Probably the dingiest proposals I have ever heard to "improve" cycling conditions. And from a self proclaimed friend of cycling no less!
Even more obtuse than the councilman's rage induced harrasment proposals.

Presumably your proposal would prohibit bicycle commuting to Center City; like the six years worth of commuting I used to do to City Hall.
Whatchu been smokin,' Dude?

There is no mandatory bike lane law in Philly. PA had a mandatory bike lane law up until around 1998 when it was repealed.

One of these days I'll take some pics of some of Philly's finest bike lanes. They're something special.

Oh, I read this:
""There are elements that refuse to follow the rules, refuse to stay in the bike lane, swerve in and out of traffic during rush hour."
and thought that that meant that one was required to stay in the bike lanes

Wishful thinking by the quoted? While it may be popular opinion, it's not the law. Like most places with bike lanes, there's a lot of confusion surrounding their purpose.

You're right, my ideas would do nothing to improve cycling conditions in the city. They would, however, go a long way toward improving pedestrian safety. Which is the point. Most of the less self centered among us can see that clearly.

Believe it or not, the careless and arrogant behavior of messengers in center city isn't making cycling a good name. If city hall banned all cycling because of this group most people would say "Good riddance!" In my view anything that deals with the problem, reigns in the problem groups, and still preserves your right to commute anywhere in the city on a non registered bike is a win for cyclist.

Maybe the bug up DeCicco's A** has something to do with the two dead pedestrains. You know, the ones killed needlessly by reckless cyclist.

In my book, irresponsible behavoir that kills innocent people is a big problem. All the issues you mention are worthy of attention. But, so is this. And, relatively speaking, for the city, this is slam dunk easy to fix problem. The goal here would be to get a solution that doesn't completely ban bike riding in certain sections of the city. That said, whining that it's not a problem, unfair, a rip off, etc, etc ,etc, isn't going to help the cause.

I think the issue isn't the two dead pedestrians killed by people on bicycles, it's that all of a sudden there is a big uproar about these pedestrians being killed, but the dozens if not hundreds of pedestrians killed every year by reckless and stupid car drivers, are "just accidents".

Joey,

As you have been told numerous times by other members here. It is YOUR "style" of "riding" that is leading people to call for bicycles to be registered, riders to be licensed and to have insurance. It should NOT take such drastic steps to get you or others to obey the laws.

If you do not like the current laws then petition for their change or be prepared to face the music for your actions.

Tom,

I would say that as bad as bicycle messengers may be that the "ninja" and "salmon" cyclists are far more damaging to the cycling community. And instead of eliminating the bicycle messengers maybe they need some sort of regulatory body to insure the greatest number behave and operate in a responsible manner. Just as there is for taxi cab operators. As I am sure that we all know that there are a minority of cab drivers/operators who are more then willing to "bend" various laws IF the price is right. In that regard bike messengers really aren't much different. They have to get their packages from point a to point b in the shortest amount of time possible.

To do so some, but I am sure not all. Are more then willing to ride the sidewalks, ride against the flow of traffic and in general make a nuisance of themselves to the rest of the road users.

DC, I agree that there should be regulation of the messengers. I do think that the recent pedestrian deaths put a spotlight on a problem that has been around for years. Personally, i don't see it as a tough problem to solve.

As a cyclist i don't ride much in Philly, so i have little to lose by way of any regulation. That said, if i were a Philly resident i would recognise that change is coming and realize that I can't stop it. I would try to influence that change. I'd write to my council person to make my voice heard. I beleive that because most people aren't paying attention to this all voices can be heard. I would write and call my representative and offer informed constructive solutions. Arm them, give them ideas, give them a lesser alternative, so that they don't lower the boom on everyone. Or, you can sit back and whine about it.

What exactly is the (i.e. YOUR) "Cause"?

Besides being a Serious Cyclist™ intent on harrassing those cyclists who don't fit YOUR Superior profile?

Assumption alert.

Consider that the ratio of messengers to messenger look-alikes is very small in big cities these days. Probably about 1 in 10. So why do you identify this guy as a messenger?

How do we know that the cyclist is the one to blame in all collisions between cyclists and pedestrians? Yes, I know that being as the bicycle is "larger," heavier and faster then a pedestrian walking down the street, but that doesn't mean that all collisions between cyclists and pedestrians are the fault of the cyclist. Pedestrians have a nasty habit of stepping off of the sidewalk/curb without looking where they're going. Often into the path of a bicycle, car, motorcycle or another pedestrian. People need to take responsibility for their actions and not try to pass the buck.

Agreed, like you I don't ride in Philly, but if I did I would be trying to get positive changes made. Changes that target the right group(s) and not be so narrow in scope as to negatively impact everyone.

Malarkey. If bicycles have mandatory registration and or insurance, then the "Far right as practicable" clause needs to be repealed. If I have to do all that crap, then I want my lane. I will stop for each and every red light right in the MIDDLE of my lane. When the light goes green, I will accelerate at my leisure while holding my position. If every registered beach cruiser with flowers on the basket, every roadie, every commuter (numbering into the thousands where I live) stop for each and every light IN THE LANE of their choice and never filter to the front.....do you know how effed-up traffic will be here (and in most cities)?

Do you think motorists want THIS^^^??? REALLY!!!????

