Knowing the law does change motorist attitudes

[banerjek]

I had an interesting conversation with a woman yesterday where she started by explaining how ticked off she used to get when she drove in certain areas and got stuck behind cyclists. I kept my mouth shut for most part, but I observed that I felt the frustration most people feel is caused by their expectations -- it is common for cars to block the road when turning left or pulling out of a parking space, but that doesn't seem to rankle most drivers.

Anyway, sometime back, she got miffed enough to actually look up the law and found that bicycles are entitled to the full lane. She says getting stuck behind bicycles has never aggravated her since.

I've always believed that most people who get aggravated don't really care what the law is, but apparently some do.

[Brian Ratliff]

This is heartening to hear! I don't exactly know what it is, but it seems where I ride in the suburbs of Portland (Hillsboro, Tigard, Tualitin, etc.) there seems to have been a sea change in the attitudes of drivers towards cyclists. I started commuting this year on the first of Feb and have commuted on a route through the residential areas of Tigard and Tualitin on my way to Wilsonville, and haven't been exposed to so much as a honk (perhaps one, but the driver swung wide anyway; I'm not sure this one counts) of annoyance. I'm on fully bike laned roads and take the lane where appropriate, but no animosity has been directed my direction (now watch... on my way home today...).

Hopefully, it is permanant ;).

[genec]

Thanks guys... this supports what I have been saying all along. I have seen similar changes in motorists that frankly had no idea that cyclists have the same rights to the road. Now of course this epiphany doesn't occur in a heated exchange along the side of the road. But in casual conversation with folks... simply discussing these things. Motorists can be changed, when they understand all the issues. We just have to inform them.

Of course all of this stems from the ridiculously short training that most motorists receive for a life long activity. Strangely enough our education system chooses to spend far more time and expense on things like football.

Now if we could just get PSAs on sharing the road to be shown during the Super Bowl... Sigh...

[sggoodri]

I agree - some people appear much more inclined to endanger people whom they think are breaking the law.

This is why I think it is important to educate motorists that cyclists have the legal right to use the roadway, including situations where drivers must wait before passing.

Unfortunately, some state and local governments don't agree with this interpretation of the law, or at least resist educating the public about it, because they worry that this public knowledge will increase delays for motorists, or they fear backlash from the motoring public.

An example is NCDOT's Bike/Ped Division, which published a "Guide to North Carolina Bicycle and Pedestrian Laws" that mentions nothing about motorists needing to slow down for cyclists on the roadway, provides no support for "taking the lane," and in a few places implies that if a motorist cannot immediately overtake a bicyclist, the cyclist is operating unlawfully. We have had a number of incidents with police pulling over cyclists for "impeding traffic" since this was published. By contrast, the NC DMV's driver manual claims that cyclist's have the right to use the entire travel lane. It would seem that the DMV cares more about how roadway cyclists are treated by motorists and police than does the Bike/Ped Division!

[sbhikes]

At least she looked up the law before she wrote that letter to the editor and made a fool out of herself. I wish others would do that. And THEN write that letter to the editor with their newfound epiphany.

[pj7]

Someone brought this up the other day and I was inclined to disagree with them. After contemplation and alcahol, I feel I can agree with what you guys are aserting in these statements.

[Bikepacker67]

it is common for cars to block the road when turning left or pulling out of a parking space, but that doesn't seem to rankle most drivers.


I can't count how many times I've had a car buzz me, and then watch the same driver give 6 feet to a parked car that's taking up more of the lane than I am.

[Helmet Head]

Certainly thinking that we're doing something wrong adds to the aggravation they feel, and learning that we're not doing anything wrong -- legally -- may alleviate some or even most of the aggravation for some.

At the same time, FTR (Force To the Right) laws like CA's 21202 and MBL (Mandatory Bike Lane) laws like CA's 21208 reinforce the notion that we are doing something wrong if we're not riding in the margin (despite all the exceptions in those laws which hardly even any cyclist knows about). And regardless of what the law says, a bike lane just being there demarcating the margin with a bike symbol in it speaks volumes of where cyclists are "supposed" to be (and, thus, are seen as doing something wrong if they're riding anywhere but there).

