Advocacy & Safety - SC General Assembly Passes New Bicycle Safety Legislation

SC General Assembly Passes New Bicycle Safety Legislation

http://www.charleston.net/news/2008/jun/08/south_carolina_could_get_new_bike_law43668/

Odd, but I thought the law already protected bicyclists. Apparently not.

If there's no such lane, the bill says the bicyclist should keep to the right as much as possible except to avoid potholes or to make left hand turns.


Hmmmmmm. Seems like a step backwards. I don't ride in SC. But I'd like to be able to venture into the lane for other obstructions as well (glass, etc.)

Odd, but I thought the law already protected bicyclists. Apparently not.

The law already allowed bikes to use the roads. It's just poor reporting on the part of the Charleston newspaper.

What this bill adds is add a 3 foot passing zone for passing cyclist & specifially outlaws harassing bicyclists (also already on the books). Bicyclist already had the right to use all roads except for interstates and a handful of restricted access highways in SC.

The 3 foot passing zone idea is a good one although it won't be enforced. What I hope they do is a public campaign to make awareness of bicycling rights throughout my home state.

i thought this was going to be a lot more agreeable than it appears to be from this article. i'm kind of wondering what was so great about it, and why the Palmetto Cycling Coalition wanted this! i thought the law was already clear enough - or vague - to just say that cyclists can use the road. if harrassment really is already illegal, what is new and better about this? i would like the P.C.C. to explain. maybe they have a better explanation than this Charleston newspaper.

Here's a link to the bill:

http://www.scstatehouse.net/sess117_2007-2008/bills/3006.htm

Note the title:
"Bicyclists and Users of Play Vehicles..."

This section is probably well-intentioned:

Section 56-5-3445. It is unlawful to harass, taunt, or maliciously throw an object at or in the direction of any person riding a bicycle. A person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be fined not less than two hundred fifty dollars or imprisoned not more than thirty days, or both.

They have the silly skid test for brakes (although that's probably not new). Newsflash: skidding isn't stopping.

They do seem to have a half-way reasonable definition of a bicycle, which is more than can be said of some other states.

I wonder where they define "play vehicle". :D

"Play vehicle" is an odd choice of terms. Trust me, while I'm peddling my fat ass down a highway in 100 degree heat, I ain't playin'.

This law looks totally normal to me.

and why the Palmetto Cycling Coalition wanted this!

I think simply to get the public aware of bicycling laws. In all fairness, our governor has done a few public bicycle rides in our state in order to raise awareness.

A realistic article is here that explains really what was passed (although take a look at some of these comments)

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080605/NEWS01/80605028

"Play vehicle" is an odd choice of terms. Trust me, while I'm peddling my fat ass down a highway in 100 degree heat, I ain't playin'.

<rant>

"Play vehicle" :rolleyes: Pretty much the general American perception of the bicycle - either a child's two-wheeler, or an the toy of the American fitness fetish.

Bring on the TV commercials with the two-bit big smile actor trying to teeter down the boardwalk on a retro cruiser. Roll out the athletic folk pedaling triumphantly up the winding tarmac on MTB's. Shine that camera into that blue sky, and catch the rays of the sun. Slow-mo the film. It's an adventure. Your adventure. Nothing matters except what the camera wants you to see. Ignorance is bliss.

That's right - with a bicycle around, our product will "make you feel like a kid again"...

...foolish and stupid, as you plow into a (choose one: tree, cyclist, ditch, car, post, pedestrian, rosebush, sinkhole) because you were woolgathering. :bike2:

</rant>


-Kurt

this is a lot better than the Charleston newspaper article, thanks!

The law already allowed bikes to use the roads.

SC law previously required cyclists to ride on a "usable path" (aka glorified sidewalks, "multi-use paths", or whatever the cop thinks it means) and not on the roadway if such path existed. That law is now apparently being repealed.

At one point some anti-cyclist legislators tacked on a requirement to ride single file, but due to vigorous opposition from SC cyclists that got removed before the final bill was approved and moved on for signature.

Using the right arm to signal right turns is now recognized with this law. Previously the bent left arm was required, IIRC.

Shoulders are now recognized as optional for cycling but bike lanes will be mandatory. Sounds like a good reason for SC cyclists who like edgeline striping to oppose stenciling bike symbols in them.

SC has a long way to go! I'm visiting from Virginia, and trying to ride here makes me appreciate how good things are at home.

The bill seems to be a reasonable start. The comments from Greenville show what a sorry state our population is in.

Its a start.........sigh.

1) Lumping us with "play vehicles" is anti-bicycle rhetoric.
2) "As far to the right as possible" is anti-bicycle legislation.
3) California has the same archaic skid provision, which dates back to bikes with a coaster brake and no front brake.

The bill seems to be a reasonable start. The comments from Greenville show what a sorry state our population is in.

Our governor, rather you like his politics or not, is very pro-bicycling and has hosted events to help like this one (http://www.scgovernor.com/news/releases/mar_07/mar_30_07-01.htm).

I haven't heard anything for 2008 though.

I will also agree, our roads here are the most bicycle unfriendly ones although I almost never have a problem from the locals here while pedaling....

Yes, I also despise the term "play vehicle".