Originally Posted by chrisvu05
Really....speeding on a bike is far different than speeding in a car. If I hit another car....i'm going to die....The only person that I am endangering is myself and possibly a pedestrian or a squirrel... As far as destruction goes, a bike would do far less damage than a car going 41 mph. I've seen this same guy before and harasses alot of motorists and joggers. You can tell he really dislikes his job and dislikes what he would probably call "babysitting cyclists"
I am sorry, but "possibly a pedestrian" isn't an issue to you???? I'll bet it would be an issue if it were "possibly another cyclist" because in this forum a cyclist is worth 10.6 times as much as a non-cyclist or a cyclist not currently on his/her bike... But, that is not my main point.
While I sympathize with your position that a cyclist is likely to do less direct damage, a cyclist going too fast could cause a situation where a car driver being shocked at being hit by a bike causes an accident with damage that would normally be beyond the scope of a cycle, then what? Is this the car driver's fault if everything was done right by that driver except what was initiated by the cyclist?
The laws are written to be followed by everyone... Have you ever heard someone claim that they are safer at 20 miles over the limit than most people at the speed limit? If you make an exception for bicycles, then you need to make exceptions for others who can demonstrate an ability to go faster without negatively impacting safety. I don't want to be on a road, whether in a car or on a bike, where people are allowed to drive at whatever speed they can claim to be safe at... Whether they are on a bicycle or in an exotic Italian sports car, they need to follow the same rules in order for the roads to be relatively safe.
BTW - Congrats on the 41 MPH!
