1nterceptor

"This was truly a sneak attack by a few House members on Missouri's bicycling community. They waited until the last minute to introduce their language, made it nearly impossible to understand, and tagged it onto an innocuous amendment that bill supporters had already approved. The bicycle ban is back--new and improved for 2014. And it is accompanied by something new--a proposal to eliminate bicycling from the $8 billion Missouri Transportation Funding proposal. No bicycles - some Missouri legislators want to ban bicycles from the road and from state transportation funding. This bill is due for a vote on Monday or Tuesday, so we need you to act now!"

Read the full article:
ADVOCACY ALERT: Please contact your own Missouri Representative to oppose bicycle ban & removal of bicycling from transportation funding bill | Missouri Bicycle and Pedestrian Federation

B. Carfree

Yet another example of why the proper pronunciation for that state is "misery".

I guess they like sending as much money to oil-producing and refining states as possible, as well as shortening the lifespans of Miserians by reducing their opportunities to exercise and maximizing the amount of toxins in the air.

By the way, this sort of dirty-dealing is fairly normal in legislation. My local state senator used the same procedure to sneak in the "vulnerable road user safe passing law" six years ago. It requires motorists to give cyclists room to fall in their direction when passing. Too bad the police won't enforce it.

kickstart

2. Notwithstanding any provision of this section or any other law, bicycle operation on a state-maintained roadway is prohibited when there is a state-owned bicycle path or trail that runs generally parallel to and within two miles of a state roadway, except a bicycle may be operated on the shoulder of a state roadway if: (1) The bicycle is operated with a motorized escort; (2) The bicycle is operated as a means to ride to or from the operator's home to another residence, to a place of business, to a school, or to any public facility; or (3) The person operating the bicycle is doing so due to an economic hardship.

Seriously? two miles?
I especially like the "generally parallel"........

Here in Washington we're allowed to ride on virtually all roads including the interstate and freeways outside of a few major urban areas, and a few segregated bypasses of a particularly dangerous portion of road.

Metal Man

I like #3.
(3) The person operating the bicycle is doing so due to an economic hardship.
When I ride I voluntarily leave three cars at home. I guess I would be forced to drive??

Chris516

Makes me thankful, I don't live in Missouri.

bbbean 

Before y'all get carried away with the Missouri bashing, be aware that there are roughly 1300 bills introduced in the MO legislature each year, and all of them are amended and modified as they work their way through the process. This amendment likely will be undone, and represents one rep's poor judgement, not the will of the state. It isn't law yet and likely won't be.

BB

B. Carfree

Aw, come on. We were just warming up. Don't tell us we have to go back to bashing Mississippi.

I-Like-To-Bike

Or Portlandia

AngeloDolce

Technically, you're not forced to drive when bicycling you're just restricted to local roads and not allowed on state roads. You can ride your bike, you just can't go anywhere motorists want to go.

In general, I agree with bbbean that all jurisdictions introduce many stupid laws each year that are eventually die of their own unworkability. This one is just so badly conceived and written it is clear it can't be ordinary stupidity, it really is mean spirited if not outright malicious.

To follow up your point, the law has an OR - even if there is no hardship, there is an exception for transportation as opposed to recreational loops. I think the "exceptions" will be irrelevant, since this proposal only gives bicyclists permission to ride on the shoulder. If there is no shoulder, I'm sure Rep Korman and the police will ban bicyclists even if there is no State owned bicycle facility within 50 miles.

I'm sure this will fail, but it will keep motorists angry at bicyclists that they don't think should be allowed to use public roads.

bigfred 

"(1) The bicycle is operated with a motorized escort;"

This has the possibility of backfiring on motorists in a huge way. I can just see a few cyclists getting partners, family or friends to provide "motorized escort" for as many rides as possible and really creating some road congestion:-)

FMB42

This is all about lawmakers exercising their abnormal lust for power over their subjects. This, and their insatiable craving for money, is what they live and breath for. And to top it off, these power and money craving lawmakers often call us "greedy" when we, the taxpayers, complain about such wasteful spending.

rydabent

Apparently in Mo when a person is elected to the legislature, they take them into a back room first thing and jam two straws up their nose, and suck out all brain cells that has anything to do with common sense and logic!!!!

