wheel
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-bicycles_09tex.ART.State.Edition1.42a1e6f.html
OK I am posting this because the quotes are absurd.
Mr. Brimer called his amendment "a test to see how much common sense we have on this floor."
Mr. Brimer said, "If you're driving on a public road with no shoulders, you shouldn't be prosecuted. Bicyclists don't belong on those roads."
Mr. Patrick argued that under the legislation, "traffic would come to a dead stop" on many streets where there wouldn't be 3 feet of clearance.
"I have great concerns that you're setting up many drivers for potential lawsuits, or you're going to force them to impede traffic," he said.
Mr. Patrick also pressed Mr. Ellis on what a driver should do on a narrow two-lane street where there is no way to get past a bicyclist and leave 3 feet of space.
Accordignly to these baboons they don't even know the law. I really like the sound of this law.
AUSTIN – Motorists could be ticketed for not yielding one full lane to bicyclists on four-lane roads and at least 3 feet on two-lane roads under a bicycle safety bill tentatively approved by the Senate on Tuesday.
I don't think it is too much to ask that they pass in the adjacent lane no matter how big the lanes are. Why am I the only one who needs to share my laneon a 4 lane road? I can't help it if they have a speed limit I can't reach.
***************************************************************
AUSTIN – Motorists could be ticketed for not yielding one full lane to bicyclists on four-lane roads and at least 3 feet on two-lane roads under a bicycle safety bill tentatively approved by the Senate on Tuesday.
[Click image for a larger version] FILE 2003/Staff photo
FILE 2003/Staff photo
Sen. Rodney Ellis, author of the bill given tentative approval, said its goal is to save lives of bicyclists.
Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, author of the measure, said it was intended to save lives of bicyclists – about 50 of whom were killed last year in Texas in accidents with motor vehicles.
"Most of those [fatalities] could have been avoided if this were the law," Mr. Ellis said, calling the current statute – which requires a "safe passing distance" for cars passing bicycles – too vague.
The legislation would require cars and trucks to yield the right lane to bicyclists where there are at least two marked lanes in each direction on a highway or street. On two-lane roads, the driver would have to leave at least 3 feet between his vehicle and the bicycle when passing. Commercial vehicles would have to leave at least 6 feet of distance.
Among the riders who have died on North Texas roads was Larry Schwartz, who garnered attention for riding 26,000 miles on his bicycle in 2002. Mr. Schwartz, 42, was killed in May 2003 north of McKinney, when he was clipped by the rearview mirror of a passing school bus.
That death and others spurred cycling groups to lobby for new protections on the roads. A bill similar to the one passed by the Senate on Tuesday failed narrowly two years ago.
Violations would be Class C misdemeanors punishable by fines of up to $500. If a violation results in bodily injury, it would become a Class B misdemeanor subject to a jail sentence of up to 180 days and a fine of up to $2,000.
Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, led arguments against the bill, tentatively approved on a 24-7 vote. Final approval is expected today.
"I have great concerns that you're setting up many drivers for potential lawsuits, or you're going to force them to impede traffic," he said.
While Mr. Ellis said eight states have passed laws similar to his bill, Mr. Patrick responded that "41 states have decided this type of legislation is not needed."
Mr. Patrick also pressed Mr. Ellis on what a driver should do on a narrow two-lane street where there is no way to get past a bicyclist and leave 3 feet of space.
"Should I stop my car and hold up traffic, or break the law and pass him?" he asked Mr. Ellis.
Mr. Ellis said that current law requires a driver to leave a "safe passing distance" and that his bill would not change that requirement other than to specify what a safe distance is.
"Under your scenario, most reasonable people would say if the road is too narrow, if you want to pass the person, you have to pass at a safe distance. All I'm trying to do is put in a guidepost so that you won't end up with frivolous lawsuits," he said.
"Most people would consider 3 feet to be a minimum distance."
Mr. Patrick argued that under the legislation, "traffic would come to a dead stop" on many streets where there wouldn't be 3 feet of clearance.
The Houston Republican offered two amendments to the bill that were defeated. One would have exempted streets from the bill and covered only highways, while the other would have required bicyclists to have safety devices such as mirrors and rear reflector lights.
A third amendment offered by Sen. Kim Brimer, R-Fort Worth, was adopted on a 16-13 vote, eliminating the mandatory passing distance on two-lane roads without a paved shoulder.
Although Mr. Ellis argued against the change, Mr. Brimer said, "If you're driving on a public road with no shoulders, you shouldn't be prosecuted. Bicyclists don't belong on those roads."
