Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 115
  1. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Elevation 666m Edmonton Canada
    My Bikes
    2013 Custom SA tourster
    Posts
    476
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Sorry to disappoint all you VCers living in your DREAMWORLD .... "Drivers/driving" does NOT INCLUDE bicycle "RIDERS".
    So saying bicycles don't belong on shoulders, can't "travel" on them or States don't expect you to ride them is LAUGHABLE.
    Alberta in fact does REQUIRE such. So no wonder I haven't seen "Chipseal" in these parts.
    =============
    (a) shall keep both hands on the handlebars of the cycle,except when making a signal in accordance with this Regulation or shifting the gears of the cycle,(b) shall keep both feet on the pedals or foot rests of the cycle other than when stopped,(c) shall not ride other than on or astride a regular seat of the cycle, and(d) shall not use the cycle to carry more persons at one time than the number for which the cycle is designed and equipped.
    (2)
    A person who is operating a cycle, other than a motor cycle, on a highway shall operate the cycle as near as practicable to the right curb or edge of the roadway unless that person is in the process ofmaking a left turn with the cycle.
    (3)
    Notwithstanding subsection (2), a person who is operating a cycle, other than a motor cycle, on a one-way highway in an urban area shall ride as near as practicable to either curb or edge of the roadway unless that person is in the process of crossing from one curb or edge of the roadway to the opposite curb or edge of theroadway.
    (4)
    Notwithstanding subsection (2), a person who is operating acycle, other than a motorcycle, on a highway that has shoulders(a) in the case of a highway that has paved shoulders, shall operate the cycle on the right shoulder, and (b) in the case of a highway that does not have paved shoulders, shall operate the cycle as far to the right of the roadway as practicable,unless that person is in the process of making a left turn.
    (5)
    A person who is riding as a passenger on a cycle(a) shall not ride other than on a regular seat of the cycle thatis designed to be used by a passenger, and(b) shall keep both feet on the foot rests provided for the useof the passenger riding on the seat.
    Travel single file
    78
    A person who is operating a cycle on a highway in the same direction in the same traffic lane, except when overtaking and
    passing another cycle, ...........
    ==========
    Last edited by GamblerGORD53; 12-06-13 at 10:32 AM.

  2. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    226
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by benjdm View Post
    ....
    Drivers who are driving in the shoulder (or 'breakdown lane') are ticketed for violating 89 4b (Example 1 and Example 2):
    ....
    A shoulder is not a breakdown lane. Both of your examples btw are covered by 700CMR7. Which is not applicable to bicycles, except that they are prohibited from those roads. And that's not applicable to Route 9 in Hadley.

    For driving on the shoulder, see Chapter 89 Section 4A. There is no practical way a bicycle can run afoul of 89.4(a).
    (BTW, it is indeed 89.11(b) which allows bicycles to pass other vehicles on the right of those vehicles.)

    BTW, my strongest memory of riding route 9 is Broadside Bookshop in Northampton and Bread Euphoria just outside of Northampton.
    Hadley? Nothing at all memorable.

    -mr. bill

  3. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    104
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by howsteepisit View Post
    Nothing in my post about going to court. And by the way, I have 25 years of experience doing research for and preparing environmental documents and supporting environmental litigation cases. Think I know how to do research when its worth my while to spend my time doing so. To presume that any internet users needs your sanctimonious education is presumptuous and arrogant. I accept your apologies that I am sure that you will offer.
    And we all know enviornmentalists are the epitome of objectivity

  4. #54
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    104
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by howeeee View Post
    You think lawyers should work for free?
    No, but why should the taxpayers of Hadley, Mass. be raped for $27, 500?

    I'm sure the lawyer "worked" for every penny of that settlement. No, wait, as FrenchFit sees it, the lawyer got screwed ... "And, I bet the guy who took this case and got his client the settlement he wanted wrote-off a good deal of his time."

