Wednesday, February 27, 2008


Greetings Readers

Okay - time for me to write/comment about a blogger's right to the road on a post he/she made within the last week or two.

I am not saying he/she is wrong, but every cyclist/biker must adhere to what the consequences of one way thinking or more to the point "I'm right and your wrong" attitude. I too, have every right to be biking on the streets of Denver and the roads of Colorado, but I must also adhere to who will "lose" the battle between vehicle and bike.

ith that - I now present my post:

Entitlementto give (a person or a thing) a title, a right, or a claim to something; furnish with grounds for laying claim. [Webster’s Definition]

Interesting definition, I think. I was reading a blogger’s post about his/her “entitlement” to the streets of Denver. Well, let me tell you readers – no one gave this fucking blogger “entitlement” to the streets of Denver – specifically Downtown Denver. He/She took this “entitlement” upon themselves to be on the streets (of Denver, Colorado).

Pretty arrogant of that blogger if you ask me even more so since I never, ever proclaimed “entitlement” for myself – anytime on this blue planet. And believe me I am arrogant enough that should I believe in that I would proclaim that from the tallest building in Denver that I am “Entitled” to the streets of Denver. Alas, never going to happen though.

No one in my book is “entitled” to the streets of Denver. Every cyclist is granted a right to ride upon legal route(s) to bike. Otherwise, no one has the authority to give anyone the “entitlement” to roads of Denver. (well perhaps the Mayor - who knows.)

If that is the case, per the blogger who made this comment then I have the “entitlement” to post-it note a message on his/her tombstone “his/her entitlement causes his/her death.” I also have the “entitlement” to “dance” upon his/her grave and also to say, “He/she was a fuck up for believing in the word “entitlement.”

Anyone with some intelligence knows that a cyclist (for example - who weights about 150 pounds) with a bike that may or not may include carbon will lose the “battle” with a 5000-pound vehicle.

“Entitlement” in that blogger’s words will earn him/her a straight shot to an early grave in the cemetery.

I, of course, will be the first one there to say, “I told you so.” Not to mention telling the whole world about “another cyclist passes away” post and the real reason why. No remorse from this guy, not a tear would be shed and/or no "woe-is him/her story" that him/her life was extinguished before he/she got to live a full life.

To dance upon this blogger’s grave would be very inconsiderate - rude, but I would since in this blogger’s words I too can invoke the word - “entitlement” to public areas.

I take no satisfaction in this particular situation, but by all means I will make an example of a cyclist that thinks he/she has a right to ride in the streets.

I have mentioned this before and I will mention this once again. I had a co-worker who thought that she had the “right” to ride in the lane that she was in. Well readers, let me tell you she got herself fucked up. I am not saying that she is wrong, but readers you need to understand that if you have the right to the road, you must adhere to a vehicle that could possibility kill you. She did everything right, by the book, but not “bending” to the vehicle’s right of passage the outcome was ugly, to say the least.

Legal battle in general, from what I heard, could take years to resolve. Meanwhile, you could be sideline, permanently injured or physiologically scarred. Not to mention that perhaps your bike could be FU-BAR!

So readers – “entitlement”, per the blogger’s own words will earn him/her a one-way ticket to an early grave and perhaps I will be there in the future to bow my head in respect, but also say “His/Her entitlement to the road got him/her entitlement to 6 feet under the earth.”

Until the next time.

Daryl Charley
The Fallen Athlete

No comments: