Excellent piece! Every word of it true. The cyclists moan that we need to "share the road" but they never seem to think that "the rules of the road" apply to them!

I share your concerns people behaving badly on the roads. As a pedestrian, I'm frustrated with cars blasting through crosswalks without a second look. Stop and count (from the sidewalk) how many cars actually stop at a red light when turning right. Bicyclists are often doing as you describe, passing too closely to pedestrians without ringing their bell. When I'm riding my bicycle to work I see drivers texting when they should be paying attention to the road ahead. I've also seen joggers with headphones dart right across an intersection without even looking --in the dark.

There's people who will behave badly no matter what they are doing, so I don't think it's limited to cyclists. The biggest difference I can see is that cars are much bigger, heavier and faster than the other road users ---cars are much more likely to kill other road users as well. So I'm not sure why drivers would be so terrified when they're surrounded by 2000 points of steel. I haven't seen many drivers run over and killed by pedestrians or bicycles lately, either.

Let's all be careful and respectful of each other on the roads!

More cyclists statistically makes the streets safer for pedestrians. That isn't a theory. It's a fact. Whenever a city or municipality successfully raises the bicycle modal share on any given street, the pedestrian/motor vehicle collisions actually go down. Yes, some cyclists are inconsiderate; just like there are inconsiderate motorists and inconsiderate pedestrians. If you have "never" seen a cyclist signal or observe a traffic light or stop sign you either haven't been paying very close attention or have a selective memory that has intentionally forgotten all the cyclists who you do actually see observe the laws every single day. If you would like to see more pedestrians killed by fast moving motor vehicles, please, do continue with your myopic little anti-bicycling culture war. Also, please share more of your anecdotal gramps observations that that laws that allowed cycling in the street were from an earlier, more innocent time, when there were fewer pedestrians (false) and fewer cars (fewer cars actually makes the streets a more dangerous place to cycle, which is why the country and the suburbs always have double the bicyclist fatality rate than urban areas), because they are just so darned constructive.

Robert Dorr's article is an excellent report on the hazards that errant bicyclists create in neighborhoods as well as on main arteries. I have observed similar safety lapses by bicyclists in the Reston-Herndon-Oak Hill area. I have also seen better bicyclists observing the rules of the road and safe practices.

Loved the article and it's so true! For a couple of years I rode a bike as my main mode of transportation on an island in the Pacific. We learned about stop signs and how to exist with pedestrians/vehicular traffic. Most of all we learned about safe bicycling habits. To bad, for the most part, none of that seems to exist locally

Kudos to Robert F. Dorr for speaking up. Certainly many cyclists are courteous and considerate. But not all, and it only takes a few to make pedestrians and motorists fearful for their safety. My vehicle and I are both terrified when we have to swing wide of a cyclist who has decided half of the lane is his, forcing me closer to oncoming traffic. To slow down and follow him benignly is not an option, as the growing line of traffic behind the considerate motorist grows increasingly hostile, presenting dangers of its own.

Robert F. Door: The story is more complicated than you suggest.

There are alot of cyclists who ride the wrong way, and that is a serious hazard. The next most serious problem, however, is cyclists riding at night with no or too few lights. And then we have cyclists who fail to yield right of way to pedestrians, or to motor vehicles that have the right of way.

The next most serious hazard, perhaps surprisingly to K Curthoys above, is cyclists riding too far to the right. Sometimes they get hit by opening car doors, and it the worst case the door diverts them to the left and they fall in front of a moving car. Other times, people coming out of side streets or driveways are not looking for a fast moving vehicle so close to the curb, and a collision results.

Cyclists runing stop signs or red light are way down the list of hazards (other than those who fail to yield right of way). But it is irritating to a driver to see cyclists break a law with which drivers all comply. And it is illegal. So many cyclists do comply, but most don't.

I may be mistaken, but it seems to me that drivers who have watched me sit through a red light almost never honk at me for riding in the middle of the lane, which I do, because I think doing so is safer. But drivers who have not watched me sit through a red light often do honk.