    Title should read:
    Taxpayers of Hadley Mass. forced to pay $27,500 for settled federal case with bicycle advocate

  5. #55
    Senior Member howsteepisit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    My Bikes
    Mecian
    Posts
    2,743
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ephin View Post
    And we all know enviornmentalists are the epitome of objectivity
    Another presumptive fail. I generally worked for industry and pro development forces.
    Recycle, Reclaim, Reuse and Repair
    The 4 Rs to save the planet

    "Toes"

  6. #56
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    8,402
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by GamblerGORD53 View Post
    Sorry to disappoint all you VCers living in your DREAMWORLD .... "Drivers/driving" does NOT INCLUDE bicycle "RIDERS".
    So saying bicycles don't belong on shoulders, can't "travel" on them or States don't expect you to ride them is LAUGHABLE.
    ?????

    No one is saying that "bicyclists don't belong on shoulders". As I said, more than once, bicyclists in the US are allowed, in practice, to use the shoulder (but are not generally required to do so). Personally, I don't care that cyclists use the shoulder.

    http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/VAT/VII/34/1231

    Every person riding a bicycle or skating or gliding on in-line skates upon a roadway shall be granted all of the rights and shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle by this title, except as to special regulations in this article and except as to those provisions of this title which by their nature can have no application. - See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/V....setw5yo0.dpuf
    This is pretty-much a standard law in all US states.

    This law makes it quite clear that biyclists on the roadways are, legally, exactly the same as drivers (unless the law explicitly provides for an exception or the law can't apply by the "nature" of bicycles).

    US states generally (there are rare exceptions) never require bicyclists to use the shoulder. Thus, the law does not "expect" riders to use them.


    Quote Originally Posted by GamblerGORD53 View Post
    Alberta in fact does REQUIRE such. ...
    =============
    ...Notwithstanding subsection (2), a person who is operating acycle, other than a motorcycle, on a highway that has shoulders(a) in the case of a highway that has paved shoulders, shall operate the cycle on the right shoulder, and (b) in the case of a highway that does not have paved shoulders, shall operate the cycle as far to the right of the roadway as practicable,...
    ==========
    Yes, Alberta (at least), Canada does require cyclists to use the shoulder. That might be useful information if Massachusetts was in Canada. Beyond that, no one is expecting that US law applies to Canada or vice versa.
    Last edited by njkayaker; 12-06-13 at 12:10 PM.

  7. #57
    New Orleans
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,458
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
    The VC haters are many in this thread.

    There are many folks who disagree with VC- sure.
    It is an argument about lane positioning-no really cares(much) where some other rider rides.Can't possibly rise to the level of hate.
    Now many folks disagree with the assertion that Lane Controlling is protective-no proof of that has ever been offered.

    You really need to start counting- hospital hits maybe. 2 zip so far by my recent count of episodes reported here.
    The episodes need to be verifiable-made some local news -tickets etc.

    Give us some real numbers.

  8. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    293
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    No, but why should the taxpayers of Hadley, Mass. be raped for $27, 500?
    This could have been avoided the first time he was stopped. I've watched some of the videos of these stops and the police just couldn't grasp that he was OK to be on the road. Rather than trying to learn the law they felt the need to intimidate.

  9. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Elevation 666m Edmonton Canada
    My Bikes
    2013 Custom SA tourster
    Posts
    476
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    @njkayaker
    Your quote said "Every person RIDING a bicycle ..... so you agree with me.
    The laws equate bicycles to SLOW MOVING VEHICLES = NOT exactly the same. pffft
    Same Rights = the right to travel "somewhere" on the roadway and AT TIMES use any part of the roadway.
    NOT = To riding always in the left track or left lane.
    Same Duties/ Responsibilities = Not causing accidents, not unnecessarily IMPEDING other users of any sort , obeying traffic control devices, facilitating passing (make way). There is No mention of excluding from the entirety of the lane for any other users, only a "3" foot passing allowance. "Taking the Lane" is but a figment of the VC/ LAB imagination.