The current bike laws are wrong. They are designed to discourage people from cycling. If you look at statistics from NYC, and they are vast, legions of pedestrians are hurt and killed by auto traffic, many of them breaking all the rules. So, pedestrians should also be educated, registered, licensed, and insured by the DOT according to this "thinking". There are also studies that motorcycles and scooters filtering and running lights (Italy for example) actually LESSENS traffic jam severity in crowded city environments. Auto drivers don't like it because someone is getting ahead of them (boohoo), but they would like it even less if, in places with heavy 2-wheel vehicle use, we all queued up in line at every light.

I am doing my best with the talents I possess. I am not qualified to "un-brainwash" the masses. That is why I call for a cycling revolution. We (cyclists) are being taxed, but not represented or protected by The Law. Perhaps a cycling revolution will take on the shape of claiming the entire right lane as I mentioned above. What we have now makes no sense in urban/city settings. That is why so many cyclists are ALREADY revolting against the system, whether they realize it or not.

False.

NEWSFLASH -- Just because someone rides a track bike and wears a messenger bag does not mean they are a messenger. The ranks of actual messengers are dwindling in Philly and elsewhere. There are far fewer messengers on the streets today than there were 10 years ago, while the number of riders who look like messengers has exploded. You are observing 'posengers' who, unlike actual messengers, are uninsured and unaccountable to their clients and fellow messengers. There may be a few rookie messengers among the bad cyclists you see but I assure you that the veteran messengers of Philly are among the most conservative, safety conscious riders on the street, and they have the safety records to prove it.


False again. Messengers are not going to get banned by the same people who rely on them on a daily basis.

You're barking up the wrong tree.

After having worked as a bicycle messenger for almost 18 years, I have observed and heard about several nasty collisions between bike messengers and pedestrians. Almost every single one of these occurred after the ped stepped into the street into the path of a lawful cyclist. In the single instance I can recall that was the messenger's fault, he was fired immediately.

No, not malarkey. After watching several of your videos of your "riding style" I would not want to be on the same road as you are. As all you are doing is adding fuel to the fire. And making life difficult for those riders who do ride according to the law as well as the rules of the road. I agree with you that the "as far right as practicable" clause needs to be repealed. But that is about the only thing you've said that I can agree with. Not nearly as much as you are trying to make it sound. How "effed-up" will YOU feel when some newbie takes your advice and gets killed?

Motorists want us to obey the same laws that they obey, is that so hard a concept for you to understand? As well as riding in a safe, predictable orderly fashion, again why is that such a hard concept for you to understand?

Then WORK to change them write to your elected officials let them know how you feel. Give them suggestions on how to improve the situation. EVERYONE should educated in how to safely share the road.



Work with the system, find out what you can do to help make the changes that need to be made. Write letters, send e-mails, make phone calls. Work with the system to make positive changes.

The bottom line is that right now Joey you are part of the problem and NOT a part of the solution.

A couple of months ago I had a "braindead" person get off of the bus , open her cell phone and step off of the sidewalk right into my path. Fortunately for her I was able to swerve and avoid her. I shudder to think how many times a day that happens where the pedestrian isn't lucky enough to survive, as well as how many cyclists and drivers have been blamed for a crash that was beyond their control.

That is most certainly NOT what motorists want. They want us out of their way, preferably banned from the roadways. What motorists want is a form of "racism" or genocide against a population of people who are not like them, and who on occasion cause them moments of inconvenience. Motorists want me to wait my turn so long as I am BEHIND them.

Motorist behavior, as well as police inaction, makes it nearly impossible and certainly EXTREMELY dangerous for me to obey traffic laws in certain areas of my city. Autos already have tags (license plates) hanging on them, front and rear in some states, yet they all speed, roll through stops and right-on-reds, talk on phones, fall asleep, drive drunk ad infinitum. Somehow, registering their cars does not miraculously make them obey laws. It is a total waste of time and resources registering bicycles based on how well it works for cars and trucks.

Oh BTW. I never gave much thought about caring what motorists as a whole want from me. I interact with them on an individual basis and grant respect to them individually as warranted. And I do my very best to avoid giving anyone behind the wheel the opportunity to grant me anything.

Why then doesn't he have a bug up his a$$ about all the pedestrians that get killed by cars on the Roosevelt Blvd?? Or pedestrian deaths only "count" when a bicycle, rather than a car, is the vehicle in question??

I guess pedestrian deaths caused by an accident with a bicycle seem to be inexplicable. I'm guessing there are more than two a year caused by motor vehicles.

When I was a kid, the city we lived in required that bikes be licensed annually. They actually issued small metal plates similar to the license plates for cars, but about a tenth of the size. They were large enough that you could read the letters and numbers from some distance, but clearly, they weren't readable at the distance car plates are. Kids thought they were neat; our parents hated having yet another tax to pay (there was a much-hated personal property tax on all personal property, too).

I had them too- stickers that went on your rear fender. Ain't gonna happen here in Philly- hell, you can't even keep your registration sticker on your car's license plate here- the nitwits just come along and snip your plate to get the sticker. There are many cars in Philly missing a corner of the license plate because of this.

Exactly. Though ultimately what often happens is that the group that it is enforced for has dark skin, and the group that it's rarely enforced for has light skin.

And they don't want to give families running stop signs tickets? Really?

As I see it, if you've got a law, it should be enforced, even if it's absurd. If they don't want to enforce it, they should repeal it.

No one relies on messengers in Philly. The messengers operating ina very small area, a few square miles. If they are all gone tomorrow no one will miss them. The few lawyers, and others who use their service will have them replaced as fast as they can make a phone call.

Posenger? new word? Next you're going to tell me that it's the look alikes who are the problem? messengers are solid law biding citizens? Cut me an effin break!

Get rid of them and most of the problem goes with them.