[randya]

I'm with genec, I think motorist ed is important. Maybe we need to start a fund to pay for the billboards since it doesn't seem like 'the authorities' care all that much. OTOH, maybe we should all get off the internet and do some real advocacy at the local level and see if we can change this...

:)

[randya]

Certainly thinking that we're doing something wrong adds to the aggravation they feel, and learning that we're not doing anything wrong -- legally -- may alleviate some or even most of the aggravation for some.

At the same time, FTR (Force To the Right) laws like CA's 21202 and MBL (Mandatory Bike Lane) laws like CA's 21208 reinforce the notion that we are doing something wrong if we're not riding in the margin (despite all the exceptions in those laws which hardly even any cyclist knows about). And regardless of what the law says, a bike lane just being there demarcating the margin with a bike symbol in it speaks volumes of where cyclists are "supposed" to be (and, thus, are seen as doing something wrong if they're riding anywhere but there).
We agree with you on this, stop copping attitude, or don't ya get it yet? Jeez....

:rolleyes:

[2manybikes]

I had an interesting conversation with a woman yesterday where she started by explaining how ticked off she used to get when she drove in certain areas and got stuck behind cyclists. I kept my mouth shut for most part, but I observed that I felt the frustration most people feel is caused by their expectations -- it is common for cars to block the road when turning left or pulling out of a parking space, but that doesn't seem to rankle most drivers.

Anyway, sometime back, she got miffed enough to actually look up the law and found that bicycles are entitled to the full lane. She says getting stuck behind bicycles has never aggravated her since.

I've always believed that most people who get aggravated don't really care what the law is, but apparently some do.

That's nice to hear. :)

Maybe some day I will talk to someone who knows anything about bike laws. Even a cyclist that knows would be a change for me.

[CB HI]

We agree with you on this, stop copping attitude, or don't ya get it yet? Jeez....

:rolleyes:
You seem to be the only one copping an attitude. :rolleyes:

[Bikepacker67]

Oh, ohhh... gettin' a wee bit snippy in here.
Is A&S gonna get locked? :rolleyes:

[Helmet Head]

...
And regardless of what the law says, a bike lane just being there demarcating the margin with a bike symbol in it speaks volumes of where cyclists are "supposed" to be (and, thus, are seen as doing something wrong if they're riding anywhere but there).
We agree with you on this, stop copping attitude, or don't ya get it yet? Jeez....

:rolleyes: You agree with the above? I did not know that. Good to hear.

But I'm not sure who this "We" is that you're speaking for.

[pj7]

Certainly thinking that we're doing something wrong adds to the aggravation they feel, and learning that we're not doing anything wrong -- legally -- may alleviate some or even most of the aggravation for some.
Agreed

At the same time, FTR (Force To the Right) laws like CA's 21202 and MBL (Mandatory Bike Lane) laws like CA's 21208 reinforce the notion that we are doing something wrong if we're not riding in the margin (despite all the exceptions in those laws which hardly even any cyclist knows about). And regardless of what the law says, a bike lane just being there demarcating the margin with a bike symbol in it speaks volumes of where cyclists are "supposed" to be (and, thus, are seen as doing something wrong if they're riding anywhere but there).
Disagreed.
I do not know the specifics of these laws which you have mentioned. But I do know this, from my own experiences. When I was a motorist, before I had any inclination of getting a bicycle or even cared about cyclist rights. I spent a few weeks in Englewood florida, just south of Sarasota. While there I saw bike lanes for the first time in my life. they ran right alongside the roads in which I was driving and had the bikelane symbols painted in them as well as standing signs along side of them. I easily knew what they were. But I would see cyclists outside of them. I never thought that they were "supposed" to use those lanes. I just knew that I "wasn't supposed" to use those lanes, or wasn't "allowed" would be a better term.
I know I am just one person. But based on my own experiences, of a motorist who could give a rats ass about cyclists or their "rights", I would find it hard to accept that all, most, or even a vast majority of people feel the way you are saying here. especially people who live in areas where there ARE plenty of cyclists. Remember, I had never seen a bikelane before. But as I mentioned in another thread, common sense led me to believe that they could ride IN the road if they pleased, otherwise they'd not have been doing it as often as I noticed.