    REPEAT ... Damon LOST his case in The Federal Court in Mass. The judge said he was guilty of NOT obeying his duties and ruled that it is reasonable for a BICYCLE to give way to the shoulder. Not RARE at all.

    YOU ARE NOT A CAR.

  10. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    My Bikes
    Sun EZ-Speedster SX
    Posts
    374
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by njkayaker View Post
    The "or" isn't indicating a choice between two equivalent options.
    It is indicating a choice between two available options.


    If there's a shoulder and it's usable and you are unduely interfering with traffic, you have to use it.
    No. If it meant that, it would use the language of the bike lane, which IS something you have to use: "shall be driven either on a usable bicycle or in-line skate lane." Riding in the lane would then be a lesser alternative, like other choices are if there is no usable bike lane: "or, if a usable bicycle or in-line skate lane has not been provided."


    Very few state laws mention shoulders. In the states that don't, you are never required to use them but (rather obviously) you can use them.
    It's not obvious.

    If there are two (or more) lanes going in the same way, you have to use the right hand one if you are going slow (you can be anywhere in it). Or (if there is no right-hand lane), you have to be close to the right side of the travel lane.
    The only roads without a right hand lane are unlaned roads.

  11. #61
    for dynamic hybrid logics prooftheory's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Buffalo NY
    Posts
    2,204
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Who knew that in-line skaters are the same as cyclists in NY?

  12. #62
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    My Bikes
    Sun EZ-Speedster SX
    Posts
    374
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_bill View Post
    A shoulder is not a breakdown lane. Both of your examples btw are covered by 700CMR7.
    Reading.....OK, a breakdown lane is a wide shoulder. All breakdown lanes are shoulders but not all shoulders are breakdown lanes.

    http://www.lawlib.state.ma.us/source...xt/700CMR7.pdf
    Breakdown Lane refers to a paved lane on a way to the right of the travel lanes and separated
    from them by a solid line.
    Shoulder refers to that part of the paved surface of a way lying outside solid traffic lines.
    I can't find anything else relevant in 700CMR7. Certainly nothing that overrides Chapter 89 Section 4B.


    For driving on the shoulder, see Chapter 89 Section 4A. There is no practical way a bicycle can run afoul of 89.4(a).
    Chapter 89...

    Section 4A. When any way has been divided into lanes, the driver of a vehicle shall so drive that the vehicle shall be entirely within a single lane, and he shall not move from the lane in which he is driving until he has first ascertained if such movement can be made with safety. The operators of motorcycles shall not ride abreast of more than one other motorcycle, shall ride single file when passing, and shall not pass any other motor vehicle within the same lane, except another motorcycle.
    Nothing in there provides that bicycles can legally operate on the shoulder. 4A requires the driver of a vehicle to be in a lane; a shoulder that is not a breakdown lane doesn't count as a lane. So, if a person riding a bicycle is riding in a breakdown lane, they are violating 4B; if they are riding in a shoulder that is not a breakdown lane, they are violating 4A.

  13. #63
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Elevation 666m Edmonton Canada
    My Bikes
    2013 Custom SA tourster
    Posts
    476
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Geeeez I better offer some LOGIC here.....

    DRIVER manuals are for teaching people how to DRIVE.
    IF you don't PASS the DRIVER written test AND vehicle operator test, then you are NOT A DRIVER.
    Bicles do NOT require DRIVER tests so you can NOT be referred to as a DRIVER.

    Bicycles ARE often allowed travel on sidewalks, shoulders, grassy knoles etc with aforesaid lowly inline-skaters .....
    DRIVERS/ING is NOT. "Shoulder" for all intents and purposes IS a sidewalk or temporary/emergency parking place.
    Therefore cyclists are NOT DRIVERS.
    Therefore there is no such law that bicycles are included in "No driving/traveling on shoulders".
    Vehicles is a generic term that may or may not include/exclude non-MOTOR vehicles.

    Since bicycles are allowed where motor vehicles are not, then SAME LAWS/ SAME RULES does NOT always FOLLOW.

