On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 4:22:22 AM UTC-5, Rolf Mantel wrote:
> Am 17.02.2022 um 10:01 schrieb russell...@yahoo.com:
>
> > No. There is no annual inspection of vehicles in the USA. You do
> > have to pay an annual registration fee for your car in the state.
> > But no one inspects it and you do not turn in any inspection report
> > to the state. It is 100% legal to drive the biggest pile of junk on
> > earth on the highway as long as you paid the registration fees and
> > license fees.
> This might be one of the reasons why US road deaths are so high compared
> to Europe.
> In Europe, we must have a safety inspection every two years (in Germany
> an annual emmissions check as well).
>

There are a number of US states that require annual inspections with emissions testing. There is no federal law for inspections, but each state can decide for themselves.
https://www.partsgeek.com/mmparts/car_inspection_requirements_by_state_a_compendium.html

On 2/16/2022 10:30 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 5:34:16 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>>
>> In my area a full size pickup is as likely to have woman
>> pilot as a man. And often with a child in a baby seat on the
>> 4-door models.
>
> Are they jacked up a foot, sporting oversized tires, light bars, loud exhausts, mudflaps with
> this theme ?
> https://www.bigrigchromeshop.com/sitting-lady-mud-flap-cut-out-p-565352.html#.Yg3Ob5aIYaE
>
> Do they always drive with high beams on? Do they roll coal and block Tesla charging stations?
> Those are the kinds I'm complaining about.
>
> (I don't think the popularity of other pickups is really logical, but that's a separate point.)
>
> - Frank Krygowski
>

Oh, optional equipment is the standard? Does adding a
handlebar to this:
http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/biaaria.jpg

Make it a less offensive touring bike?

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 2/17/2022 3:01 AM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 12:03:58 AM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 20:30:31 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
>> <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 5:34:16 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In my area a full size pickup is as likely to have woman
>>>> pilot as a man. And often with a child in a baby seat on the
>>>> 4-door models.
>>>
>>> Are they jacked up a foot, sporting oversized tires, light bars, loud exhausts, mudflaps with
>>> this theme ?
>>> https://www.bigrigchromeshop.com/sitting-lady-mud-flap-cut-out-p-565352.html#.Yg3Ob5aIYaE
>>>
>>> Do they always drive with high beams on? Do they roll coal and block Tesla charging stations?
>>> Those are the kinds I'm complaining about.
>>>
>>> (I don't think the popularity of other pickups is really logical, but that's a separate point.)
>>>
>>> - Frank Krygowski
>> But why ever not? After all you ride a bicycle and from your own
>> writing frequently "seize the lane" and hinder other vehicles
>> traveling at legal rates of speed. Why shouldn't other vehicles be
>> allowed to hinder you?
>>
>> And, of course, you will argue that you have a legal right to do so,
>> but these outrageous motor cars you rant about must be legal, I
>> believe in all states, as they must pass an annual inspection. Don't
>> they?
>> --
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John B.
>
> No. There is no annual inspection of vehicles in the USA. You do have to pay an annual registration fee for your car in the state. But no one inspects it and you do not turn in any inspection report to the state. It is 100% legal to drive the biggest pile of junk on earth on the highway as long as you paid the registration fees and license fees.
>

You're right that there's no Federal regulation, but many
States have annual inspection, some draconian:

https://haynes.com/en-us/tips-tutorials/what-know-about-vehicle-inspections-all-50-states

You're in Iowa if I recall? "Iowa is wide open". Wisconsin
is only half-communist with regional inspection affecting
about half of titled vehicles.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 2/17/2022 3:22 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote:
> Am 17.02.2022 um 10:01 schrieb russellseaton1@yahoo.com:
>
>> No. There is no annual inspection of vehicles in the
>> USA. You do
>> have to pay an annual registration fee for your car in the
>> state.
>> But no one inspects it and you do not turn in any
>> inspection report
>> to the state. It is 100% legal to drive the biggest pile
>> of junk on
>> earth on the highway as long as you paid the registration
>> fees and
>> license fees.
>
> This might be one of the reasons why US road deaths are so
> high compared to Europe.
> In Europe, we must have a safety inspection every two years
> (in Germany an annual emmissions check as well).
>
> Rolf

Yes, USAians do suffer high rates of traffic crashes and
fatalities but equipment troubles/failures are low on the
list. More of us drive, we drive more, and we have generally
poor driving habits besides a general F You attitude
regarding traffic laws.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 2/16/2022 10:03 PM, John B. wrote:

<snip>

> But why ever not? After all you ride a bicycle and from your own
> writing frequently "seize the lane" and hinder other vehicles
> traveling at legal rates of speed. Why shouldn't other vehicles be
> allowed to hinder you?