Could other drivers indicate whether they are more tolerant of lane-using cyclists like me if you have seen me fully comply with lights and signs?

Unfortunately for Mr. Dorr, since Autumn is the best time of year for riding, many of us will be riding into Autumn.

I'm sure Mr. Dorr obeys all traffic laws when he drives, coming to a complete stop at stop signs, stopping before turning right on red, and traveling at or below the speed limit.

We tend to be biased toward the mode we're using. Cyclists see motorists at every intersection disobeying the law by rolling through stop signs and turning right on red without stopping. Motorists seem to accept those infractions but are quick to point out when bicyclists disobey the law. Oddly enough, motorists often complain when cyclists do obey the law when they ride in the road with traffic.

Fairfax needs to do a better job of educating everyone. Currently kids receive almost no bicycle education in school (I was tempted to say "no" bike education but there must be someone, somewhere teaching kids how to ride legally, right?). How do we expect bicyclists to behave correctly if we don't teach them?

If we can all agree to obey the rules of the road we'll all be better off.

Thursday evening about 8:40 coming home from work on Fox Mill, opposing traffic kept crossing the yellow line into my lane. It was dark enough that only by a particular angle could I make out the spandex clad figure on a bike with no lights or reflectors against the darkening purple sky riding far into the narrow lane.

At that location, Fox Mill is barely wide enough for two cars, yet this fool thought it was his right to be on this road with no lights at that time of day. Reckless disregard for his own safety and the safety of those around him is the only way to described this behavior.

Only by stopping my car was a head-on collision avoided.

Bikers make up less than 1% of all trips. The portion of this gang who engage in illegal and reckless behavior is far too great. The 99% of the rest of us are being oppressed by the tyranny of these outlaws.

Tyranny of outlaws? What a crock. Stand on a corner and watch cars clearly above the speed limit; running yellow lights; turning right on red w/o stopping or when it still says NO right on red; changing lanes w/o blinkers, darting into a non-opening in traffic that forces a car to break unnecessarily etc. And today's worst offense - TEXTING / READING EMAIL etc. I wish this latter offense was taken as seriously as drunk driving but even law enforcement does it.

I just spent a week cycling in Italy - some of the most aggressive drivers on the road in the World - and I felt much safer than any random ride I'd do in NVa. I think the difference is that they 'respect' a cyclists right on the road (and in turn cyclists are predictable) and if an accident does occur law enforcement doesn't immediately blame the cyclist but in turn consider the driver as at fault first. Why - because they simply realize that in a car vs bike accident - the car always wins and thus it is upon the driver to ensure they don't KILL someone. In the US - autos rule and every other form of transportation is considered a hassle and bikes are toys for kids.

Oh btw - want to know why cyclist do 'stupid' stuff - because we ride in fear constantly and often take action to save our skin.

To be honest, even if EVERY cyclist suddenly over nite followed the path Mr Dorr would like, he'd still find a reason to complain about cyclists - yet continue to accept the behavior of automobile drivers. And to use his own words cyclists "are just trying to get through the day" - be it to work, ride our kids to school, to the store or to get some exercise.

Is Mr Dorr willing to help advocate for safer and improved cycling facilities in Fairfax County - like bike lanes thereby creating a safer space for cyclists ? Somehow I doubt it and would rather see all on sidewalks or even banned entirely. Oh btw.....sidewalks and paths are so inconsistent that cyclists have to ride on the street at times. Is Mr Dorr willing to help lobby for more paths and sidewalks.... Wait don't answer that - I already know the answer.

It must be awesome to be right all the time.

You opinion loses credibility every time you state "I've been driving an automobile for 56 years and have never seen a bicyclist stop at a stop sign or a red light, or signal a turn." Or "I have never seen a cyclist follow the rules, not once." Or "I have never seen a bicycllst (sic) abide by traffic laws." This just shows your observational bias.

