Oh, great. Not one of these threads.
First of all, the roads are owned by the people, and built for transportation from one place to another. Many of the roads were actually first laid out before cars were invented, and were not designated for any single mode of transportation.
Insurance:
It is rare that a cyclist will total a car, or cause bodily damage to a vehicle's occupants, and in those cases that a car is totaled, the drivers usually will contribute a significant amount of the cause of the accident, as well as the damage to their vehicles. Excessive speed? Intoxication?
That doesn't mean that a cyclist is without liability for damage they cause to themselves or others, but it isn't a big enough issue to have insurance mandated. And cyclists with assets can be sued for damages.
Keep in mind that if you own your own vehicle, then in most states you aren't mandated to have insurance that covers damage to your person or your own vehicle.
When was the last time the Highway code was last updated???
Seriously?
Do all drivers also know that answer? Despite all the registration of drivers and vehicles, does the state send out a copy of the new laws to all drivers?
How many drivers have actually read the original highway code rather than reading a summary of the laws?
Also keep in mind that a large number of cyclists are also drivers, except a minority that have had their driver's licenses revoked (often due to unsafe or intoxicated driving). Even many of the "car free" cyclists maintain a valid driver's license.
Paying for roads?
Again, many cyclists are also drivers and pay road taxes. And, much of the expense of roads comes from the "general fund", not specifically designated as fuel or registration taxes, or even built as part of the development of new property. Bills related to truck transportation for say food is passed on to the consumers, no matter what they ride or drive. And the roads are for transportation, not owned by any particular user group.
The impact of a cyclist on a road is minimal. How many years of bicycle riding on a road will cause road ruts and potholes? Bridges are often replaced due to inherent dangers from the weight of cars and trucks. Those same bridges would serve hundreds of cyclists just fine.
What are often called "Bike Paths" are in fact "Multi-Use Trails", and often part of local park systems. They are often used equally by cyclists, pedestrians, joggers, and people walking their dogs. Part of the role of a government is to provide greenways and a hospitable place to live. I would not be happy living a place with only high-rise buildings and no open space.
Wide road shoulders and even bike lanes are as much for the safety of drivers as it is for cyclists. Ever drive 60 MPH on a road with heavy traffic and no shoulders? The shoulders and bike lanes provide an extra buffer for cars. What about an emergency break-down lane? Yep, park in the middle of the bike path.
Most cyclists are conscientious about keeping cars moving around them, but one of the main purposes of the bike paths is to allow cars to pass unencumbered.
Also keep in mind that cyclists are merely using the road. Many would be happy to use fishing trails if they took us to where we wanted to go. But, the roads are a network created by the government (and property developers) for all-mode transportation.
Your driving a 5000 pound vehicle at high speeds put the cyclists at risk, not visa-versa. I do worry about bad drivers making poor judgement calls putting themselves at risk due to my being on the road, but that is still on the drivers to operate their machinery in a safe manner, and keep those around them safe including other road users, whether they are in other cars or on bicycles.
As a driver are you paying the true cost of the fuel?
The Exxon Valdez did long-term damage to the Alaska coastline. BP has dumped millions of gallons of crude into the Gulf of Mexico... NOT DUE TO CYCLISTS.
Are we going to war over oil rights?
There are various estimates when the world will run out of easily accessible petroleum. Within a century? 5 million+ years of humans on Earth, and we're planning to use up all the oil in a couple of generations. Smart thinking? Then what? And, there are models indicating that we are doing very long-term damage to the environment and climate... NOT DUE TO CYCLISTS.
SMOG... Asthma? NOT DUE TO CYCLISTS.
Originally Posted by
volvo850t5
90% of accidents, involving cyclists, are caused by themselves !! Jumping red lights, riding 2/3 abreast, in direct contrevention of the highway code (but when was the last time a cyclist was forced to read it before taking to the public roads ?)
Please post statistics. Many accidents have contributory factors of both motorists and cyclists. Yes, the accidents caused by cyclists themselves is disturbingly high, but the papers I've read indicate somewhere around 50/50 contributory factors, with cyclists taking the brunt of the damages. Even those accidents where a cyclist did something stupid, a savvy driver should have been able to prevent the accident. SHARE THE ROAD.
Many types of accidents really are not caused by cyclists. Dooring, Rear-End, Right-Hook, Left-Hook, Pulling out in front, passing coming towards a cyclist, side-swipe, turning through a bike lane, excessive speed, drunk driving, etc. Of course it goes both ways, and a road savvy cyclist can also avoid many of the potential collisions.
Generally laws about riding side-by-side vs as far right as possible are ambiguous. Motorcyclists are generally legally allowed to ride side-by side, and cyclists are often legally allowed to take the lane, especially in cases where a car can't safely pass without exiting the lane. In cases that I've ridden side-by-side, it is always in low traffic areas, and the cyclists have moved over when traffic approaches due to common courtesy.
Cyclists are not above the laws, and if they are riding in an unsafe manner (no lights or reflectors at night, running red lights, etc), they can, and should be ticketed. But, also make sure infrastructure is appropriate. I have a lot of problems with tripping red light sensors... so one gets stuck on "dead reds". While having lights bunch up vehicles is common, I also feel it is safer to not have cars bunched around me, and have had a couple of close calls in part due to traffic pulses from lights.
There are also those instances that hardly impact bicycles, such as the "Top of the T" bike lane intersections. Stopping is irrelevant since traffic isn't supposed to cross bike lanes in these situations. In fact, running a red on the Top of the T is legal in some places.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop
Many cyclists here have ridden safely in traffic for decades. We still have to be exposed to the risk of some drunk driver smashing us with a weapon more lethal than a gun.
And don't forget litter. Throwing your beer bottle out (so you can't be charged with an open container) may not seem like much to a car driver, but think of it as a cyclist dumping road spikes or a bag of nails on the road just for the heck of it.