Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site noscvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!noscvax!powers
From: powers@noscvax.UUCP (William J. Powers)
Newsgroups: net.bicycle
Subject: Re: Bikes, Hatred, etc.
Message-ID: <955@noscvax.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 9-Jun-85 02:42:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: noscvax.955
Posted: Sun Jun  9 02:42:13 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 10-Jun-85 15:15:34 EDT
References: <2048@sdcrdcf.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego
Lines: 51

> This is a reply to a question Mark Draughn  brought up, "How should cyclists
> and drivers communicate?"

> The most comprehensive and thoughtful discussion of the bicycle in traffic
> can be found in "Effective Cycling" by John Forester (sp?). and probably
> should be mandatory reading for anyone wishing to discuss this.  He is a
> forceful proponent of assertive cycling.  Essentially, his view is that a
> bicycle is a (usually) slow moving vehicle and has all the rights and
> resposibilities of such a vehicle.  Thus it needs neither special priveledges
> nor special restrictions.
> 
> I believe he would agree that cyclists and drivers need to communicate ---
> the same way drivers communicate among themselves, with turn signals and
> position on the road!  There is no need for a special signal to indicate,
> "I am about to make a sudden right angle turn in front of you!" because it
> is illegal to do so.  He would suggest that when you overtake a bicycle
> you should do it the same way you would a slow moving vehicle, say a tractor.
> If he is taking up the lane, you slow behind him, watch oncomming traffic,
> signal, change lanes, accelerate past, and then pull back in.  If you have
> room to pass in the lane, you moderate your speed appropriately and pass.
> You would not use your horn on the tractor unless he is swerving back and forth
> or not staying to the right as any slow moving vehicle must, and the same 
> would apply to bicycles.
> (Incidently, Forester's principals include staying to the right as far as 
> saftey permits, but because visibility is of paramont importance in safety,
> - cyclist are struck in intersections not from behind - this is NOT all the
> way to the right.  If there is not enough room for cars to pass safely, then
> the cyclist should assert his right to the lane by moving towards the middle
> rather than tempting cars to pass unsafely.)

I totally agree with Forester, esp. since I discovered his attitude in
the same manner that he did: by experience.  However, it occurs to me
that there is a need for a horn.  If I wanted to pass that tractor, I
would think that safety and courtesy would dictate that I inform the
operator of the tractor.  The best way to do that is with a horn
before the manuever is attempted.

I still think that a more or less universally adopted or advocated
system of communication between the motorist and bicyclist is
important.
One of the major concerns that I hear from motorists
is that they simply do not know how to react to bicycle traffic.
At best they are overly careful and fearful; at worst they are hostile
and frustrated with their presence on the road.  A well advertised
system of communication would have the two-fold effect of alleviating
this problem while simultaneously making both the motorist and
bicyclist aware of their mutual concerns.
Just the exercise of political effort to implement such a system could
have tremendous beneficial effects.

Bill Powers