[genec]

Agreed


Disagreed.
I do not know the specifics of these laws which you have mentioned. But I do know this, from my own experiences. When I was a motorist, before I had any inclination of getting a bicycle or even cared about cyclist rights. I spent a few weeks in Englewood florida, just south of Sarasota. While there I saw bike lanes for the first time in my life. they ran right alongside the roads in which I was driving and had the bikelane symbols painted in them as well as standing signs along side of them. I easily knew what they were. But I would see cyclists outside of them. I never thought that they were "supposed" to use those lanes. I just knew that I "wasn't supposed" to use those lanes, or wasn't "allowed" would be a better term.
I know I am just one person. But based on my own experiences, of a motorist who could give a rats ass about cyclists or their "rights", I would find it hard to accept that all, most, or even a vast majority of people feel the way you are saying here. especially people who live in areas where there ARE plenty of cyclists. Remember, I had never seen a bikelane before. But as I mentioned in another thread, common sense led me to believe that they could ride IN the road if they pleased, otherwise they'd not have been doing it as often as I noticed.


HH does have a point.

I have had people point to painted road edge marks (fog line or demarked parking line) on the side of the road and yell "get in the bike lane" when no such thing existed. Of course, I have had people yell "get on the sidewalk" too, so clearly motorists have little knowledge of cyclists' rights.

I do feel that BL at least acknowledge that cyclists should be in the street. Personally I rarely ride in BL... I tend to ride just outside of them, especially at intersections.

[rando]

motorist education is needed. (before I started bike commuting, I don't think I really knew what the rights of cyclists were.) local officials need to be educated too on what a useful bike facility is.

[Helmet Head]

At the same time, FTR (Force To the Right) laws like CA's 21202 and MBL (Mandatory Bike Lane) laws like CA's 21208 reinforce the notion that we are doing something wrong if we're not riding in the margin (despite all the exceptions in those laws which hardly even any cyclist knows about). And regardless of what the law says, a bike lane just being there demarcating the margin with a bike symbol in it speaks volumes of where cyclists are "supposed" to be (and, thus, are seen as doing something wrong if they're riding anywhere but there).

Disagreed.
I do not know the specifics of these laws which you have mentioned. But I do know this, from my own experiences. When I was a motorist, before I had any inclination of getting a bicycle or even cared about cyclist rights. I spent a few weeks in Englewood florida, just south of Sarasota. While there I saw bike lanes for the first time in my life. they ran right alongside the roads in which I was driving and had the bikelane symbols painted in them as well as standing signs along side of them. I easily knew what they were. But I would see cyclists outside of them. I never thought that they were "supposed" to use those lanes. I just knew that I "wasn't supposed" to use those lanes, or wasn't "allowed" would be a better term.

What about at intersections where you were turning right? What did you think about what you were supposed to be with respect to the bike lanes? Stay left of them or merge into them before turning right?

I know I am just one person. But based on my own experiences, of a motorist who could give a rats ass about cyclists or their "rights", I would find it hard to accept that all, most, or even a vast majority of people feel the way you are saying here. especially people who live in areas where there ARE plenty of cyclists. Remember, I had never seen a bikelane before. But as I mentioned in another thread, common sense led me to believe that they could ride IN the road if they pleased, otherwise they'd not have been doing it as often as I noticed.
I suspect you are the exception to think this way. Certainly most letters to the editors and most people I talk to, including most cyclists, think there is some sort of obligation for cyclists to be in the bike lane. This is what laws like CA's 21208 say.


21208. (a) Whenever a bicycle lane has been established on a roadway pursuant to Section 21207, any person operating a bicycle upon the roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time shall ride within the bicycle lane, except ....


http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21208.htm

Yes, there are many exceptions and I take full advantage of them, but few people know they exist much less what they are. But most everyone seems to understand the intent of 21208: in general, cyclists should ride in bike lanes when they are there.

[pj7]

HH does have a point.

I have had people point to painted road edge marks (fog line or demarked parking line) on the side of the road and yell "get in the bike lane" when no such thing existed. Of course, I have had people yell "get on the sidewalk" too, so clearly motorists have little knowledge of cyclists' rights.

I do feel that BL at least acknowledge that cyclists should be in the street. Personally I rarely ride in BL... I tend to ride just outside of them, especially at intersections.