Don't extrapolate the discredited "vehicular cycling" behavior onto all
cyclists. Most cyclists don't "take the lane" unless it's necessary to
do so.

> And, of course, you will argue that you have a legal right to do so,
> but these outrageous motor cars you rant about must be legal, I
> believe in all states, as they must pass an annual inspection. Don't
> they?

No. Only a handful of states still have annual vehicle safety
inspections. Some have A few more have biennial inspections. Most states
dropped the safety inspections after it was found that statistically
they prevented a minuscule number of accidents. The state I grew up in
started off with safety inspections every six months, then switched to
annual, then dropped them altogether.

I had a girlfriend in college whose dad collected classic Ford Mustangs.
He had to get ten cars safety inspected every year. If one failed he
would swap parts to get it to pass until he could order the necessary
parts to do a proper repair. I remember my car failing one year due to
some rust on a muffler pipe and tiny exhaust leak. One place quoted me
$200 to replace all the exhaust components. Another place charged me $5
to weld the system enough to pass.

In my state, the state built a network of inspection facilities and
hired staff for each one. It was enormously expensive and the inspection
fees didn't cover the cost.

Personally, I would not oppose biennial safety inspections. In
California we still have biennial smog checks once a vehicle is over a
certain age. But on 2000 and newer cars they don't actually even use an
exhaust gas analyzer, they just plug into the OBD-II port and ensure
that all the self-tests are complete. $40 and it takes the smog test
station about two minutes.

On 2/17/2022 8:41 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/17/2022 3:01 AM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 12:03:58 AM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
>>> On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 20:30:31 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 5:34:16 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> In my area a full size pickup is as likely to have woman
>>>>> pilot as a man. And often with a child in a baby seat on the
>>>>> 4-door models.
>>>>
>>>> Are they jacked up a foot, sporting oversized tires, light bars,
>>>> loud exhausts, mudflaps with
>>>> this theme ?
>>>> https://www.bigrigchromeshop.com/sitting-lady-mud-flap-cut-out-p-565352.html#.Yg3Ob5aIYaE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Do they always drive with high beams on? Do they roll coal and block
>>>> Tesla charging stations?
>>>> Those are the kinds I'm complaining about.
>>>>
>>>> (I don't think the popularity of other pickups is really logical,
>>>> but that's a separate point.)
>>>>
>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>> But why ever not? After all you ride a bicycle and from your own
>>> writing frequently "seize the lane" and hinder other vehicles
>>> traveling at legal rates of speed. Why shouldn't other vehicles be
>>> allowed to hinder you?
>>>
>>> And, of course, you will argue that you have a legal right to do so,
>>> but these outrageous motor cars you rant about must be legal, I
>>> believe in all states, as they must pass an annual inspection. Don't
>>> they?
>>> --
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> John B.
>>
>> No.  There is no annual inspection of vehicles in the USA.  You do
>> have to pay an annual registration fee for your car in the state.  But
>> no one inspects it and you do not turn in any inspection report to the
>> state.  It is 100% legal to drive the biggest pile of junk on earth on
>> the highway as long as you paid the registration fees and license fees.
>>
>
> You're right that there's no Federal regulation, but many States have
> annual inspection, some draconian:
>
> https://haynes.com/en-us/tips-tutorials/what-know-about-vehicle-inspections-all-50-states

I lived for several years in a state with annual or biennial safety
inspections (I forget which), since rescinded.

But one year I took our car in to a shop to get the sticker. A short
while after I sat down the mechanic said "Your brake pads are too thin.
You need a complete brake job." I disagreed, having just checked them
myself, but the mechanic said "No brake job, no sticker." I drove away.

I happened to know the head of the Automotive Technology program at an
area tech school. When I mentioned this to him, he surprised me by
saying he was a certified inspection guy. I pulled my car in, he
checked, said "Your brakes are fine!" and slapped on the sticker.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 2/17/2022 11:17 AM, sms wrote:
> On 2/16/2022 10:03 PM, John B. wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> But why ever not? After all you ride a bicycle and from your own
>> writing frequently "seize the lane" and hinder other vehicles
>> traveling at legal rates of speed. Why shouldn't other vehicles be
>> allowed to hinder you?
>
> Don't extrapolate the discredited "vehicular cycling" behavior onto all
> cyclists. Most cyclists don't "take the lane" unless it's necessary to
> do so.

Points to counter Scharf's typical nonsense:

1) When you're riding a totally empty residential street, no motor
vehicles nearby, do you really right right next to the gutter? None of
the cyclists I ride with do that. They typically ride on the smoothest
part of the road, which is usually the center of the lane.

2) Vehicular Cycling is, essentially, riding safely in accordance with
the traffic laws. Traffic laws in states I'm familiar with do NOT
require cyclists to ride far right when it's not safe to do so; they
allow "taking the lane" for safety when necessary.

3) And I, like the other competent cyclists I ride with, DO share a lane
with motor vehicles when it's safe to do so.

And for John:

4) You seem to imagine some law that says no vehicle operator can ever
impede any other vehicle operator. That's never been true. Heavily
loaded trucks, post office delivery vehicles, buses, construction
vehicles, snowplows, agricultural equipment and even horse-driven
buggies ARE permitted to use roads even if they delay following traffic.
Neither they nor bicyclists are required to leave the road or endanger
their safety to save a minute for an impatient motorist.

This has been firmly established by the courts.
https://mobikefed.org/2010/09/selz-case-establishing-bicyclists-right-road
And since then, many states have revised their laws to make this more clear.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 2/17/2022 8:32 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/16/2022 10:30 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 5:34:16 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>>>
>>> In my area a full size pickup is as likely to have woman
>>> pilot as a man. And often with a child in a baby seat on the
>>> 4-door models.
>>
>> Are they jacked up a foot, sporting oversized tires, light bars, loud
>> exhausts, mudflaps with
>> this theme ?
>> https://www.bigrigchromeshop.com/sitting-lady-mud-flap-cut-out-p-565352.html#.Yg3Ob5aIYaE
>>
>>
>> Do they always drive with high beams on? Do they roll coal and block
>> Tesla charging stations?
>> Those are the kinds I'm complaining about.
>>
>> (I don't think the popularity of other pickups is really logical, but
>> that's a separate point.)
>>
>> - Frank Krygowski
>>
>
> Oh, optional equipment is the standard?

No, Andrew. But there is obnoxious "optional equipment" added to certain
vehicles just for the purpose of being obnoxious. And there is obnoxious
behavior that correlates pretty strongly with certain equipment and
vehicle choices.

As I've mentioned before, these days I'm forced to do more long drives
than I like, some of it on freeways, some of it on two-lane highways.
I've long noticed that pickup truck drivers are heavily over represented
in the guys who refuse to switch from high beam headlights to low beams.
In fact, it seems to be a style thing for the bigger, more macho pickups
to run high beams even in daytime. And super bright auxiliary lights or
"light bars" are almost exclusively on big pickups.

When I've flicked my brights on and off to request someone else dim
their high beams, I've had a pickup driver switch on his light bar instead.

Want to talk about "rolling coal" as "optional equipment"?

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 01:01:42 -0800 (PST), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 12:03:58 AM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 20:30:31 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
>> <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 5:34:16 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In my area a full size pickup is as likely to have woman
>> >> pilot as a man. And often with a child in a baby seat on the
>> >> 4-door models.
>> >
>> >Are they jacked up a foot, sporting oversized tires, light bars, loud exhausts, mudflaps with
>> >this theme ?
>> >https://www.bigrigchromeshop.com/sitting-lady-mud-flap-cut-out-p-565352.html#.Yg3Ob5aIYaE
>> >
>> >Do they always drive with high beams on? Do they roll coal and block Tesla charging stations?
>> >Those are the kinds I'm complaining about.
>> >
>> >(I don't think the popularity of other pickups is really logical, but that's a separate point.)
>> >
>> >- Frank Krygowski
>> But why ever not? After all you ride a bicycle and from your own
>> writing frequently "seize the lane" and hinder other vehicles
>> traveling at legal rates of speed. Why shouldn't other vehicles be
>> allowed to hinder you?
>>
>> And, of course, you will argue that you have a legal right to do so,
>> but these outrageous motor cars you rant about must be legal, I
>> believe in all states, as they must pass an annual inspection. Don't
>> they?
>> --
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John B.
>
>No. There is no annual inspection of vehicles in the USA. You do have to pay an annual registration fee for your car in the state. But no one inspects it and you do not turn in any inspection report to the state. It is 100% legal to drive the biggest pile of junk on earth on the highway as long as you paid the registration fees and license fees.

https://www.bentleymore.com/california-vehicle-safety-inspection-requirements/
https://www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/dmv/registration/inspections-emissions/index.htm

?????
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 10:22:21 +0100, Rolf Mantel
<news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:

>Am 17.02.2022 um 10:01 schrieb russellseaton1@yahoo.com:
>
>> No. There is no annual inspection of vehicles in the USA. You do
>> have to pay an annual registration fee for your car in the state.
>> But no one inspects it and you do not turn in any inspection report
>> to the state. It is 100% legal to drive the biggest pile of junk on
>> earth on the highway as long as you paid the registration fees and
>> license fees.
>
>This might be one of the reasons why US road deaths are so high compared
>to Europe.
>In Europe, we must have a safety inspection every two years (in Germany
>an annual emmissions check as well).
>
>Rolf

Here it is every year for vehicles 7 years old or older. A
prerequisite to getting the next year's tax certificate.

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:50:11 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 2/17/2022 11:17 AM, sms wrote:
>> On 2/16/2022 10:03 PM, John B. wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> But why ever not? After all you ride a bicycle and from your own
>>> writing frequently "seize the lane" and hinder other vehicles
>>> traveling at legal rates of speed. Why shouldn't other vehicles be
>>> allowed to hinder you?
>>
>> Don't extrapolate the discredited "vehicular cycling" behavior onto all
>> cyclists. Most cyclists don't "take the lane" unless it's necessary to
>> do so.
>
>Points to counter Scharf's typical nonsense:
>
>1) When you're riding a totally empty residential street, no motor
>vehicles nearby, do you really right right next to the gutter? None of
>the cyclists I ride with do that. They typically ride on the smoothest
>part of the road, which is usually the center of the lane.
>
>2) Vehicular Cycling is, essentially, riding safely in accordance with
>the traffic laws. Traffic laws in states I'm familiar with do NOT
>require cyclists to ride far right when it's not safe to do so; they
>allow "taking the lane" for safety when necessary.
>
>3) And I, like the other competent cyclists I ride with, DO share a lane
>with motor vehicles when it's safe to do so.
>
>And for John:
>
>4) You seem to imagine some law that says no vehicle operator can ever
>impede any other vehicle operator. That's never been true. Heavily
>loaded trucks, post office delivery vehicles, buses, construction
>vehicles, snowplows, agricultural equipment and even horse-driven
>buggies ARE permitted to use roads even if they delay following traffic.
>Neither they nor bicyclists are required to leave the road or endanger
>their safety to save a minute for an impatient motorist.
>
>This has been firmly established by the courts.
>https://mobikefed.org/2010/09/selz-case-establishing-bicyclists-right-road
>And since then, many states have revised their laws to make this more clear.

I think that you are getting carried away again. I distinctly remember
seeing trucks with humongous great sections of cast concrete pipe
section, far wider then the truck bed, parked in California and I was
told that because of the extremely wide load they could only proceed,
on public highways during the night and with state police accompany
them.

And as for the court ruling you mention, I believe that you have
mentioned this before, and I believe that I did look into it, and from
memory it was a court case where a bicyclist was accused of impeding
traffic and the court ruled that in that isolated incident the cyclist
was not guilty . Not an all encompassing ruling that "bicycles can
impede traffic".

However, I am, admittedly getting on in years and perhaps my memory
is faulty so if you can cite a ruling that bicycles are free to impede
traffic in the state of Ohio, I will humbly apologize.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:59:00 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 2/17/2022 8:32 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 2/16/2022 10:30 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 5:34:16 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In my area a full size pickup is as likely to have woman
>>>> pilot as a man. And often with a child in a baby seat on the
>>>> 4-door models.
>>>
>>> Are they jacked up a foot, sporting oversized tires, light bars, loud
>>> exhausts, mudflaps with
>>> this theme ?
>>> https://www.bigrigchromeshop.com/sitting-lady-mud-flap-cut-out-p-565352.html#.Yg3Ob5aIYaE
>>>
>>>
>>> Do they always drive with high beams on? Do they roll coal and block
>>> Tesla charging stations?
>>> Those are the kinds I'm complaining about.
>>>
>>> (I don't think the popularity of other pickups is really logical, but
>>> that's a separate point.)
>>>
>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>
>>
>> Oh, optional equipment is the standard?
>
>No, Andrew. But there is obnoxious "optional equipment" added to certain
>vehicles just for the purpose of being obnoxious. And there is obnoxious
>behavior that correlates pretty strongly with certain equipment and
>vehicle choices.
>
>As I've mentioned before, these days I'm forced to do more long drives
>than I like, some of it on freeways, some of it on two-lane highways.
>I've long noticed that pickup truck drivers are heavily over represented
>in the guys who refuse to switch from high beam headlights to low beams.
>In fact, it seems to be a style thing for the bigger, more macho pickups
>to run high beams even in daytime. And super bright auxiliary lights or
>"light bars" are almost exclusively on big pickups.
>
>When I've flicked my brights on and off to request someone else dim
>their high beams, I've had a pickup driver switch on his light bar instead.
>
>Want to talk about "rolling coal" as "optional equipment"?

Frank, you are turning into a Crotchety Old Man.

Yup them there AR guns are dangerious, Oh and them 30 round magazines
shouldn't be allowed, and them damned pickup trucks, and the plastic
bicycles and Oh My God! The fancy sifting....

But official government figures show that homicides carried out with
AR's are extremely rare and that pickups are the most common motor
vehicle in the U.S. and Andrew makes far more money and thus can pay
far more taxes selling fancy sifters and plastic bikes, which in turn
allows the U.S., to pay more in compensation to those poor people who
want to work.

I recommend
https://tinyurl.com/bdf4w836
Only $8.89
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 4:14:42 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 12:50:11 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >On 2/17/2022 11:17 AM, sms wrote:
> >> On 2/16/2022 10:03 PM, John B. wrote:
> >>
> >> <snip>
> >>
> >>> But why ever not? After all you ride a bicycle and from your own
> >>> writing frequently "seize the lane" and hinder other vehicles
> >>> traveling at legal rates of speed. Why shouldn't other vehicles be
> >>> allowed to hinder you?
> >>
> >> Don't extrapolate the discredited "vehicular cycling" behavior onto all
> >> cyclists. Most cyclists don't "take the lane" unless it's necessary to
> >> do so.
> >
> >Points to counter Scharf's typical nonsense:
> >
> >1) When you're riding a totally empty residential street, no motor
> >vehicles nearby, do you really right right next to the gutter? None of
> >the cyclists I ride with do that. They typically ride on the smoothest
> >part of the road, which is usually the center of the lane.
> >
> >2) Vehicular Cycling is, essentially, riding safely in accordance with
> >the traffic laws. Traffic laws in states I'm familiar with do NOT
> >require cyclists to ride far right when it's not safe to do so; they
> >allow "taking the lane" for safety when necessary.
> >
> >3) And I, like the other competent cyclists I ride with, DO share a lane
> >with motor vehicles when it's safe to do so.
> >
> >And for John:
> >
> >4) You seem to imagine some law that says no vehicle operator can ever
> >impede any other vehicle operator. That's never been true. Heavily
> >loaded trucks, post office delivery vehicles, buses, construction
> >vehicles, snowplows, agricultural equipment and even horse-driven
> >buggies ARE permitted to use roads even if they delay following traffic.
> >Neither they nor bicyclists are required to leave the road or endanger
> >their safety to save a minute for an impatient motorist.
> >
> >This has been firmly established by the courts.
> >https://mobikefed.org/2010/09/selz-case-establishing-bicyclists-right-road
> >And since then, many states have revised their laws to make this more clear.
>
> I think that you are getting carried away again. I distinctly remember
> seeing trucks with humongous great sections of cast concrete pipe
> section, far wider then the truck bed, parked in California and I was
> told that because of the extremely wide load they could only proceed,
> on public highways during the night and with state police accompany
> them.

_Extremely_ wide loads have special rules. What applies to them does NOT apply to all
the other examples I listed above - heavy trucks, mail delivery, buses, etc.. and bikes.

> And as for the court ruling you mention, I believe that you have
> mentioned this before, and I believe that I did look into it, and from
> memory it was a court case where a bicyclist was accused of impeding
> traffic and the court ruled that in that isolated incident the cyclist
> was not guilty . Not an all encompassing ruling that "bicycles can
> impede traffic".

John, it's very easy to find all you need to know about the Selz case and its implications.
You should do that.

But the fundamental fact is, bicyclists DO have a right to the road. The fact that bikes are
usually slower than cars does not change that fact. If you want to read that as "bicycles can
impede traffic," fine. They certainly can when it's necessary to do so.

Ohio Revised Code 4511.55 says bicyclists must ride as far right "as practicable."
But session (C) of that same law says:

("C) This section does not require a person operating a bicycle or electric bicycle to ride at the edge of the roadway when it is unreasonable or unsafe to do so. Conditions that may require riding away from the edge of the roadway include when necessary to avoid fixed or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, surface hazards, or if it otherwise is unsafe or impracticable to do so, including if the lane is too narrow for the bicycle or electric bicycle and an overtaking vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane."

> However, I am, admittedly getting on in years and perhaps my memory
> is faulty so if you can cite a ruling that bicycles are free to impede
> traffic in the state of Ohio, I will humbly apologize.

Obviously, if the lane is too narrow for the overtaking vehicle to travel side by side, if there is
traffic that prevents the motorist moving left to pass, and the bicyclist moves left as specifically
allowed by law, the following motorist will have to slow down. To that degree, he will be "impeded."

And let me emphasize, this is not just my idea or interpretation. Try reading the book
_Bicycling and the Law_ by lawyer and fairly famous bicyclist Bob Mionske.

You're up, John. Do what you promised.

- Frank Krygowski

On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 4:29:11 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
>
> Frank, you are turning into a Crotchety Old Man.
>
> Yup them there AR guns are dangerious, Oh and them 30 round magazines
> shouldn't be allowed, and them damned pickup trucks, and the plastic
> bicycles and Oh My God! The fancy sifting....
>
> ...Andrew makes far more money and thus can pay
> far more taxes selling fancy sifters ...

Fancy sifters? These??
https://www.amazon.com/flour-sifter/s?k=flour+sifter

Hey, I'm fine with people using those things if they like. I don't need one.
And I've said the same about fancy shifters like STI, even though I have no need for them.

Buy what you like, John. Feel free to keep your choices secret if you like,
or we can discuss advantages and disadvantages if you like. After all, this is
a discussion group!

- Frank Krygowski

On 2/17/2022 7:06 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 4:29:11 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
>>
>> Frank, you are turning into a Crotchety Old Man.
>>
>> Yup them there AR guns are dangerious, Oh and them 30 round magazines
>> shouldn't be allowed, and them damned pickup trucks, and the plastic
>> bicycles and Oh My God! The fancy sifting....
>>
>> ...Andrew makes far more money and thus can pay
>> far more taxes selling fancy sifters ...
>
> Fancy sifters? These??
> https://www.amazon.com/flour-sifter/s?k=flour+sifter
>
> Hey, I'm fine with people using those things if they like. I don't need one.
> And I've said the same about fancy shifters like STI, even though I have no need for them.
>
> Buy what you like, John. Feel free to keep your choices secret if you like,
> or we can discuss advantages and disadvantages if you like. After all, this is
> a discussion group!
>
> - Frank Krygowski
>

I don't decide what sells. Customers decide that.

I do decide what goes to the dump at a dead loss.
As with most things painful and expensive, that's an
educational experience.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 8:34:16 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:

> >
> In my area a full size pickup is as likely to have woman
> pilot as a man. And often with a child in a baby seat on the
> 4-door models.
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

When I lived in Alabama, if you bought a pickup, you got your choice of options.
you could have a gun rack or a choice of turn signals, but not both.

On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 6:18:29 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 04:13:20 -0800 (PST), Tim R
>
> >
> >Recoil really does make a difference in accurate shooting, especially for the less experienced. Less than 5% of the population hunt, and probably not many of those fire many rounds per year. Now that military rifles have little recoil, I see soldiers holding them in ways that would be painful with a 12 gauge or .30 caliber, but that work very well with the 5.56 rounds.
> Certainly a lighter weight rifle can be held in different ways then a
> 9lb plus rifle but I really would have to argue about the recoil and
> accuracy. I used to shoot at a range where there was one guy shooting
> a 300 Weatherby rifle that weighed something like 6 lbs. It kicked so
> hard that he used to wad up a sweater to put between his shoulder and
> the butt stock, and he shot some very impressive groups at 100 and 200
> yards.
> --
> Cheers,
>
> John B.

Certainly it can be done.
But also, outside of the few specialists, almost all of us shoot low recoil guns more accurately.
I grew up in Wisconsin, and deer hunting was done with 12 gauge or .30/06 depending on your area. Most of us kids learned to handle some recoil.
Now that most people don't hunt it's a different story. When I worked corrections those who weren't already experienced didn't qualify.
The M16 and variants has almost no recoil and a straightline stock. You don't have to pull the stock firmly into the pocket; you can set the sharp edge high on the shoulder and shoot very well with no fear. I'm too old to be trained on that, but I've worked with military for 30 years and watched them shoot.

Of course in combat accuracy is overrated. You never have targets, you are shooting areas to keep heads down while you call in arty and air. But that's another argument.

On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 9:45:32 AM UTC-5, Rolf Mantel wrote:
> Am 16.02.2022 um 14:45 schrieb AMuzi:
> >
> > BTW I would bet real money than not one person here on RBT could qualify
> > NSW.
> Certainly not at our age. It might have been different at age 20.

At age 20 I had the physical abilities but not the mental toughness.

Approaching 70, I have the mental toughness but the physical abilities are only a dream.

I won't take your bet. Certainly i can''t do it. Still an old geezer can surprise you sometimes.