    Sorry VCers .... I guess I need to invent another term to put yall in the proper context.
    You are just VELOQUESTRIANs. Neato eh?

  14. #64
    ---- buzzman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Newton, MA
    Posts
    4,535
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Benjdm
    Nothing in there provides that bicycles can legally operate on the shoulder. 4A requires the driver of a vehicle to be in a lane; a shoulder that is not a breakdown lane doesn't count as a lane. So, if a person riding a bicycle is riding in a breakdown lane, they are violating 4B; if they are riding in a shoulder that is not a breakdown lane, they are violating 4A.
    Wow.

    Talk about overthinking it!

    Good luck getting from point A to B via any form of conveyance if you guys get that caught up in the letter of the law.

    That such minutiae of legal interpretation is even being debated here boggles my mind.

    My analogies to dogmatic fundamentalists hold more weight than even I had imagined.

    It's not brain surgery, it's not the Talmud, it's not the Supreme Court, it's riding a bike. Children do it. People with mental handicaps do it. It requires no licensing. No special education. It's simple. It's elementary. It's basic.

    Don't we want to keep it that way? Isn't that the beauty of riding a bike? Are we really relegating the capacity to ride on the road to those who hold a law degree or like to pretend they do?


    PS- I think it's already been said but you are aware that 700CMR7 is not relevant to bikes because the roads it applies to are limited access and bar bicycles.

  15. #65
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    My Bikes
    Sun EZ-Speedster SX
    Posts
    374
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by GamblerGORD53 View Post
    Geeeez I better offer some LOGIC here.....
    You're not offering logic. You're offering assertions and ignorance.

    Here's an example (2, really) of cycling on the shoulder not being in accordance with traffic law:

    http://walkbikejersey.blogspot.com/2...riding-in.html
    ...the Chatam Police intend on issuing a summons to Mr. Batista for "failure to exercise due care when passing a standing or slow-moving vehicle proceeding in the same direction."

    In this case it would appear that Mr. Batista was riding his bicycle heading east in the shoulder while passing backed up motor traffic in the travel lanes to his left. At the entrance to the CVS Pharmacy a driver heading east left a gap open so that Patrick McVeigh of Chatham, the driver of the vehicle involved in the crash who was heading west, could turn left and enter the CVS parking lot. As the vehicle driven by Mr. McVeigh crossed the path of Mr. Batista, Mr. Batista then crashed into the rear of Mr. McVeigh's vehicle.

    This case brings up a number of problems with shoulder cycling in New Jersey that continue to put cyclists at risk of injury, as well as prosecution from the law. As reported by WalkBikeJersey earlier this year, The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled on a lawsuit that involved a cyclist tragically killed while traveling in the shoulder. That case had the court rule on the legality of shoulder cycling and the court declared:

    Bicyclists do not have special privileges on a roadway’s shoulder. Indeed, a bicycle rider is directed to ride on the furthest right hand side of the roadway, not on the roadway’s shoulder. The Motor Vehicle Code does not designate the roadway’s shoulder as a bicycle lane.

  16. #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    293
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    PA refers to cyclists as drivers.
    http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/docs/pamanual.pdf

    [QUOTE][Bicyclists do not have special privileges on a roadway’s shoulder. Indeed, a bicycle rider is directed to ride on the furthest right hand side of the roadway, not on the roadway’s shoulder. The Motor Vehicle Code does not designate the roadway’s shoulder as a bicycle lane./QUOTE]

    Yes, you are assuming certain liabilities by riding on the berm.

  17. #67
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    8,402
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by benjdm View Post
    No. If it meant that, it would use the language of the bike lane, which IS something you have to use: "shall be driven either on a usable bicycle or in-line skate lane." Riding in the lane would then be a lesser alternative, like other choices are if there is no usable bike lane: "or, if a usable bicycle or in-line skate lane has not been provided."
    No.

