Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register. Please log in or create an account.
Vehicle: Car: Bumper
Bumper Stamper   (+5)  [vote for, against]

These cheap, refillable, permanent ink stamps are affixed to various spots on the bumper of your car. When another car bumps yours, the stamp leaves a print on their car: "Oops, I just bumped MBR5-27D" ...where the "MBR5-27D" would be replaced with your license plate.

Wouldn't the ink dry out? No -- The stamp is in a cartridge that opens when under pressure, keeping the ink wet until deployment.
-- swimswim, Aug 30 2011

Maybe not with permanent ink (washable would be fine), but I want a hand held one of these for when I'm on my bike. After all, if I can reach your car, you are passing to close to me anyway.
-- MechE, Aug 30 2011

// I want a hand held one of these for when I'm on my bike //

Hmmmm ...
-- 8th of 7, Aug 30 2011

Good point BigSleep, so maybe I should emphasize it as for specific situations when one is aiming to catch a carelessly destructive repeat offender (a repeat bumper bumper).
-- swimswim, Aug 31 2011

I can see a need for a ninja bumper bump thumper to thump bumper bumpers in mid bump.
-- Grogster, Aug 31 2011

If the lane is to narrow for a car to pass the cyclist safely, the car is not entitled to pass until the situation changes. Whether that means a period where there is no oncoming traffic so the car can pass in the oncoming lane or the road is wide enough for the car to pass safely, either is acceptable.

If neither of those happen in a reasonable amount of time, it is the responsibility of the cyclist to pull to the side and let the car pass.

That is what the law in my current and past states of residence require, it may be different elsewhere. (Although I'm pretty sure it's the same in the UK)

If I signal a left turn, my arm is at full extension out into traffic. If a driver is passing within arms reach, I will be hurt.
-- MechE, Aug 31 2011

Just because others fail to obey the law doesn't mean I don't, or that I shouldn't expect others to. And I do check before signalling, but I have, on rare occasions, been surprised by a car overtaking from a particularly bad angle around a curve, especially under conditions where noise is useless (heavy traffic, rain, etc.)

I double checked on my commute this morning. There are three sections, totalling less than a mile, where it is unsafe for cars to pass and they cannot see if there is oncoming traffic (curves or obstructions). On those sections, I deliberately take the lane, preventing an unsafe passage. The total delay for a car caught in any one of those sections is less than 30 seconds (assuming my average speed, and the car doing approximately the speed limit). I don't feel I am creating an undue burden on a driver behind me to expect them to wait that long.
-- MechE, Aug 31 2011

Narrow enough that I would have to ride on the edge of the road, and have no room to adjust my path if there is an obstruction. I will do that for brief periods specifically to let a car pass, but I won't make a habit of it, because it is dangerous. A few feet of pavement to either side of my wheels is not to much to ask.
-- MechE, Aug 31 2011

-Cyclists vs Pedestrains:
Result, boo-boo's.

-Cyclists vs Motorists:
Result, broken twisted smears.

Are there Darwin Awards for entire planning committees?
Friggin stupidity!

It's simple. Cyclists and pedestrians share the sidewalks, and pedestrians have the right of way.
Yes, some grass will get trampled. Yes some joggers will get cycled over by assholes, but there will be much, *Much* fewer road smears.

Heck, the savings in police, firetruck, ambulance and hospital costs should pay for widening of the sidewalks out as far as current bike lanes many times over and excess savings could be sent directly to me where they will fund my benevolent planetary dictatorial campaign.


A vote for me...
is a vote for you.
-- 2 fries shy of a happy meal, Sep 02 2011

Neighbourhood cycling is just fine on sidewalks as long as there's either an apron between sidewalk and street where they can pass pedestrians, or they dismount and walk past.

Commuter cycling, where the guy/gal is riding 10-20 miles to work and back, that's very different: you don't want to spend all your time dodging mailboxes and lamposts.

Given that commuter-cycling almost certainly requires sharing the road with vehicles at certain portions of the traverse, I think they should be required to be licensed, perhaps even insured.

I've done commuter-cycling: downtown from the 'burbs for one shift, over to another shop downtown for the next then back home. However I always tried to either take a path in a park, or use sidestreets. And if I absolutely had to ride on a major street, I tried to make sure it was either when traffic was really slow, or when traffic was non-existent. YMMV.

As a driver I've noticed that when traffic conditions are heavy enough such that it's difficult to pull partially or completely into the next lane to overtake a cyclist, then you're not going to be going anywhere real fast anyways so who cares.
-- FlyingToaster, Sep 02 2011

-- pashute, Sep 02 2011

and another +
-- pashute, Jun 26 2013

random, halfbakery