On 2/17/2022 8:25 PM, Tim R wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 8:34:16 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>
>>>
>> In my area a full size pickup is as likely to have woman
>> pilot as a man. And often with a child in a baby seat on the
>> 4-door models.
>> --
>> Andrew Muzi
>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>
> When I lived in Alabama, if you bought a pickup, you got your choice of options.
> you could have a gun rack or a choice of turn signals, but not both.
>

That's a big difference between Texas and Wisconsin!
When I worked in Texas your average housewife with a couple
of children in tow parked at the grocery with a long gun in
the rack. Don't see that in Wisconsin.

Turn signals? Almost nobody uses turn signals. I hate that.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 11:27:13 AM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>
> People tend to adopt styles that reflect their personalities. I think
> the owners of big, loud, "petro masculinity" pickups are typically
> sending deliberate and obnoxious messages. I very much doubt that you do
> the same.
>
>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski

Frank,
I think you're wrong on the pickup thing, and here's why.
Some years back the sociology department at Univ of Wis did a study on deer hunters.
Understand that Dane County is defined as 1200 square miles surrounded by reality, a hotbed of liberal thought.
They suspected that people who like to blast defenseless Bambi into hamburger probably had some screws loose, bloodthirsty killers or macho fantasies.

They found no difference on any psychological or personality measures. What they found was if your friends and family hunt deer, you hunt deer; if they bowl, you bowl; if they play cards, you play cards. it was as simple as that.

..

On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 6:44:14 PM UTC-8, timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 11:27:13 AM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >
> > People tend to adopt styles that reflect their personalities. I think
> > the owners of big, loud, "petro masculinity" pickups are typically
> > sending deliberate and obnoxious messages. I very much doubt that you do
> > the same.
> >
> >
> > --
> > - Frank Krygowski
>
> Frank,
> I think you're wrong on the pickup thing, and here's why.
> Some years back the sociology department at Univ of Wis did a study on deer hunters.
> Understand that Dane County is defined as 1200 square miles surrounded by reality, a hotbed of liberal thought.
> They suspected that people who like to blast defenseless Bambi into hamburger probably had some screws loose, bloodthirsty killers or macho fantasies.
>
> They found no difference on any psychological or personality measures. What they found was if your friends and family hunt deer, you hunt deer; if they bowl, you bowl; if they play cards, you play cards. it was as simple as that.

I can easily believe that, at least as a general tendency. As we all know, most families do contain exceptions.

But that probably means merely that the tailgating, headlight-glaring, coal rolling pickup drivers* hang around
with other tailgating, headlight glaring, coal rolling pickup drivers*.

(* This being r.b.tech, I feel a need to emphasize that I'm not talking about _all_ pickup drivers.)

- Frank Krygowski

On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 20:18:50 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>On 2/17/2022 7:06 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 4:29:11 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
>>>
>>> Frank, you are turning into a Crotchety Old Man.
>>>
>>> Yup them there AR guns are dangerious, Oh and them 30 round magazines
>>> shouldn't be allowed, and them damned pickup trucks, and the plastic
>>> bicycles and Oh My God! The fancy sifting....
>>>
>>> ...Andrew makes far more money and thus can pay
>>> far more taxes selling fancy sifters ...
>>
>> Fancy sifters? These??
>> https://www.amazon.com/flour-sifter/s?k=flour+sifter
>>
>> Hey, I'm fine with people using those things if they like. I don't need one.
>> And I've said the same about fancy shifters like STI, even though I have no need for them.
>>
>> Buy what you like, John. Feel free to keep your choices secret if you like,
>> or we can discuss advantages and disadvantages if you like. After all, this is
>> a discussion group!
>>
>> - Frank Krygowski
>>
>
>I don't decide what sells. Customers decide that.
>
>I do decide what goes to the dump at a dead loss.
>As with most things painful and expensive, that's an
>educational experience.

Ah well, Poor old Frank is getting a bit past it, I guess, all his
talk of advantages and disadvantages.

What, for example, is the advantage to a bar end shifter? Sure it is
cheaper, but in a world where $10,000 bicycles aren't exactly rare is
"cheap" really better?

But re pricing, I once participated in a pricing study. We selected a
small 1-1/2 H.P. outboard motor and starting out at a low price and
gradually week by week increased it until we sold no motors at all and
then gradually lowered it, week by week, back to the original price.
We discovered that there is a price at which the most motors were sold
somewhere mid way between the highest and the lowest.

The guy managing the study termed this the "perceived value" and his
dissertation argued that everything has a perceived value and by
pricing at that level sales will be maximized. If you price too high
people say, "Wow! Too expensive" and if you price too low people say,
"Wow! Must be cheap junk".
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 18:25:07 -0800 (PST), Tim R
<timothy42bach@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 8:34:16 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>
>> >
>> In my area a full size pickup is as likely to have woman
>> pilot as a man. And often with a child in a baby seat on the
>> 4-door models.
>> --
>> Andrew Muzi
>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>
>When I lived in Alabama, if you bought a pickup, you got your choice of options.
>you could have a gun rack or a choice of turn signals, but not both.

Well, when I lived in Louisiana a gun rack was considered a necessity.
After all do you want to carry your $2,000 trap gun around rattling on
the floorboards? (:-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 7:47:42 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
>
> >On 2/17/2022 7:06 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 4:29:11 PM UTC-8, John B. wrote:
> >>>
> >>> ...Andrew makes far more money and thus can pay
> >>> far more taxes selling fancy sifters ...
> >>
> >> Fancy sifters? These??
> >> https://www.amazon.com/flour-sifter/s?k=flour+sifter
> >>
> >> Hey, I'm fine with people using those things if they like. I don't need one.
> >> And I've said the same about fancy shifters like STI, even though I have no need for them.
> >>
> >> Buy what you like, John. Feel free to keep your choices secret if you like,
> >> or we can discuss advantages and disadvantages if you like. After all, this is
> >> a discussion group!
> >>
> Ah well, Poor old Frank is getting a bit past it, I guess, all his
> talk of advantages and disadvantages.
>
> What, for example, is the advantage to a bar end shifter? Sure it is
> cheaper, but in a world where $10,000 bicycles aren't exactly rare is
> "cheap" really better?

Cheap doesn't matter to me. I can afford any bike on the market.

What matters to me is extreme reliability, plus repairability, especially with
tools I carry on the bike. I understand that STI, etc. is very reliable. (Although
ISTR at least one person here has had trouble keeping it adjusted...)

But I've helped several people get their STI shifters going again after they've
failed in ways beyond the ability of the owners to fix at home, not even on the
road. I've talked about some of those here.

The only failures I've ever had with bar end shifters have been broken cables.
I've fixed that on the road. Even that problem can be much worse with STI.

- Frank Krygowski

On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 18:33:28 -0800 (PST), Tim R
<timothy42bach@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 6:18:29 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 04:13:20 -0800 (PST), Tim R
>>
>> >
>> >Recoil really does make a difference in accurate shooting, especially for the less experienced. Less than 5% of the population hunt, and probably not many of those fire many rounds per year. Now that military rifles have little recoil, I see soldiers holding them in ways that would be painful with a 12 gauge or .30 caliber, but that work very well with the 5.56 rounds.
>> Certainly a lighter weight rifle can be held in different ways then a
>> 9lb plus rifle but I really would have to argue about the recoil and
>> accuracy. I used to shoot at a range where there was one guy shooting
>> a 300 Weatherby rifle that weighed something like 6 lbs. It kicked so
>> hard that he used to wad up a sweater to put between his shoulder and
>> the butt stock, and he shot some very impressive groups at 100 and 200
>> yards.
>> --
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John B.
>
>Certainly it can be done.
>But also, outside of the few specialists, almost all of us shoot low recoil guns more accurately.
>I grew up in Wisconsin, and deer hunting was done with 12 gauge or .30/06 depending on your area. Most of us kids learned to handle some recoil.
>Now that most people don't hunt it's a different story. When I worked corrections those who weren't already experienced didn't qualify.
>The M16 and variants has almost no recoil and a straightline stock. You don't have to pull the stock firmly into the pocket; you can set the sharp edge high on the shoulder and shoot very well with no fear. I'm too old to be trained on that, but I've worked with military for 30 years and watched them shoot.
>
>Of course in combat accuracy is overrated. You never have targets, you are shooting areas to keep heads down while you call in arty and air. But that's another argument.

I would argue the comments about recoil a bit as my experience has
been that largely because of butt stock design perceived recoil (for
want of a better name) may be vastly different between guns of the
same caliber and weight. I once got in a trade a very nice European
made 12 gauge barrel and receiver and made a "Trap Gun"out of it. I
don't remember my thinking at the time buy the gun ended up with a
very narrow comb on the butt stock. I took it out to the range after I
got it finished and I think I shot it 10 times and came back and put
it on the gun rack as it kicked so hard it would bruise your cheek
bone.
My regular trap gun was a Remington 870 which probably weighed a
little bit more but was definitely much more pleasant to shoot.
I might add that a normal "round" of trap is 25 shots and on an
average afternoon most shooters will shoot 3 to 4 "rounds"
--
Cheers,

John B.