bbbean 

Wow! You've clearly got a superior grasp of reality. You should run for office and straighten out all those power-mad tyrants!

rydabent

fmb +1

Spld cyclist

I know you're against the law, but I wanted to play this out a little more. In Massachusetts, pretty much all numbered routes are state highways, even the two-lane ones that go right through towns. A law like that would be crippling to cycling in many parts of the state if enforced. In New York State where I grew up, many of those types of roads are county roads, so it there would be more legal options. (Massachusetts county government has mostly been legislated out of existence, with the exception of the criminal justice system, so there are no county governments to administer highways).

FMB42

There's nothing "superior" about it. Most people over the age 30 know the reality of politics. It really doesn't take much to realize this.

Sorry, but I'm not a power and money craving type of person. This, and that fact that I'm honest, is why I would never think of lowering myself into seeking public office. Most normal people neither seek this kind of existence nor care to work around those that do.

Meanwhile, you shouldn't allow yourself to become agitated by those who speak the truth.

bbbean 

LOL, I'm glad you're not being superior!

So your plan is to simply suffer oppression and do nothing about it? You're not committed to your cause enough to actually step up and do something? Do you suppose complaints to internet forums are an effective way to improve things?

FWIW, I'm well past 30, and have had the opportunity and priviledge to work closely with my legislators. I can tell you from experience that the vast majority of them (including those who I disagree with) are decent people who sincerely believe they are acting according to the wishes and in the best interest of their constituents. Most of them view and conduct themselves as public servants

Dismissing all elected officians as petty tyrants or corrupt fat cats is roughly equivalent to declaring all cyclists irresponsible fools because you've seen a few of them run a red light. If you want to further your cause, you'll engage with the legislature, not dismiss it.

B. Carfree

This would be an interesting protest. Unfortunately, the result would likely be for the same dimrod legislator to simply remove the motorized escort exception. Still, it makes for a funny mental picture.

Maybe a legislator with a twisted sense of humor should propose an amendment to the current bill that requires motorists to have a bicycle escort.

bigfred 

Just imagine the line of "*******" behind a reasonably sized group ride, with no intention of ever passing:-) The first unassocciated driver might not even be able to see the bikes at the front, much less find sufficient room to pass.

But, the riders would only need the ******* for those sections of the ride that have a suitable bike path, parrallel and within 2 miles.

JoeyBike

I cycled across Missouri a few years ago (2005) more or less diagonally from SE to NW incorporating the Katy Trail in the middle. Other than way too many loose dogs chasing me I found the state roads of MO plenty wide enough for the most part, many had shoulders, and there were even some with bike route signage. I found the motorists and most everyone as cordial as anywhere else I have toured. I never got the impression that the general public cared one way or another if I used "their" roads.

As states go, Virginia was the worst. I might even vote for a law banning cycling in that whole state for the "safety" of everyone. I'm just kidding of course but I would understand why VA would try that approach. I don't see why Missouri would want it as a whole unless there is some regional problem with cyclists near larger cities and towns.

EH...I guess it could be a vehicular form of racism for some select few people in MO. Like I said, I did not experience anything but big smiles and warm welcomes (besides the Pitbull x Greyhound breed of dogs chasing me across the state). Hotels, Motels, State Parks, and eateries were all happy to take my money too.

scott967

So, exactly what "state maintained" roads are within 2 miles of "state owned" bike paths?

scott s.
.

zonatandem

Ban all politicians from campaigning or getting paid . . .

CB HI

As I recall from the last time this fool tried his legislation, there is one "state maintained" road within 2 miles of a "state owned" bike path, and the "state maintained" road is one he travels on frequently.

DW99

That's only the republicans, they stick a bigger straw up another orifice and suck out the spine of the democrats.

But honestly, Korman and his ilk (republicans), are in the majority in the Missouri legislature, House and Senate. The capital building is infested with bible thumping, gun toting ignorance. It's embarrassing.

bbbean 

Oh good grief. All those evil Republicans like Peter Kinder who helped to organize and promote the Tour of Missouri bike race.

Get informed, folks!