Mr. Brimer called his amendment "a test to see how much common sense we have on this floor."
OK I am posting this because the quotes are absurd.
Mr. Brimer called his amendment "a test to see how much common sense we have on this floor."
Mr. Brimer said, "If you're driving on a public road with no shoulders, you shouldn't be prosecuted. Bicyclists don't belong on those roads."
Mr. Patrick argued that under the legislation, "traffic would come to a dead stop" on many streets where there wouldn't be 3 feet of clearance.
"I have great concerns that you're setting up many drivers for potential lawsuits, or you're going to force them to impede traffic," he said.
Mr. Patrick also pressed Mr. Ellis on what a driver should do on a narrow two-lane street where there is no way to get past a bicyclist and leave 3 feet of space.
Accordignly to these baboons they don't even know the law. I really like the sound of this law.
AUSTIN – Motorists could be ticketed for not yielding one full lane to bicyclists on four-lane roads and at least 3 feet on two-lane roads under a bicycle safety bill tentatively approved by the Senate on Tuesday.
I don't think it is too much to ask that they pass in the adjacent lane no matter how big the lanes are. Why am I the only one who needs to share my laneon a 4 lane road? I can't help it if they have a speed limit I can't reach.
***************************************************************
AUSTIN – Motorists could be ticketed for not yielding one full lane to bicyclists on four-lane roads and at least 3 feet on two-lane roads under a bicycle safety bill tentatively approved by the Senate on Tuesday.
[Click image for a larger version] FILE 2003/Staff photo
FILE 2003/Staff photo
Sen. Rodney Ellis, author of the bill given tentative approval, said its goal is to save lives of bicyclists.
Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, author of the measure, said it was intended to save lives of bicyclists – about 50 of whom were killed last year in Texas in accidents with motor vehicles.
"Most of those [fatalities] could have been avoided if this were the law," Mr. Ellis said, calling the current statute – which requires a "safe passing distance" for cars passing bicycles – too vague.
The legislation would require cars and trucks to yield the right lane to bicyclists where there are at least two marked lanes in each direction on a highway or street. On two-lane roads, the driver would have to leave at least 3 feet between his vehicle and the bicycle when passing. Commercial vehicles would have to leave at least 6 feet of distance.
Among the riders who have died on North Texas roads was Larry Schwartz, who garnered attention for riding 26,000 miles on his bicycle in 2002. Mr. Schwartz, 42, was killed in May 2003 north of McKinney, when he was clipped by the rearview mirror of a passing school bus.
That death and others spurred cycling groups to lobby for new protections on the roads. A bill similar to the one passed by the Senate on Tuesday failed narrowly two years ago.
Violations would be Class C misdemeanors punishable by fines of up to $500. If a violation results in bodily injury, it would become a Class B misdemeanor subject to a jail sentence of up to 180 days and a fine of up to $2,000.
Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, led arguments against the bill, tentatively approved on a 24-7 vote. Final approval is expected today.
"I have great concerns that you're setting up many drivers for potential lawsuits, or you're going to force them to impede traffic," he said.
While Mr. Ellis said eight states have passed laws similar to his bill, Mr. Patrick responded that "41 states have decided this type of legislation is not needed."
Mr. Patrick also pressed Mr. Ellis on what a driver should do on a narrow two-lane street where there is no way to get past a bicyclist and leave 3 feet of space.
"Should I stop my car and hold up traffic, or break the law and pass him?" he asked Mr. Ellis.
Mr. Ellis said that current law requires a driver to leave a "safe passing distance" and that his bill would not change that requirement other than to specify what a safe distance is.
"Under your scenario, most reasonable people would say if the road is too narrow, if you want to pass the person, you have to pass at a safe distance. All I'm trying to do is put in a guidepost so that you won't end up with frivolous lawsuits," he said.
"Most people would consider 3 feet to be a minimum distance."
Mr. Patrick argued that under the legislation, "traffic would come to a dead stop" on many streets where there wouldn't be 3 feet of clearance.
The Houston Republican offered two amendments to the bill that were defeated. One would have exempted streets from the bill and covered only highways, while the other would have required bicyclists to have safety devices such as mirrors and rear reflector lights.
A third amendment offered by Sen. Kim Brimer, R-Fort Worth, was adopted on a 16-13 vote, eliminating the mandatory passing distance on two-lane roads without a paved shoulder.
Although Mr. Ellis argued against the change, Mr. Brimer said, "If you're driving on a public road with no shoulders, you shouldn't be prosecuted. Bicyclists don't belong on those roads."
Mr. Brimer called his amendment "a test to see how much common sense we have on this floor."