Do you have the right in America to ride four abreast and obstruct traffic?
You know, Pete, I guess it never dawned on me to check that out, it's not something I do unless it's a "sponsored ride" like our two-day, 150 mile "MS 150" rides to benefit Multiple Schlerosis. Our local MS 150 goes all the way from Houston, TX to Austin, TX (a total of 168 miles, actually). There are well over a thousand individual riders, all on the road at the same time. That's the only situation in which I can imagine riding 4 abreast.
However, as a bicyclist I can imagine that, if there is an adversarial relationship between cyclists and motorists, riding 4 abreast might serve as a safety issue, making the group more visible. It is my firm belief that nobody wants to hurt another human over issues such as these, they just want some common (IS it???) courtesy. As I've said all along, I ride the white line that marks the edge of the road, and if there is even a 12" patch of pavement on the outside of that line it's where I ride. I have no interest in aggravating an angry motorist...a bicycle never even gets close to winning any confrontation with an automobile and any bicyclist who intentionally entices a
REASONABLE motorist to take such action is a fool of the highest degree. I say "reasonable" because there ARE those on the road whom I believe have anger issues that overshadow reason (I think I'd worry if I was living in the same locale as Larry, he seems to be quite angry about this issue, even to the point that IMHO it's unreasonable and if that is his state of mind he could be a significant danger to even those riders who try to be courteous...guilt by association is a powerful force to the unreasonable)...the issue seems to be how does a bicyclist, who is usually bent over the bars with his head down and can only hear the car approaching from behind, know the state of mind of that motorist? He can't...he can only hope that if that motorist is one of the unreasonably militant drivers he does not intentionally target the biker. We are constantly aware of how vulnerable we are.
I know you would not lie, Pete, so I know you must have encountered cyclists riding 4 abreast. I just can't imagine doing it except with the endorsement of the local law enforcement agencies like when we ride our MS150 fund raisers...and even then the only time I ever see something similar to the action you described was when a fast group of riders was overtaking a group pedaling at a more leisurely rate. There is an acceptable etiquette to riding in a fast group (which by "drafting" allows the entire group to go faster), the leader pedals at the front as long as he can and when he can no longer maintain the pace of "breaking" the air he moves slightly to the left as the remaining cyclists in the line pass, moving back to the right once the last rider in line has passed him. In that scenario there are never more than two abreast. It's common knowledge that the fast groups will need to bypass slower groups and when that happens it's courtesy to get as far as possible to the right so that the group can pass "...on your left" without extending too far into the lane of traffic.
As for whether or not those bicyclists are within their rights...I'm not sure of Australia's laws, but here in TX in the good ol' USA bicycles have the right of way, just like a pedestrian crossing a street. If a car hits a pedestrian, he's always at fault...I can't imagine it being any different for the scenario you pose...so to make a guess, I'd say the cyclists were "protected" by the right of way in this case.
Still doesn't make it a wise choice, much less the right thing to do :thumbsdown:
Cheers!
Doug
