Reforming Bicycle Traffic Laws
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Crystal MN
Posts: 2,147
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Reforming Bicycle Traffic Laws
https://www.geocities.com/fredoswald/law-reform.html
any thoughts?
What's Wrong With Bicycle Traffic Laws?
Traffic laws are supposed to promote your safety if you obey them, and protect your rights if someone else causes an accident. The core principles of traffic law do this very well for both motorists and cyclists, but there are many add-ons in bicycle traffic law that degrade both our safety and our rights.
There is no federal traffic law. Traffic law is a state function, and the troublesome add-ons are state (and local) laws.
This is not a problem for motor vehicle operators. Motor vehicle traffic laws are generally uniform throughout the 50 states. A motorist traveling from state to state need not learn a new set of laws with each border crossing. Also, local authorities have only limited powers to enact special ordinances. The standard traffic laws promote safe practices.
Cyclists do not enjoy this uniformity or benevolence of bicycle operation laws. State laws differ widely and local laws are often loose cannons aimed at our rights. Well-meaning but misguided lawmakers treat cyclists like children. Moreover, many troublesome laws betray a lack of knowledge of the actual causes of bicycle accidents.
Many state and local laws trample cyclists' rights. We are treated as incompetent children and third-class citizens. Some laws forbid cycling on roadways, but instead direct us to use more dangerous facilities such as sidewalks and pathways beside the road. Other directives confine us to the edge of the road, even where the road edge may not be safe. In many states, local ordinances form a crazy-quilt of dangerous and discriminatory rules that vary from community to community and that conflict with the known best practices of bicycling safety.
The safest way to operate a bicycle is as the lawful driver of a vehicle. This means riding on the roadway while following the same traffic rules as other drivers. Cyclists who operate this way have one-fifth the accident rate of the average bicycle operator. Paradoxically, the best and safest practices are sometimes prohibited while dangerous mistakes of novices are encouraged.
any thoughts?
any thoughts?
What's Wrong With Bicycle Traffic Laws?
Traffic laws are supposed to promote your safety if you obey them, and protect your rights if someone else causes an accident. The core principles of traffic law do this very well for both motorists and cyclists, but there are many add-ons in bicycle traffic law that degrade both our safety and our rights.
There is no federal traffic law. Traffic law is a state function, and the troublesome add-ons are state (and local) laws.
This is not a problem for motor vehicle operators. Motor vehicle traffic laws are generally uniform throughout the 50 states. A motorist traveling from state to state need not learn a new set of laws with each border crossing. Also, local authorities have only limited powers to enact special ordinances. The standard traffic laws promote safe practices.
Cyclists do not enjoy this uniformity or benevolence of bicycle operation laws. State laws differ widely and local laws are often loose cannons aimed at our rights. Well-meaning but misguided lawmakers treat cyclists like children. Moreover, many troublesome laws betray a lack of knowledge of the actual causes of bicycle accidents.
Many state and local laws trample cyclists' rights. We are treated as incompetent children and third-class citizens. Some laws forbid cycling on roadways, but instead direct us to use more dangerous facilities such as sidewalks and pathways beside the road. Other directives confine us to the edge of the road, even where the road edge may not be safe. In many states, local ordinances form a crazy-quilt of dangerous and discriminatory rules that vary from community to community and that conflict with the known best practices of bicycling safety.
The safest way to operate a bicycle is as the lawful driver of a vehicle. This means riding on the roadway while following the same traffic rules as other drivers. Cyclists who operate this way have one-fifth the accident rate of the average bicycle operator. Paradoxically, the best and safest practices are sometimes prohibited while dangerous mistakes of novices are encouraged.
any thoughts?
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 2,209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by wheel
https://www.geocities.com/fredoswald/law-reform.html
any thoughts?
What's Wrong With Bicycle Traffic Laws?
Traffic laws are supposed to promote your safety if you obey them, and protect your rights if someone else causes an accident. The core principles of traffic law do this very well for both motorists and cyclists, but there are many add-ons in bicycle traffic law that degrade both our safety and our rights.
There is no federal traffic law. Traffic law is a state function, and the troublesome add-ons are state (and local) laws.
This is not a problem for motor vehicle operators. Motor vehicle traffic laws are generally uniform throughout the 50 states. A motorist traveling from state to state need not learn a new set of laws with each border crossing. Also, local authorities have only limited powers to enact special ordinances. The standard traffic laws promote safe practices.
Cyclists do not enjoy this uniformity or benevolence of bicycle operation laws. State laws differ widely and local laws are often loose cannons aimed at our rights. Well-meaning but misguided lawmakers treat cyclists like children. Moreover, many troublesome laws betray a lack of knowledge of the actual causes of bicycle accidents.
Many state and local laws trample cyclists' rights. We are treated as incompetent children and third-class citizens. Some laws forbid cycling on roadways, but instead direct us to use more dangerous facilities such as sidewalks and pathways beside the road. Other directives confine us to the edge of the road, even where the road edge may not be safe. In many states, local ordinances form a crazy-quilt of dangerous and discriminatory rules that vary from community to community and that conflict with the known best practices of bicycling safety.
The safest way to operate a bicycle is as the lawful driver of a vehicle. This means riding on the roadway while following the same traffic rules as other drivers. Cyclists who operate this way have one-fifth the accident rate of the average bicycle operator. Paradoxically, the best and safest practices are sometimes prohibited while dangerous mistakes of novices are encouraged.
any thoughts?
any thoughts?
What's Wrong With Bicycle Traffic Laws?
Traffic laws are supposed to promote your safety if you obey them, and protect your rights if someone else causes an accident. The core principles of traffic law do this very well for both motorists and cyclists, but there are many add-ons in bicycle traffic law that degrade both our safety and our rights.
There is no federal traffic law. Traffic law is a state function, and the troublesome add-ons are state (and local) laws.
This is not a problem for motor vehicle operators. Motor vehicle traffic laws are generally uniform throughout the 50 states. A motorist traveling from state to state need not learn a new set of laws with each border crossing. Also, local authorities have only limited powers to enact special ordinances. The standard traffic laws promote safe practices.
Cyclists do not enjoy this uniformity or benevolence of bicycle operation laws. State laws differ widely and local laws are often loose cannons aimed at our rights. Well-meaning but misguided lawmakers treat cyclists like children. Moreover, many troublesome laws betray a lack of knowledge of the actual causes of bicycle accidents.
Many state and local laws trample cyclists' rights. We are treated as incompetent children and third-class citizens. Some laws forbid cycling on roadways, but instead direct us to use more dangerous facilities such as sidewalks and pathways beside the road. Other directives confine us to the edge of the road, even where the road edge may not be safe. In many states, local ordinances form a crazy-quilt of dangerous and discriminatory rules that vary from community to community and that conflict with the known best practices of bicycling safety.
The safest way to operate a bicycle is as the lawful driver of a vehicle. This means riding on the roadway while following the same traffic rules as other drivers. Cyclists who operate this way have one-fifth the accident rate of the average bicycle operator. Paradoxically, the best and safest practices are sometimes prohibited while dangerous mistakes of novices are encouraged.
any thoughts?
As much as I dislike certain local laws, I do not like the idea of the federal government mandating how I have to ride my bike---its bad enough that helmets are "mandated" (I do ride with one all the tim though)-----but this is getting into politics--I just generally dislike any federal "mandate"
#3
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,158 Posts
Originally Posted by wheel
The safest way to operate a bicycle is as the lawful driver of a vehicle. This means riding on the roadway while following the same traffic rules as other drivers. Cyclists who operate this way have one-fifth the accident rate of the average bicycle operator. Paradoxically, the best and safest practices are sometimes prohibited while dangerous mistakes of novices are encouraged.
any thoughts?
any thoughts?
The biggest issues I face as a cyclist are motorists that refuse to believe I should operate "a bicycle is as the lawful driver of a vehicle." They refuse to treat my vehicle as an equal on the road. I therefore must enlist "special behaviour," unlike any other operator of a vehicle on the road, in order to insist on my place on the road.
How do you change that?
#4
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,973
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,536 Times
in
1,045 Posts
Originally Posted by wheel
any thoughts?