I know he has a point, and it is valid and reasonable. But my post to him in this was about painted bike lanes with demarking symbols in them. These are clearly bike lanes and not shoulders.
Now idiotic and ignorant motorists are a different beast.
I only disagreed with Helmet Heads statement, not the underlying idea behind it.

[pj7]

What about at intersections where you were turning right? What did you think about what you were supposed to be with respect to the bike lanes? Stay left of them or merge into them before turning right?

I stayed in my lane and then made right turns when I saw over my right shoulder that there were no bikes in the bike lane. Granted, I am not from Florida so I have never read their laws, nor have I seen anything in their newspapers or watch special interest stories on the news about cyclist rights as Floridians would have. I just did what seemed logical and safe.


I suspect you are the exception to think this way. Certainly most letters to the editors and most people I talk to, including most cyclists, think there is some sort of obligation for cyclists to be in the bike lane. This is what laws like CA's 21208 say.

Maybe I am the exception to the rule. But I find it hard to believe truely that my hillbilly ass would know and understand more about these things than the people who live in the areas with such laws and facilities.
When it comes to letters to the editor, people write those out of anger and spite and rarely use common sense and intelligence when writing them, unless there letter is to rebute someone elses ignorant one from a previous day. I saw one the other day where a lady was blaming global warming on daylight savings time for Christs sake! Obviously shewasn't using common sense.


Yes, there are many exceptions and I take full advantage of them, but few people know they exist much less what they are. But most everyone seems to understand the intent of 21208: in general, cyclists should ride in bike lanes when they are there.
Then maybe the advocacy should be towards getting drivers to understand the existing laws instead of doing away with facilities all together just because people seem too stupid or ignorant to follow laws we have in place already.
Personally, if we had bike lanes around here I would gladly use them any and all times that they were available so long as I didn't feel immediately threatened by being in them or was not facing iminent danger.

[skanking biker]

Burn me at the stake here but when I am driving and get behind a cyclist my "gut" reaction for a split second is to get pissed off cause i have to slow down; and then I remember that I am a cyclist and have to go to confession.

[rando]

Burn me at the stake here but when I am driving and get behind a cyclist my "gut" reaction for a split second is to get pissed off cause i have to slow down; and then I remember that I am a cyclist and have to go to confession.

me too.

[atbman]

As a matter of curiosity, how greatly do each state's laws differ with regard to their driving tests?

Having seen the Florida one in a tv programme on Brits emigrating to the US, it is clearly a joke and grossly inadequate in ensuring that drivers are actually tested on their driving in traffic, unlike the UK test, which has got steadily stiffer over the years.

I've certainly had far fewer idiots telling me to get off the road than seems to be the case with many of you on this forum. That's not to say that ignorance is entirely unkown over here, of course.

[Ed Holland]

OK here's my take on the driver attitude thing... It's worth exactly what you paid for it :p:

Motorists expect other cars etc, so do not baulk at traffic* but cyclists look like an added extra thing to deal with that is out of the ordinary. Couple that with lack of awareness of the road laws and...

* this is not entirely true - plenty of motorists get upset at slow moving motor traffic; get impatient, honk, gesture and pull dangerous and or illegal overtaking manouvres in the complete absence of bicycles. Why, only the other day I tried driving AT the speed limit and provoked excactly this reaction...

Cheers,

Ed

[noisebeam]

See here about both motorist and cyclist confusion about bike lanes:
http://azbikelaw.org/articles/RayRoad.html

[flipped4bikes]

I got into it with a cager today. She was following me and honked at me because I took the lane in a construction zone. LSS, we get into it, and yells at me that she knows the law and bikes are not allowed in the middle of the road. Yeah her attitude changed, but not for the better.

[Helmet Head]

See here about both motorist and cyclist confusion about bike lanes:
http://azbikelaw.org/articles/RayRoad.html
Yes, painting a narrow shoulder on a curbed road with "bike route" signs is a common sleazy tactic of traffic engineers to provide space for bicyclists to "get out of the way" without having to meet AASHTO standards for such a facility.

[king88uy7]

Question about CA 21208: (4) When approaching a place where a right turn is authorized.

Does a driveway into an apartment complex count as "a place where a right turn is authorized?" The bike lane where I ride has parallel parking and these private intersections every 20 yards or so. The motorists leaving the apartments can't see the road traffic until they pull through the bike lane, to see around the parked cars (when they bother to look). Am I required to ride in this bike lane?

[Helmet Head]

Question about CA 21208: (4) When approaching a place where a right turn is authorized.

Does a driveway into an apartment complex count as "a place where a right turn is authorized?" The bike lane where I ride has parallel parking and these private intersections every 20 yards or so. The motorists leaving the apartments can't see the road traffic until they pull through the bike lane, to see around the parked cars (when they bother to look). Am I required to ride in this bike lane? I'm not a lawyer, but I am a cyclist and CA licensed driver, and I'm expected to know, understand and follow the law. If it's not illegal to turn right into the driveway, then it is "a place where a right turn is authorized." I don't see how this could be interpreted any other way.
Permitted Movements from Bicycle Lanes

21208. (a) Whenever a bicycle lane has been established on a roadway pursuant to Section 21207, any person operating a bicycle upon the roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time shall ride within the bicycle lane, except that the person may move out of the lane under any of the following situations:

(1) When overtaking and passing another bicycle, vehicle, or pedestrian within the lane or about to enter the lane if the overtaking and passing cannot be done safely within the lane.

(2) When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.

(3) When reasonably necessary to leave the bicycle lane to avoid debris or other hazardous conditions.

(4) When approaching a place where a right turn is authorized.
CVC Section 21208 (http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21208.htm)

Note that the "sister law", 21202, has almost identical language (including the "place where a right turn is" stuff) but applies on streets without bike lanes:
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21202.htm

Anyway, I avoid the bike lane on streets like that.

[king88uy7]

That's how I've interpreted the law as well. But it's interesting that the bike lane stripe in this area changes to dashes before right turns onto public streets, but is solid alongside these apartment driveways. Motorists do not appreciate me being in the lane when there is a bike lane adjacent, I always wonder if it's legal.
Thanks.

[Recycle]

The League of Illinois Bicyclists is trying to address the OP's issue with safety education. LIB has several programs running now.

One is aimed at drivers in general (Audio for this announcement is now on http://bikelib.org/ )


*********************************************************
From: "Ed Barsotti" <ed@bikelib.org>
To: {Chicago Area Bicycle Clubs}
Subject: RE: May 7 - Share the Road press conference at Thompson Center, Chicago
Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 13:13:21 -0500

Dear Illinois bike club leaders,

If your club has an e-mail list-serve, would you forward the following? We are hoping for a good bicyclist turnout at the Thompson Center * hopefully somme of your club members are able to attend.

Thanks,

Ed Barsotti
Executive Director
League of Illinois Bicyclists
2550 Cheshire Dr.
Aurora, IL 60504
630-978-0583
ed@bikelib.org
www.bikelib.org

*************************

Chicago area bicyclists are invited to attend a noon
May 7 news conference on the plaza of the James R.
Thompson Center, 100 W. Randolph in the Loop to
announce a statewide "Share the Road" radio public
service announcement campaign. The news conference
will be hosted by the League of Illinois Bicyclists,
Illinois Department of Transportation and Illinois
State Police.

The "Share the Road" message will be heard on selected
radio stations across Illinois the week of May 7-11.

If you can ride your bicycle to the Thompson Center,
that would be great. Hope to you see you there either
way.
You can hear the announcement at
http://www.bikelib.org


Dean Schott
Outreach Director
League of Illinois Bicyclists
847-291-1213

The other is directed towards law enforcement
(quoted from from http://www.bikelib.org/education/enforcement.htm )

Bicycle Law Enforcement
The League of Illinois Bicyclists recently received two new grants totaling more than $50,000 from the Illinois Department of Transportation to promote bicycling safety.

One of the grants, Bicycle Enforcement for Safe Roads, will underwrite the development of training classes for police departments and sheriff's offices on state bicycling laws, how to educate motorists and bicyclists to obey traffic laws and how to enforce those laws for everyone's safety. The pilot training class will be held Oct. 11 at the Northbrook Police Department under the auspices of the North East Multi-Regional Training Unit, based in North Aurora, Illinois.