That is just ridiculous.

Mr. Dorr, I regularly ride a bicycle. I, as well as, I would guess, the fellow on the bicycle you saw on your outing, have a driver's license and own a car. It is you who is putting on the us vs. them hat. I am well aware of problems created by operators of both kinds of vehicles, and to dismiss anything a cyclist says as victim talk is just the kind of ad hominem attack you feign being above. You say that in 156 years or whatever you've never seen a cyclist obey a traffic law. That's ridiculous. I stop at lights, traffic signs, ride on the right side of the road consistently. I'm not the only one. I also don't follow the rules blindly, 100% of the time, because a bicycle is not a car. A car is a two-ton piece of steel that occupies a space 12-15 feet long, 5-7 feet wide, and 4-6 feet high (I haven't even got into trucks). A bicycle weighs 20-30 pounds and occupies little more space than the rider without the bicycle. I can turn 360 degrees inside a car parking space. The cyclist didn't hit you or your dog. You were upset by attitude, not danger. That is a problem, but it's not a one-way problem. Please recognize your own biases.

As an owner of a yellow labrador (Habanero), I agree with Mr. Dorr... don't ride into Autumn. I have in the past been a commuter bicyclist. When I was 18 years old riding from my parent's house in the Helena Valley in Montana to the Vo-Tech were I attended Airframe and Powerplant school, I would log 16 miles a day on an old Browning 10 speed. Later, living in San Jose, California, I would ride an old Peugeot 10 speed from my residence in East San Jose/Milpitas area to the San Jose International Airport. I rode a Schwinn 12 speed around Everett, Washington before it was stolen. My career moved me to Wiesbaden, Germany in 1991 where I purchased a Schwinn 21 speed mountain bike which I used as primary transportation for quite awhile. The Germans provided beautiful bike paths for bicycles... the prize for living Socialist. Personally, I cannot answer for all the people who ride bikes, but I would like to think I followed the rules of the rode when riding. I stopped for stop signs and red lights, obeyed yield right of way signs, stayed on the correct side of the road... and always gave the road to vehicles with larger mass than my two wheeler to avoid broken bones or visits to the morgue. I do see bike riders quite often who will not moved to the right side of the road to let other traffic move by when there is not excuse for them not to, which does annoy me. Again, I do love dogs and anyone who would ride into a dog would require a boot to the ass.

Now, let's discuss the terrors visited upon motorcycle riders by people in cars who insist on chatting on cell phones, texting, drinking coffee, having a smoke, eating that Big Mac, or just b.s.ing with the passengers while making lackadaisical, blind lane changes or turning infront of oncoming two wheeled, motorized traffic.

I echo Mark Blacknell's invitation. It actually crossed my mind to ask Mr Dorr to 'ride a mile in our shoes" but figured I'd get a resounding No Thanks.

However, I'll reconsider this for 2 reasons:

1) I have been working w/ FABB, FCPS and the FC BOS over the past few years to encourage kids to walk/bike to school 'again'. I invite guest riders of all kids - typically elected officials or local racers who are doing well on the National and International scene as well as the FCPD Bike Patrols (who when they rode with us actually reprimanded a driver for their actions and echoed the plight we face as cyclists). We've had a U2 pilot ride with us and I think the kids would love to have a fighter pilot join us

AND

2) this story is moving to me - because had others just written him off he might never have achieved what he did and I view that kindness to be incredible and an example of what cycling can bring to us as a society.
http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/06/news/a-bicycle-and-a-few-friends-lead-a-big-man-into-an-even-bigger-world_226368

Since I last commented on this topic:
-- I observed a bicyclist (a valid word in the English language) in Oakton rush-hour traffic, riding through a red light; no helmet; no lights; no mirrors. This is consistent with 100 percent of my observations of bicyclists on the road.
-- Someone implied that it might be all right for bicycles to be on sidewalks. I'm not up to date on the local law but in terms of simple common sense a sidewalk is the worst place for a bicycle and the likeliest place to ride into Autumn. Many times, I've been at the wheel when one bicyclist was in front of me moving in the same direction on the street while another was in front of me approaching from the opposite direction on the sidewalk.
-- Mark Blacknell and J. Anderson have extended an invitation. J. Anderson's post includes several unexplained abbreviations.
I'm ready to consider the invitation and accept it if possible. Call me on the phone. I'm not sure whether Patch rules permit leaving contact information here but my phone number is all over the Internet.

Good morning

FABB - http://fabb-bikes.blogspot.com/ Fairfax Advocates for Better Bicycling
FCPS - Fairfax County Public Schools
FCPD - Fairfax County Police Department
FC BOS - Fairfax County Board of Supervisors

The invitation I extended was to ride w/ kids to Wolftrap school when the school year begins again come September....as we run a monthly Bike to School day.

If Mark B organizes a ride w/ Mr Dorr before then, I'd be glad to join in if available.

Bob, I may be double dipping here, but I could not agree more with you. My friend Ed Chalkley was terribly injured by a bike maniac who ran into him exactly as yours threatened to do with Autumn. And underlying it all is a "I am greener than thou" superiority that is impossible to squelch. Walt

Walter - There are jerks everywhere.....they aren't just on bicycles.

Mr Dorr - I'm in touch w/ Mark B ..... not sure when / where but we'll get in touch w/ you. My offer is for September when the kids get back to school.

Hey all - Hope everyone is enjoying Olympic cycling. 8^)

Anyway....I saw this article on the Wash Post.....goes to show that bicyclists have plenty of company in breaking laws. All those that got tickets said they never had any infractions ever yet we all know they regularly broke speed limits while driving.....and doing 80 on highway is pretty dangerous in our area.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/dc-drivers-hurt-by-tough-interpretation-of-va-offenses/2012/07/30/gJQAzPbBLX_story.html

The feeble attempt by cyclists to defend the way they tyrannize our lives may become a part of Autumn's platform if she decides to run for office. For more news about Autumn and less news about cyclists, see today's (August 1) issue of this publication.

I accepted the olive branch and have been staring at my telephone ever since. That hasn't changed my opinion about cyclists on the road and my observations of them in the past few days haven't changed either. As I wrote explicitly above, the new posting about Autumn is not about cyclists. If Autumn decides to run for office, her trademark issue will be the federal budget. J. Anderson, the phone still hasn't rung and the behavior of your brethren out there on our roads hasn't changed. If you perceive hatred/abhorrence/disdain (your terms) perhaps you should ask your fellow cyclists why they go to such lengths to violate the law with such consistency.

Mr Dorr - Are you so callous to not even recognize the death of a 24 year old woman at the hands of a hit & run driver? Clearly the behavior of 'your brethren' will be "stay the course" also....

And if anyone reads this thread - it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see our responses to your waiting by the phone commentary.

Patch Editor - I apologize for continuing this discussion. I should have heeded the words of my mother 'If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all"

I agree. People riding bikes on public streets are dangerous and should be given a wide berth by sane people. We (here in Omaha) have an extensive bike/walking trail system that allows people to bike safely to work, yet still allows others to walk or hike to their hearts content. It is safer for the bicycle drivers and motorists. Perhaps other cities could look into the same system to protect, bicyclists, walkers, joggers, and poor little dogs like Autumn.

Bruce - Would you like to borrow my helmet cam?

I am rescinding the invite Mr Dorr because I don't see any value in having you ride to school with children after your last comment. I fear the lecture they'd be given would be counterintuitive to what the Safe Routes to School effort is about. Thank you for not letting me waste my time in trying to accommodate you.

If anyone has the desire to read this thread it is clear my invite was real. 100% real. It was an invitation to ride with the students of Wolftrap ES and as such I mentioned this as a something that would take place when the students return to school - that is September. I then said I would work w/ Mark B who extended a separate offer. The editor of this Patch & the Vienna Patch are well aware of my activities and REALNESS of my invite.