...Some laws forbid cycling on roadways, but instead direct us to use more dangerous facilities such as sidewalks and pathways beside the road. Other directives confine us to the edge of the road, even where the road edge may not be safe. In many states, local ordinances form a crazy-quilt of dangerous and discriminatory rules that vary from community to community and that conflict with the known best practices of bicycling safety.
The safest way to operate a bicycle is as the lawful driver of a vehicle. This means riding on the roadway while following the same traffic rules as other drivers. Cyclists who operate this way have one-fifth the accident rate of the average bicycle operator. Paradoxically, the best and safest practices are sometimes prohibited while dangerous mistakes of novices are encouraged.
any thoughts?
...Some laws forbid cycling on roadways, but instead direct us to use more dangerous facilities such as sidewalks and pathways beside the road. Other directives confine us to the edge of the road, even where the road edge may not be safe. In many states, local ordinances form a crazy-quilt of dangerous and discriminatory rules that vary from community to community and that conflict with the known best practices of bicycling safety.
The safest way to operate a bicycle is as the lawful driver of a vehicle. This means riding on the roadway while following the same traffic rules as other drivers. Cyclists who operate this way have one-fifth the accident rate of the average bicycle operator. Paradoxically, the best and safest practices are sometimes prohibited while dangerous mistakes of novices are encouraged.
any thoughts?
"conflict with the known best practices of bicycling safety"
"The safest way to operate a bicycle is as the lawful driver of a vehicle."
"This means riding on the roadway while following the same traffic rules as other drivers."
And most telling of all, the pièce de résistance of Forester fabrication:
"Cyclists who operate this way have one-fifth the accident rate of the average bicycle operator."
The author makes the same mountain out of a molehill about side path laws in the U.S. that another BF self proclaimed legal scholar is currently engaged in exaggerating.
His organization's project of assigning "grades" to the various states based on compliance with it's unique vision of proper traffic code is an exercise in Forester Brand arrogance. In fact, the whole article is a wildly exaggerated take on the actual effect of varying state traffic codes on the safety of cyclists of the real world. Good exercise in Foresterism.
Last edited by I-Like-To-Bike; 03-10-07 at 06:41 AM.
#5
Out fishing with Annie on his lap, a cigar in one hand and a ginger ale in the other, watching the sunset.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida
Posts: 16,056
Bikes: Techna Wheelchair and a Sun EZ 3 Recumbent Trike
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 22 Times
in
17 Posts
Originally Posted by skanking biker
As much as I dislike certain local laws, I do not like the idea of the federal government mandating how I have to ride my bike---its bad enough that helmets are "mandated" (I do ride with one all the tim though)-----but this is getting into politics--I just generally dislike any federal "mandate"
__________________
. “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche
"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant
. “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche
"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant
#6
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,973
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,536 Times
in
1,045 Posts
Cyclists who operate this way have one-fifth the accident rate of the average bicycle operator.
That's when the other shoe drops from the author and his Forester Brand Accomplices. The traffic law shoe is minor in the author's cyclist safety program, the real deal (IAW Forester dogma) comes with the drop of the educational/training requirement shoe. And all the false claims about a safety record associated with the recommended brand of training.
Originally Posted by genec
Can you prove the statement in bold above?
#7
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: clipped in & pedaling
Posts: 283
Bikes: jamis dakar xlt 1.9, weyless sp
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by genec
Can you prove the statement in bold above?
The biggest issues I face as a cyclist are motorists that refuse to believe I should operate "a bicycle is as the lawful driver of a vehicle." They refuse to treat my vehicle as an equal on the road. I therefore must enlist "special behaviour," unlike any other operator of a vehicle on the road, in order to insist on my place on the road.
How do you change that?
The biggest issues I face as a cyclist are motorists that refuse to believe I should operate "a bicycle is as the lawful driver of a vehicle." They refuse to treat my vehicle as an equal on the road. I therefore must enlist "special behaviour," unlike any other operator of a vehicle on the road, in order to insist on my place on the road.
How do you change that?
#8
Dominatrikes
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Still in Santa Barbara
Posts: 4,920
Bikes: Catrike Pocket, Lightning Thunderbold recumbent, Trek 3000 MTB.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Good thing we have ILTB around to debunk and unmask the Forester moles. Thanks, ILTB. You provide a valuable service to us all.