    Quote Originally Posted by benjdm View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by njkayaker View Post
    Very few state laws mention shoulders. In the states that don't, you are never required to use them but (rather obviously) you can use them. That is, in those states, using the shoulder is a choice between options (the roadway is the explicit option and the shoulder is the unspoken one)..
    It's not obvious.
    It's really, really obvious.

    Bicyclists who "don't know any better" will strongly prefer to ride on the shoulder. Many drivers think that's where bicyclists should be. Many cops too.

    Quote Originally Posted by benjdm View Post
    The only roads without a right hand lane are unlaned roads.
    No. The opposing lane isn't the "lefthand" lane.

  18. #68
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,069
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by GamblerGORD53 View Post
    Geeeez I better offer some LOGIC here.....

    DRIVER manuals are for teaching people how to DRIVE.
    IF you don't PASS the DRIVER written test AND vehicle operator test, then you are NOT A DRIVER.
    Bicles do NOT require DRIVER tests so you can NOT be referred to as a DRIVER.

    Bicycles ARE often allowed travel on sidewalks, shoulders, grassy knoles etc with aforesaid lowly inline-skaters .....
    DRIVERS/ING is NOT. "Shoulder" for all intents and purposes IS a sidewalk or temporary/emergency parking place.
    Therefore cyclists are NOT DRIVERS.
    Therefore there is no such law that bicycles are included in "No driving/traveling on shoulders".
    Vehicles is a generic term that may or may not include/exclude non-MOTOR vehicles.

    Since bicycles are allowed where motor vehicles are not, then SAME LAWS/ SAME RULES does NOT always FOLLOW.

    Sorry VCers .... I guess I need to invent another term to put yall in the proper context.
    You are just VELOQUESTRIANs. Neato eh?
    This is arguing like a philosopher, with no regard for the facts. Everywhere in the USA (I don't know about Canadian law), a person riding a bicycle on a roadway has the rights and duties of a driver of a vehicle. That's the law, no matter what some philosopher might think.

  19. #69
    Cycle Year Round CB HI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    11,420
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
    The VC haters are many in this thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by buzzman View Post
    I realize I often defend bicycle infrastructure, like bike paths, MUPS, Rail Trails, bike lanes and sharrows but that defense does not define how I ride on the road in the absence of said accommodations. Making use of the full lane, riding as a vehicle on the roadway is something that I do every single day that I ride. I think if you rode with me on the roadway you would find I am very much a vehicular cyclist. This type of riding was around long before certain "bike experts" turned "Vehicular Cycling" into a trademarked dogma, which is often used to drive a wedge between cyclists. You would be absolutely correct to say I am not that kind of "VC" cyclist. I'm more of a pragmatic vehicular cyclist than a dogmatic Vehicular Cyclist.

    But I have no idea how it serves you, other cyclists or bike advocacy in general to delineate those who do not adhere to this dogma as "VC Haters". I don't hate it I just don't buy it. I don't get it as a strategy to win others over to your point of view.
    Why do you think my statement was inclusive of you specifically?

    You are right VC riding has been around a very long time. From my observations, the divide did not begin with either John Forester or John Allen BUT with those that felt the need to claim VC is dangerous so they could get the bike lanes, side paths and MUPs that they wanted.
    Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.

  20. #70
    Cycle Year Round CB HI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    11,420
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by phoebeisis View Post
    So did he WIN LOSE OR DRAW ?
    The cyclist lost the traffic citation and I believe an appeal on that. Cyclist had to pay the fine(s). I believe the lawyer did that pro-bono. The cyclist won in civil court on the Motion for Summary Judgement. That win set up the city for a big lose in a civil trial, thus the city welcomed the chance for a settlement and minor financial lose (which covered much but not all the lawyers time on the civil case). The cyclist won big time in that if the city police are dumb enough to go after the cyclist again, the city will have to pay out big time.

    Quote Originally Posted by phoebeisis View Post
    There are many folks who disagree with VC- sure.
    It is an argument about lane positioning-no really cares(much) where some other rider rides.Can't possibly rise to the level of hate.
    You clearly have not attended some bike plan meetings or public meeting for installing bike lanes.
    Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.

