General Discussion

Fumesucker

(45,851 posts)

38. I wasn't "ranting and raving" about anything

Sat May 18, 2013, 12:02 AM

May 2013

Indeed your OP reads more like a rant than my post you are replying to here.

You also admit that drivers *will* *not* obey the traffic law as it relates to maximum speed.

Your entire OP was meant as a slam on anyone who is riding a bicycle rather than driving a car, you weren't even particularly subtle about it and you certainly weren't fooling anyone except those who wish to be fooled.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

42 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Proposition: All drivers and all cyclists should follow traffic laws [View all] GiaGiovanni May 2013 OP

cogent argument? datasuspect May 2013 #1

If physics is your argument, then bikes should not be on the road with cars at all GiaGiovanni May 2013 #20

That already happens. Travis_0004 May 2013 #29

The place kicker is more like the pedestrian: he shows up temporarily on the field GiaGiovanni May 2013 #31

Does that include brake lights, turn signals,liability insurance, and road use taxes? oneshooter May 2013 #2

we can only dream zerosumgame0005 May 2013 #8

The law requires none of those for bikes where I live. Lizzie Poppet May 2013 #15

I think that's irresponsible of the state GiaGiovanni May 2013 #26

The things in your first paragraph are indeed required here. Lizzie Poppet May 2013 #27

Bikes are often covered by auto insurance Travis_0004 May 2013 #30

It seems cyclists have no insurance coverage for the accidents they cause GiaGiovanni May 2013 #34

That makes more sense GiaGiovanni May 2013 #33

I think that eventually that will happen GiaGiovanni May 2013 #19

Hybrid/electric cars should have to put a baseball card in their spokes NightWatcher May 2013 #3

I always thought they should have speakers IDemo May 2013 #6

I never thought of that Yo_Mama May 2013 #14

I always make it a point... Lizzie Poppet May 2013 #4

Breezing through stop signs when no one else is there might sound ok, but GiaGiovanni May 2013 #21

Idaho law IDemo May 2013 #5

That's the law, and a good one at that. Gormy Cuss May 2013 #7

Generally thats how it works in Oregon as well bhikkhu May 2013 #11

The stoplight law sounds problematic GiaGiovanni May 2013 #22

It's the law, and a good one at that meow2u3 May 2013 #28

The Idaho law allows cyclists to run the stop sign GiaGiovanni May 2013 #35

If bikes can run stop signs, what's to say there won't be accidents? meow2u3 May 2013 #36

I'm in total agreement GiaGiovanni May 2013 #37

As a pedestrian, I am in total agreement. smirkymonkey May 2013 #42

In California cyclists are liable to the same traffic laws nadinbrzezinski May 2013 #9

I find this to be very true GiaGiovanni May 2013 #23

Only if they do first bhikkhu May 2013 #10

No, cyclists are special ..... oldhippie May 2013 #12

Interesting that you don't mention the single most common violation among drivers Fumesucker May 2013 #13

Only after you prove you NEVER exceed the posted speed limit in your motor vehicle. Ikonoklast May 2013 #16

I have exceeded the speed limit plenty of times, probably nearly every time I drive a car Fumesucker May 2013 #18

Speeders are one main reason cyclists and motorists should be particularly careful GiaGiovanni May 2013 #24

I wasn't "ranting and raving" about anything Fumesucker May 2013 #38

"Rant and rail" was the expression and it did not refer to you GiaGiovanni May 2013 #39

I was the one who mentioned speeders because you certainly didn't in your OP Fumesucker May 2013 #40

It was not a personal comment, but a general one GiaGiovanni May 2013 #41

Why? Criminals won't follow the laws, they're criminals! Robb May 2013 #17

Laws are usually followed by the law-abiding and ignored by criminals GiaGiovanni May 2013 #25

And don't forget... zappaman May 2013 #32