Nonetheless, nothing...absolutely nothing we can do/say /show will change Mr Dorr's mind. Yet, as proof of a car breaking the rules - I will post a picture of a car turning right on red while pedestrians are presents...even when the sign says not to. And to debunk the 100% of cyclists break the rules, I will post a picture of 20+ children 'stopped' at a stop sign. Just need to find them on my computer. Not sure why 'we' have to document our observations when Mr Dorr has not - only posting a picture of a talking dog. Our observations are as valid as Mr Dorrs yet in our case we listed multiple ones, Mr Dorr only lists one in his article.

I must admit, I admire Mr Dorr's ability to stick to his guns.....regardless of just how laughable the entire discussion is becoming (and our willingness to get sucked into it). Mark B might be right about those shallow joys.

The point is that people on bikes don't usually obey the law.

It's unfortunate that a handful of bicycle activists who represent less than one percent of the population have managed to take this commentary and turn it into something so ugly. I've asked the editor to remove the photos that I didn't provide: this is my commentary and I will decide how my work is illustrated. Those of you who are too lazy to do your own work but have time and resources to despoil mine, so somewhere else, please. This is an opinion commentary representing a view held by the overwhelming majority of Americans and if you don't like it, write your own commentary, I want those photos removed, now.

The editor has informed me that it is not possible to remove the images J Anderson hacked onto my opinion column about adult cyclists.

The editor promised to publish a disclaimer about the images and has not yet done so.

I understood that others would be able to comment here. I did not understand, when I started down this road, that a pro-cycle person would be able to refer to me using a derogatory term that denigrates to my age. I did not expect that a pro-cycle person would be able to change my decision about how to illustrate my work.

Apparently, J Anderson is not capable of offering an opinion column of his or her own but is willing to use the vile tactic of grafting an illustration on my work to change its meaning.

I used my dog in my opinion column about adult cyclists for a legitimate reason: the dog could have become a victim of a reckless adult cyclist. J Anderson retaliated by using children.

How low can you go?

When we started down this long road together, I had in mind nothing more than a light-hearted opinion piece expressing a point of view on adult cyclists that is shared without exception by everyone I've ever met. I was going to write a few words and get back to other writing -- the 75 books, ten thousand magazine articles and five thousand newspaper columns that have paid my rent for fifty-seven years. I never expected to stay with, or revisit, the subject of adult cyclists. But J Anderson and the other minority activists who blemished this space and got away with it have inspired me to act.

You're going to see a lot of me.

I'm going to become active and visible and make it my goal to get you off the road and off the sidewalk. Why have I decided to become an activist? The two pictures, J.A. Your totally unethical and despicable act of hacking into MY WORK and posting two pictures. In my six decades as an author, I have never seen anyone stoop so low.

It is very sad indeed that for the first time ever neither I nor my editor can control what pictures are used to illustrate MY WORK, even when the picture is planted by someone unable to contribute work of his or her own.

Someone else will decide where J Anderson learned ethics and why he or she chose to use a photo of children being indoctrinated and subjected to enormous danger.

You appear to have won this battle, J.A., with tactics, ethics and ideas that no serious person would ever employ. When I began this, I never thought there would be a second round. Thanks to you, I'm now in this fight for the long term.

And in case the message isn't clear: I will decide which images are used to illustrate MY WORK.

I have asked the Editor to remove them however there was no hacking done nor were any T&Cs broken by doing so. The Patch is essentially a community forum and it's feature set permits this type of activity.

I have removed the photos at J Anderson's request, though his uploads did not violate Patch's Terms of Use. Users are permitted to add comments and photos to articles.

To be clear, I asked them to be removed because the entire discussion - to which Mr Door said "a vigorous dialogue is a good thing" was being entirely diverted from the issue of pedestrians, drivers, cyclists and dogs. They were posted as proof against the 100% of cyclist break rules as well as to show supportive evidence Mr Dorr was looking for to Mr Wright's list. In fact in the latter case, it was two pedestrians attempting to walk to school that were tyrannized. Also as the Patch pointed out, no one has violated any Terms of Use.

I have no reason to contact Mr Dorr directly (nor has Mr Dorr contacted me) - as the dialog he himself has encouraged here is fine and involves the community. I don't condone one commenter's use of age related name calling and actually cringed when I saw it. I am respectful of those on this and all forums no matter how much I disagree with them. There are bigger issues in life to deal with than that which appears on a Patch Commentary.

I recently read an article that essentially said that no one's opinion has ever been changed by Facebook postings, Opinion pieces or the like and I think we are best to realize that is the case here.

As Mark B said "I'm going to post this, and then leave things alone." I truly hope I have the will to do so. 8^)

I'm very relieved that the lovely (and talkative) Autumn was not injured.

Come on guys. I've been a rider for over 60 years. I didn't stay alive by not watching traffic. Dorr is correct in saying that many bikers ride like they own the road.I lost a prized breeding bull because a group of cyclists spread across a two lane country road. I was trying to take my bull to a major university vet school. I followed for 30 minutes before i could turn off to the clinic. Bottom line is cyclists need to keep their situational awareness keen and pay attention to those around them.

George - In fact I don't think any of the cyclists who have responded are claiming that it doesn't happen. Of course it does and I get mad at those that do it but it's the 100% claim and that they should be banned from roads and sidewalks (meaning banning cycling entirely) that stuck in our collective craw as well as the implication that drivers are mostly immune when we all see drivers texting constantly let alone speeding, right on red w/o stopping etc. At the next stop light take note of drivers with their head down trying to hide the phone. The issue is that everyone needs to be responsible in their respective activities - driving, cycling, walking, running, roller blading etc. I think that is all we are saying.

That being said, the bull story is simply tragic. The cyclists were naturally unaware and it's unfortunate that there wasn't a chance to pass or for them to single out so you could....though understand a truck / trailer isn't very quick. On group rides, if we are being followed...we single out.

Robert Dorr is nothing more than a feckless troll. It is shameful that the Patch would even post this drivel. You don't plan on responding, but yet you responded to the first negitive comment? Your "flooded with letters" one day after you post this garbage? You are "unfamilair with the local laws" regarding bicyclist, yet you decree what all bicyclisit should be doing? And somehow, you have omnipitent knowledge of what all bicycilist are doing now? Really? And are you actually saying that violating traffic rules by motorist in Fairfax is rare? And your ad homninum response is to "ban all bicycilist"? And then, although your comments have no actual facts other then your all-knowing observations, you demand "facts" and rationale from others?? Ignorant and arrogant troll. That is all you are sir.

"This cycling habit occurs all over it seems. Here in Victoria BC we get the 'rat packs' of about a dozen or so Lance Armstrong 'wannabes' who ride in clusters taking the whole of the road. At stop signs the leader slows and looks for traffic and the rest blast through. This happened to me where my choice was to drive into the oncoming lane or run into the pack. Fortunately there was no other traffic. When I got home I emailed the Victoria Cycling coalition and stated that if it happened again and my only choice was to hit the pack of cyclists, I would. Their reply was something about bring criminal charges against me. Bring them on I say.
Incidentally I am a keen cyclist riding a thousand plus miles each season. I do observe stop signs as my skin is softer than the bumper of a vehicle."

Many cyclists could benefit for a vacation in say, Germany, to learn bicycle behavior. Bigger safety issue is motorcycles and all the "Easy riders" that I now see hugging the center line with their feet just nudging it. Taxpayers have to provide for all the legless wonders who are also brain damaged due to the exercise of their "right" to ride in their chair at highspeeds with no helmets. But, if you think all this is bad, try taking your horsie out on the roads! Every year some yahoo spatters an Amish family in their buggy because the roads belong only to highspeed motorized transports, right?

I find bicyclists really irritating. They speed on the sidewalks and they expect me to move for them when I have my kids and 2 dogs with me they are a nuisance and should ride only the roads. The End.

As Micky is undoubtedly aware, bicyclists are not supposed to be on sidewalks at all, ever, at any time under any circumstance. If I had my way, they wouldn't be allowed to endanger everyone else on the street, either. There is no argument in favor of bicycling that holds up under scrutiny, not environmental, not economic. Once again yesterday, as happens so often, my dog Autumn and I were nearly hit by a bicyclist who was where he shouldn't have been and was heading in the wrong direction. This is tyranny by a tiny few and we need to change our laws to ge them off the sidewalks AND off the streets.

I happened to return to this article today as I wanted to share it with someone given yesterday was Bike to Work Day and last week was Bike to School Day. I guess I missed the last two comments from Dec 2012 as I thought this thread had ended . Despite my desire to not engage this anymore.....I have to. Mr Dorr continues his hatred of cyclists and is frankly WRONG when it comes to bikes on sidewalks. Some jurisdictions don't allow bikes on sidewalks - I think DC is the only one locally. I am not aware of any ordinance in Fairfax County or Towns like Vienna that prohibit bikes on sidewalks. If he had his way, riding my bike w/ my kids to the ice cream shop or soccer practice would be a banned activity. Does he really advocate for that activity to be banned? I'm not riding my kids on Maple Ave - who would, that leaves the sidewalk as the only alternative. If you have a different solution Mickey and Mr Dorr I'd be glad to hear it but we know there isn't one. Stuffing a kid into an SUV for a mile ride is not a solution.

Mr Dorr simply needs to go away and stop his personal tyranny on cyclists. He is welcome to his opinion - 100% wrong as it is. His desire to ban bicycling is a pipe dream at best but will in fact turn into a nightmare for him as more and more people decide that sitting on Maple Ave, the beltway, etc etc is no longer something they want to engage in and opt to ride to work or school or to the ice cream parlor.

The only tyranny is that imposed by bicyclists, who have no place among vehicles or pedestrians, on the rest of us. Mr. or Ms. Anderson, who doesn't seem especially eager to be identified by a full name, is right on one point: If I had my way, riding his bike with his kids would be banned activity. Not sure what the law says but common sense dictates that bicycles do not belong on sideways. Just yesterday, observed a cyclist using a pedestrian crossing to pedal across an intersection in the face of a red light. The poor motorist or pedestrian at the mercy of someone like this has no way to predict what direction the cyclist will come from, or where he will go next. The fact that your destination may involve ice cream for your kids highlights the fact that this irresponsible behavior endangers children everywhere., Fortunately for me and unfortunately for Mr. or Ms. Anderson, polls show that cycling is on the decline.

Huh? Seriously? Mr Dorr - you have completely marginalized yourself on so many levels. Bike share programs are being installed in many cities and membership is rising. Businesses are seeing benefits after initial concerns. Bike To Work Day in the Metro area broke last years record and in Fairfax County 75% more schools participated in National Bike to School Day. Many studies show the younger generations are not driving their cars - for many reasons - and opting to walk, bike or use transit. Note bicycling is one of those choices. Banning a bike ride to the ice cream parlor ? Seriously? It's laughable. I don't even understand your comment about irresponsible behavior . There is no such thing as a pedestrian crossing ... it's a cross walk and VA law supports bicycles using such. And I bet if I stood on that same corner I'd see a pedestrian cross against a red light, a car speed to get thru a yellow light and a car turning right on red w/o stopping let along if a pedestrian is present.

As far as polls.....please provide a link to such.

I'll start w/ this Rutgers/VATech study.
http://www.utrc2.org/sites/default/files/pubs/analysis-bike-final_0.pdf

And if you want more....go nuts.
http://www.bikesbelong.org/resources/stats-and-research/statistics/participation-statistics/#Recent%20trends

I don't know why I'm even engaging Mr Dorr.....but I don't like 'wrong' getting the last word.

- Jeff Anderson 8^)

Perhaps you know Virginia law better. In most places, you do not ride a bicycle on the sidewalk, or against traffic on the highway, or against a red light.

I should have used "crosswalk" instead of "pedestrian crossing" but my meaning was clear. Let me know the section of the law that says it's okay to use a crosswalk to weave through cars moving perpendicular to you against a red light. You and your fellow cyclists are inflicting your tyranny on normal people who don't need hokey Lance Armstrong clothing to jack up their sorry self-esteem.

Even if you weren't violating the law, rules that permit bicyclists in the same space as motor vehicles and pedestrians were forced upon us by the trivial minority you represent. As for the last word, if you want it you need only to post one more time.

Mr Dorr - As a student of history I'm surprised you aren't aware of how the American Highway system came to be. "The League began as the League of American Wheelmen (LAW) in 1880. Newport, R.I. was the location of the founding meeting -- and was responsible for defending the rights of cyclists from its start. The League of American Wheelmen is credited with getting paved roads in this country before the reign of the automobile.
http://books.google.com/books?id=MJgSAAAAYAAJ&pg=PP7#v=onepage&q&f=false

By 1898, the League of American Wheelmen had more than 102,000 members including the Wright Brothers, Diamond Jim Brady, and John D Rockefeller! Wait...didn't the Wright Brothers own a bicycle shop?

Pretty trivial minority I reckon.

And is this a bicycle in the National Air & Space Museum? Best get that removed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:WrightBrothersBicycle.JPG

One can and should at times ride a bicycle on a sidewalk...if the law permits one to do so. As far as against traffic or thru a red light - that is stupid behavior but such is not limited to bicyclists. We have all acknowledged some bicyclists do that - but you fail to acknowledge your beloved drivers and pedestrians also engage in stupid behavior....with the former leading to significantly more deaths in a year than bicyclists in a decade.

Victim hat? Never seen a cyclist?

Although I can't disagree with your statement that cyclists should obey the law and that "salmon" (bikers riding unaware on the wrong side of the street) and "ninja" (someone mentioned cyclists riding without lights or reflective gear at night), are annoying at the least, your opinions loose all relevance to a helpful dialogue when you speak in hyperbole and vastly ridiculous generalities.

As a pilot as I am, with higher than average observational skills, I have to assume you're outright lying when you claim you've never seen a cyclist signal or obey traffic laws. When others salute this type of "discussion", I have to assume its just an emotional game to them with no hope of understanding the issues involved. Just a way to vent and try to rile up the majority.

As a pilot you should be aware of the heightened responsibilities of someone in control of an aircraft compared to someone driving a car. To try to compare a 140 lb. cyclist to a 3000 plus lb. automobile in collision results is simply absurd. The fear of swinging a bat at someone's head compared to receiving the impact on your head is simply a bad analogy. With an automobile, as with any deadly weapon, you have a much higher responsibility.

(Continued)

Although that cyclist had a responsibility to slow and stop and not injure either of you, it ain't the same as a car bearing down on you at the same intersection. This is not to rationalize the cyclist's wrong, but I wouldn't be surprised if Autumn wasn't really thinking, "I thought you taught me to look both ways before crossing the street."

Here's my generalization. Only in America would someone say that bicycles were created for a different era or that it doesn't make sense for them to be on the road. They are well integrated on modern roads in much more advanced societies than ours.

Some of the problem is the the lack of local government's foresight in planning for multiple means of transportation, but ignorance and the type of hyperbole you're engaging in is only helpful if you're clear about what you really want. Hopefully it's that cyclists need to be more mindful of others, and you should simply state that after engaging in your fun, but if its not, and you really believe these things, then please, just get your own TV show with Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh and rest on your fame and fortune - just don't provide anything useful.