Frazz by Jef Mallett for July 15, 2011

How could he see Frazz? If he is close enough to holler he is to close to see.

I disagree with Frazz. 4WD was developed for non-paved conditions. “Ironic” is definitely the right word.

@kafox: But the definition of ‘ironic’ is when what you mean is the opposite of what you say. The ‘irate moron’ meant exactly what he said, it’s just that he’s driving something that is also built to be on unpaved roads.

Ironic! What if it’s made of magnesium or aluminium?

I think Frazz drives a composite bike.

While the idea of the 4-wheel drive vehicle driver yelling that Frazz’s bike doesn’t belong on the road is indeed “the pot calling the kettle black” so-to-speak… saying that a 4-wheel drive vehicle doesn’t belong on a paved road is as equally moronic. 4 wheel drive is useful in snow (granted there is no snow at this time of the year) so people who live in Michigan (like Frazz) might have a 4-wheel drive vehicle as their only vehicle and then need to drive it year round. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In terms of vehicles… does Frazz still own and drive his Chevette? I cannot recall, but seem to have a hazy memory of something happening to it. I always thought that Frazz drove around in a Chevette was very funny and it brought back memories of that very little, very quirky GM product…. of which don’t see hardly at all on the roads anymore. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ If Jef reads this, I hope that Frazz still has the Chevette.

I forgot to add…. I also agree that it is moronic to say that bicycles do not belong on the road. They are excellent vehicles of transportation when the conditions are right (and the person is physically fit enough).

What’s really annoying is the people walking on the bike path and leaving no room for bikers or other people to pass them. While bikers biking on a road right next to a bike path is ridiculous, for them it is probably easier than dealing with all the pedestrians.

I get annoyed when bicyclists ignore the bike path and slow down traffic, but that’s the extent of my annoyance.

Not that I’m knocking bicycling, but which one of the two pays the taxes used to build those roads? Many roads are built using funds collected from the tax on fuel.

Where I live there aren’t many bike paths, so bicyclists have to ride on the roads. Unless there is a paved, wide shoulder to ride on, I think it is suicidal to ride a bike. Especially on a road with 55 mph or greater speed limit and limited visibility. (Curves and/or hills)

For Nabuquduriuzhur and anyone else who may care: I know Jef Mallett well. If Frazz rides like Jef, then yes—Frazz IS one of the extremely rare bicyclists who consistently obeys traffic laws, is courteous toward others on the road, stops at stop signs, stops at lights, does turn signals, uses reflectors and lights at night, rides on the correct side of the road, doesn’t ride alongside vehicles at a stop unless there’s a bike lane, doesn’t block traffic, doesn’t impede traffic, doesn’t throw litter like water bottles and energy bar wrappers, thinks about others on the road and how they will be affected by sudden maneuvers as if he were a driver and gives other drivers time to react to changes.

Jef’s one of those rare bicyclists. And he’s not crazy about riding with cyclists who DON’T do these things because they are, as he puts it, the reason so many drivers hate bicyclists.

Actually it is ironic because the original reason for paving roads was not for automobiles, but for bicycles.

There are very few words in English that mean one thing only. Meaning changes over time through usage. The original definition may not have included, for example, “a free ride when you’ve already paid”, but it’s come to refer to that sort of usage over time. Older words acquire newer meanings in newer versions of dictionaries; I think it’s a matter of whether you consider the dictionary a book of how the language should be, or of how it is.