Comments on: How Drivers Think

By: Tracy Wilkins

Tracy Wilkins — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 14:03:31 +0000

Andy,

I’ve only had one close pass in what seems like forever, and it occurred the other morning out on Eastgate. I think I may have invited that one by riding too close to the edge of the pavement.

The bulk of my commuting these days is in the dark, where I’m lit up like a christmas tree and I typically command a position in the right tire track, moving to the center of the lane well before stop lights and signs. I think the lights make something of a statement that I belong there and deserve respect (at least that’s my theory).

Interestingly, I had one car pass me last night that got honked at because it gave me the entire lane as it passed, but forced an oncoming car to slow down (I guess the honk could have been at me, but I assumed it was directed toward the car going around me). The guy got it partly right…he gave me lots of clearance but failed to wait for a clear opportunity.

By: Andy Cline

Andy Cline — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 20:21:46 +0000

Tracy… I’m with you as long as the distance is realistic. Three feet just isn’t in many cases, as you know. So why not five or more? Or, better, why not what the Diver’s Guide suggests: a full lane.

I’d be very interested in your assessment of how cars are passing you now. Your commute is far different from mine. I think it would be enlightening.

By: Tracy Wilkins

Tracy Wilkins — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 19:28:22 +0000

I may be wrong here, but I think the value of any minimum passing law (be it 3 feet, 5 feet, or greater) is not what drivers will do in response to it. Let’s face it, most of us drive by instinct, and don’t know enough of the details in our traffic ordinances to know whether we’re making a legal pass of a cyclist or not. Perhaps such a law might include enough news coverage and education that some folks might pick up on it, but I’m not betting on it.

In my mind, the potential value of such an ordinance lies in the potential for enforcement and ticketing IF a cop happens to notice a close buzz and decides to do something about it or in the prosecution of an actual accident. Without education directed toward law enforcement and consistent enforcement, I don’t see a lot changing.

As for the law itself, I’m not particularly comfortable being passed at 3 feet. I can almost reach out and touch vehicles at that distance. I would, however, like clarity of some sort added to the existing law. It’s pretty vague, and in my mind darn near unenforceable. If that can change, we’ve made progress!

By: Andy Cline

Andy Cline — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 00:32:02 +0000

Steve… I may indeed be wrong about drivers changing their behavior. We won’t know until someone can do a study. Until that happens, I prefer to be somewhat alarmist because the change in behavior I’m predicting seems entirely reasonable to me given what I believe the average driver’s mental state to be (much like my own used to be).

By: Steve A

Steve A — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 20:35:24 +0000

In Texas, the governor was (and continues to be) pilloried for vetoing a similar measure and was virtually accused of killing two cyclists hit ON THE SHOULDER in San Antonio afterwards. The level of hysteria about these bills is amazing considering that nationally, I don’t know of more than one or two prosecutions EVER. I think and hope that Andy’s engaging in needless worry that the bill would change motorist behavior in the slightest.

The REAL tragedy in such bills is that cyclist advocacy groups spend real effort trying to get them passed and actually twist facts to make them seem more valuable. Visit biketexas.org for an example. They hype such stuff THREE PLACES on their home page. You can sign the petition objecting to the veto there if you are so inclined. We DO need better advocates!