  21. #71
    Senior Member Spld cyclist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Springfield, MA
    My Bikes
    2012 Motobecane Fantom CXX, 2012 Motobecane Fantom CX, 1997 Bianchi Nyala, 200? Burley Rock 'n Roll
    Posts
    870
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by buzzman View Post
    Wow.

    Talk about overthinking it!

    Good luck getting from point A to B via any form of conveyance if you guys get that caught up in the letter of the law.

    That such minutiae of legal interpretation is even being debated here boggles my mind.

    My analogies to dogmatic fundamentalists hold more weight than even I had imagined.

    It's not brain surgery, it's not the Talmud, it's not the Supreme Court, it's riding a bike. Children do it. People with mental handicaps do it. It requires no licensing. No special education. It's simple. It's elementary. It's basic.

    Don't we want to keep it that way? Isn't that the beauty of riding a bike? Are we really relegating the capacity to ride on the road to those who hold a law degree or like to pretend they do?


    PS- I think it's already been said but you are aware that 700CMR7 is not relevant to bikes because the roads it applies to are limited access and bar bicycles.
    If you ever have the misfortune of being ticketed (rightly or wrongly) for bicycling on a public way, you might want to come back and read the thread again. We'll help you sort it all out.

  22. #72
    New Orleans
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,458
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
    The cyclist lost the traffic citation and I believe an appeal on that. Cyclist had to pay the fine(s). I believe the lawyer did that pro-bono. The cyclist won in civil court on the Motion for Summary Judgement. That win set up the city for a big lose in a civil trial, thus the city welcomed the chance for a settlement and minor financial lose (which covered much but not all the lawyers time on the civil case). The cyclist won big time in that if the city police are dumb enough to go after the cyclist again, the city will have to pay out big time.

    You clearly have not attended some bike plan meetings or public meeting for installing bike lanes.
    Thanks for the info. You are right I have never been to any of those meetings.
    According to Turbo(someone hit him with a chair-fellow bike rider?) they are FULL CONTACT affairs!
    Yeah never figured argument over lane positioning-or bike lanes-would be so contentious.

    It certainly would be interesting to see actual numbers-car-bike hits per 10,000 people miles vs lane position

  23. #73
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    My Bikes
    Sun EZ-Speedster SX
    Posts
    374
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by njkayaker View Post
    It's really, really obvious.
    If only you had been there to present that incredibly compelling argument to the NJ Supreme Court! Alas, they only read the laws as written.

    No. The opposing lane isn't the "lefthand" lane.
    We've argued this before, and I have shown you many instances where the left lane is referring to the opposing lane, including the NYS Driver's manual chapter on passing. Also court cases where vehicles in the right lane were found not guilty of violating SMV law even when they didn't use the shoulder.

    http://www.dmv.ny.gov/dmanual/chapter06-manual.htm
    The left lane is usually used for passing other vehicles. However, you may not pass a vehicle on the left if:

    Your lane has a solid yellow center line.

    You cannot safely return to the right lane before reaching a solid yellow center line for the right lane.

    You cannot safely return to the right lane before any approaching vehicle comes within 200 feet (60 m) of you.

    You are approaching a curve or the crest of a hill on a two-way road and cannot see around or over it.

    You are within 100 feet (30 m) of a railroad crossing on a two-way roadway.

    You are within 100 feet (30 m) of a bridge, tunnel or viaduct on a two-way road and your view is obstructed.

    Passing will interfere with oncoming traffic.

  24. #74
    ---- buzzman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Newton, MA
    Posts
    4,535
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Spld cyclist View Post
    If you ever have the misfortune of being ticketed (rightly or wrongly) for bicycling on a public way, you might want to come back and read the thread again. We'll help you sort it all out.
    While I have not been ticketed I've been very nearly arrested by ignorant LEO's.

    The first, and worst, incident was on a long distance tour as I crossed through the small towns of the Ozarks in 1972. The local constabulary of one town didn't look kindly on the presence of two hippies on bicycles and warned us that local law prohibited the riding of bikes in the roadway. (I'm sure this was not correct) we then moved to the sidewalk, riding very slowly. He came by and said that wasn't legal either. We then took to walking our bikes. He came back again and told us bikes simply were not allowed on the sidewalk- they took up too much room.

    We then asked if we could lock them to something, buy some groceries and be on our merry way. He reluctantly relented after lecturing us at length.

    We did move on to the next town where we ended up being held overnight for being vagrant- we were in town after dark with no where to stay and they "invited" us to spend the night in jail.

    In my more militant bike riding youth (in the late 1960's early 1970's) I was frequently stopped by police for ridng in the lane in numerous places, particularly in New England. I was never ticketed but warned and lectured innumerable times. I've since learned to avoid such confrontations and so far have managed to cope with authoritative ignorance with some finesse.

    Should I fail to do so and it results in a citation or arrest I will most certainly turn to the wisdom of the self appointed experts in the A&S sub-forum of BF for help and for your assistance in particular.

  25. #75
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Elevation 666m Edmonton Canada
    My Bikes
    2013 Custom SA tourster
    Posts
    476
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    [QUOTE=Metal Man;16308041]PA refers to cyclists as drivers.
    http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/docs/pamanual.pdf

    [QUOTE][Bicyclists do not have special privileges on a roadway’s shoulder. Indeed, a bicycle rider is directed to ride on the furthest right hand side of the roadway, not on the roadway’s shoulder. The Motor Vehicle Code does not designate the roadway’s shoulder as a bicycle lane./QUOTE]

    REALLY NICE link there. I'm just not sure which parts are PA law and which are John Allen's Book.
    It says bicycles are vehicles , BUT nowhere does it say DRIVERS of bicycles.
    Lots of "pedalcycle operators", slow vehicle and sholder use references.

    (b) Operation on shoulder. -- A pedalcycle may be operated on theshoulder of a highway and shall be operated in the same direction asrequired of vehicles operated on the roadway.Comment: A bicycle may be operated on either a shoulder or on theroadway (the travel lanes). The locations will be based upontraffic volume, the physical condition of the travel lanes or theshoulder, traffic speed, the bicyclist's intended direction, andother safety factors.(c) Slower than prevailing speeds.-- A pedalcycle operated atslower than prevailing speed shall be operated in accordance with theprovisions of Section 3301(b), unless it is unsafe to do so.[3301(b). Vehicle proceeding at less than normal speed.Upon all roadways, any vehicles proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic atthe time and place under the conditions than existing shall be driven in the right-handlane then available for traffic, or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edgeof the roadway, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in thesame direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into an alley,private road or driveway. This subsection does not apply to a driver who mustnecessarily drive in a lane other than the right-hand lane to continue on his intendedroute.]Comment: Taken together, 3505 (c) and 3301 (b) state that slower vehicles shouldkeep to the right, which is the normal expectation of all road users, while permittingbicyclists to make movements consistent with their intended route.(d) One-way roadways. -- Any person operating a pedalcycle upon aroadway, which carries traffic in one direction only and has two or moremarked traffic lanes, may ride as near the left-hand curb or edge of theroadway as practicable, exercising due care when passing a standing vehicleor one proceeding in the same direction.Comment: Bicycles may ride in the left lane of a one-way street whichcontains two or more lanes. However, this does not apply topedalcyclists on freeways. See Section 3511(d), below.(e) Limitation on riding abreast. -- Persons riding pedalcycles upon aroadway shall not ride more than two abreast, except on paths or parts ofroadways set aside for the exclusive use of pedalcycles.Section 3506.No person operating a pedalcycle shall carry any package, bundle or articlewhich prevents the driver from keeping at least one hand upon the
    handlebars.

    Makes sense to me, unlike LAB VC dogma.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •