robncindi

Hi all, I am on a car mailing list and a discussion has come up this week about cyclists because one of the guys on the list was hit by a car on his bicycle. The following is what one of the guys had to say about the situation. I thought you guys might be interested in reading this:

"We see a lot of traffic signs around here about bicycle riders on the road,
etc., but they will never do any good as long as folks on bicycles ride in the
middle of a traffic lane, sometimes two abreast, at speeds from 15 to 50 mph
below the posted speed limit. Given the number of vehicles on the road at
times, bicycle speeds are not compatible with traffic speeds on most county roads
and highways, and in many cases even on city streets.

You do have you right to ride a bicycle, but you don't have a right to delay
traffic, cause others to be late for appointments, extend travel times for the
majority, especially during peak travel hours such as "rush hour", which in
our case out here means folks going to work at approximately the posted speed
limit for 10- 30 miles from their homes, etc.

People can talk about their "rights" all day, but as with many things,
attempting to enforce these rights with aggressive behaviors can have consequences.
The probable result of Steve White's grabbing a driver by the throat through
an open vehicle window in KY would result in a fatal shooting by driver who
was attacked in his vehicle (his private domain) while carrying a licensed
firearm, and while I don't give legal opinions on anything, one would certainly
expect a "justifiable homicide by self defense" plea if he were even to have been
prosecuted. My suggestion in circumstances like that is to just either learn
to take it, adjust your travel patterns, or advise law enforcement. Violence
on the street only begets escalating violence, and the "rednecks", as some
have referred to them, in their pickup trucks are generally far better armed and
ready to defend themselves than bicycle riders.

The real solution to the problem is licensing and taxation of bicycles, (in
most jurisdictions bicycles do not pay for license plates and they certainly do
not pay gasoline taxes to contribute to road construction and maintenance)
just as is done with automobiles, with these funds utilized to construct bike
trails on the side of the highways to segregate bicycle traffic from real
traffic. I remember a traffic engineering course many years ago where they taught
that the way to set speed limits was to set out a traffic speed sensing device
and to set the speed limit between the 80th and 90th percentile of the traffic
speeds of the drivers. No politics, green or otherwise back then (which
probably ages me some), just simple engineering and safety.

One final point. While many bicycle riders seem to think that automobile
drivers are "out to get them" (Could this be a result of their own recognition of
the adverse effects upon traffic flow of their conveyances and the
frustration that they cause among automobile and truck operators?) when in fact they are
just difficult to see in many ambient conditions. I remember, once again many
years ago, taking a motorcycle safety course where they emphasized utilizing
a head/tail light at all times to increase visibility. Motorcycles have far
better lighting than most bicycles, and they also move at speeds consistent with
surrounding traffic, yet there are many car/truck-motorcycle accidents due to
their limited visibility. The dangers to bicycles are exponentially
increased in comparison to these motorcycles. Sometimes, despite what the bicycle
riders think, it is just a visibility problem and not the malice that is inferred.

The best solution, although perhaps not to the bicyclists liking, is for them
to stay out of rush hour or moderate and high speed traffic, stay as far to
the right as possible, utilizing road shoulders when possible, pull over and
stop when automotive traffic is building up behind you, ride in single file
only, and perhaps confine your rides to "bike paths" until your taxes can build
more suitable facilities for your use.

These practical solutions recognize several factors. First of all, you will
NEVER WIN in a collision with an automobile, pickup truck or 18-wheeler. That
is a simple application of the laws of physics and of nature. You can demand
rights, talk about your freedoms, complain until the cows come home, etc.,
but you do need to recognize that the driver of the average 3/4 ton pickup truck
may not even notice hitting you if he clips you with his rear end due to the
protective values of automotive structure. Secondly, committing assaultive
crimes against drivers for perceived insults and infractions can result in your
arrest at best, and serious injury from an altercation with an individual
exercising his rights of self-defense against your aggression if you are less
fortunate. Just because you may consider your cause to be just doesn't mean that
you will win in practical applications. Staying off of the highways and out of
the way of automotive traffic may be the most effective way of preventing
injury or death while cycling."

robncindi

p.s. I am working on a rebuttal and could use some help....boss expects me to work today

jslopez

I think the problem really is we, as a species, tend to clump our selves in to certain groups (in this case car users vs. cyclists) and once that's done you will find @$$--les in either group that suddenly represent you. I'm sure there are bad motorists out there and I know there are bad cyclists out there but where do the decent ones meet to change the problems?

H23

I'm so sick of the mentality that drivers have a "right" to pass all traffic that is slower than they are. These "car-rights" idiots make up justifications about losing time or productivity because cyclists are on the road.

Really, I drive 400+ miles a week for work (I hate it too). I go through highways, 2-lane blacktop, urban and residential areas. I encounter cyclists frequently.

How much time have I lost, TOTAL, in a year because of cyclists? Perhaps 5 minutes. How much time do I lose per day because of too many cars? About 1 hour.

If drivers want to help themselves and make their lives easier, they should focus on encouraging public transportation and things like lexus lanes.

TheNJDevil

OK, here is something that I have been told by a local cop and a judge in the area. A vehicle has to follow the rules of the road to safely pass slower traffic. If I want to ride my bike in the middle of Main Street at 5mph, since there isn't a posted speed minimum, I have the right to ride at 5mph.

The speed limit is just that, A LIMIT. It is the MAXIMUM speed allowed on that part of the road. If a road wants to keep slow bikes off the road then they need to post speed minimums and enforce it on bikes, cars, trucks, mopeds, scooters, joggers, ect...

PaulH

I wish all the cars I encounter while driving were as easy to pass as bicycles are.

Paul

Alphie

Forcing cyclists to pay taxes for road building is ridiculous. if more people biked we would have no need of new roads.
Restricting bikes to paths does not solve the problem of teaching drivers to be aware of and courteous to cyclists.
Most cyclists (that do not have a death wish) do obey traffic laws including riding as far to the right as is safe and practical.
Most of us are trying to get to work at the same time as auto drivers. Banning cyclists from roads during rush hour only promotes our car infatuated culture. Drivers should face the fact we have the same road rights they do.

Kestrelman

Personally, I'm getting sick of the whole taxation issue for cyclists. I would venture to guess that at least 90 percent of cyclists also own a car (or more than one car) and therefore pay their share of road taxes. Taxing a bike would amount to double taxation. Stupid issue.

westman2003

"You do have you right to ride a bicycle, but you don't have a right to delay
traffic, cause others to be late for appointments, extend travel times for the
majority, especially during peak travel hours such as "rush hour", which in
our case out here means folks going to work at approximately the posted speed
limit for 10- 30 miles from their homes, etc."
-----------------
The few seconds a car has to slow down to pass me hardly slows down traffic. And, if I jump in my car and add another one to the road traffic will slow down even more.

If cars want us off the roads they use then build bike lanes or bike paths beside the roads. Otherwise until the laws change I will continue to exercise my right and ride a bike.

One more thing, you drivers are all welcome on how I am not harming the environment by pumping more exaust fumes into the air from my SUV. (in fact I don't own an SUV).

As I read somewhere in the forum "burn fat not oil".

royalflash

this is quite disturbing - the fact that idiots like the guy that wrote the above pile of cr@p are controlling two tons of metal behind me-its just the same old one sided arguments everytime but it is helpful to be reminded of the way people are thinking- bikes have no right to delay me (what about the cars that delay me everyday)- bikes dont pay taxes (as if bike riders all have some magical diplomatic tax exempt status)- bikes are just REALLY hard to see (well they would be if you dont bother looking and I dont seem to have any problem)-my car is bigger than your bike so just get off the road (well I suppose he's right there) -blah-blah

I think I'll just jack the cycling thing in and pour my increasingly fat ass into a car everyday until I die of a heart attack pounding the steering wheel in a traffic jam- it looks like so much fun NOT

IronHorse

I see, so we ask motorists how fast they'd like to go on a piece of road and then set the limit just below that. Shame we can't set saleries the same way

I fear that you're wasting your time with the rebuttal as the subtext here is "Nothing should obstruct me from doing what I what to in my car."

BenyBen

Besides, his point of view about the fact that we take up lanes... how often does that REALLY happen? I don't know about you, but I usually take the lane only in certain situations and @ certain dangerous street corners. That makes me very visible to the drivers, and I clearly signal my intentions.

I also didn't like his point about taxation, and the fact that we don't buy oil to contribute to the road maintenance. Well, most road maintenance are needed BECAUSE of cars and trucks. I have a bike path that has been built over 20 years ago here, and it has NEVER needed repairs/shows NO sign of wear. How happy would the govt be if they could build roads and never repair them for 40 years??? Would taxation even be needed then?

I would be willing to go with a bike license, if it came down to it. Provided that we are given a course with CLEAR road laws, that car drivers would also be informed of. Besides, there are idiots on bikes that really do need to be taught to signal ther intentions, and road laws. I would probably learn some things too.

Another case of a driver thinking we should be off the roads, because they are dulled to the outside by the "protective values of automotive structure". I think this guy should stop to think about the fact that he drives a potentially leathal mass of metal, and that he needs to be just as aware of his environment as we are. Perhaps a couple days cycling through traffic would put things into perspective? Being that we are not protected, we tend to make ourrselves much more aware of what's going on.

Visibility: He does make a good point about visibility. Perhaps we need to have laws about riding a bike in the night time, with mandatory head and tail lights?

Sloth

Yep, and I would add that much of the money to pay for road construction is not paid for with gas taxes, so the cyclist is paying a fair share. Maybe more than a fair share, since the amount of room that a bike takes is minimal and so is the road damage caused by a cyclist.

A few other points: in general, I agree that drivers need to safely pass slower moving vehicles, BUT it is necessary for lower speed vehicles to stay as far to the right as is safely possible. And, while I will never cede the lane when doing so would be unsafe (i.e., when it means riding in the door zone), I will always cede the lane when I can safely do so and there is someone behind me. IMO, rear view mirrors are the one of the best things a cyclist riding in traffic can have, for this reason and for safety.

One thing that I think is key is that cyclists need to obey the rules of the road if we want to be treated as vehicles. That means signalling, stopping at red lights, acting predictably and with courtesy, etc. Acting like the vehicles that we, in fact are.

I think he has a pretty good point re:illumination and being seen. I will quite often ride with a light/blinkers in traffic. That's just common sense. But it is no excuse for a motorist who is not looking, and it is certainly no excuse for some bozo who is talking on his or her cell phone. You want to improve things dramatically, for everyone, ban driving while talking on a cell, or at least require speakerphones. When I see someone on a cell, I get away as fast as I can.

Paul L.

IN Arizona you are breaking the law if more than 5 vehicles are backed up behind you and you don't let them pass (car or bicycle). That being said I try to be courteous when I see that drivers have difficulty passing me. Of course occasionally the situation dictates I wait until a safe spot to let them by. I think it is all about whether you try to be courteous or try to show those jerks in the cage whose got the rights to the road. If you go with the latter you will be about as popular as a lawyer.

Also, last I checked a great portion of highway funding came from the federal government which gets zero vehicle license tax money.

lsits

The problem with bike lanes and bike paths is that sometimes I want to go to a different location than where a bike path leads. There is a very nice bike lane where I live that I ride at least three times a week. It ends after about eight miles. I guess this bozo would have me turn around and ride home when I reached the end. <Sarcasm on> Maybe the best solution is to hook us up to trainers and put us in front of a video screen like in the "Triplets of Belleville". <Sarcasm off>

cyclingshane73

So last night I had to drive to Hamilton from Toronto which took me a about two hours one way. The distance is not that far on the highway, maybe 75k's. Of all things I was delivering a MTB bike frame I had just sold. So I'd say half of that two hours was slow moving traffic crawling along at very painful pace nary a cyclist in sight. Granted it was on a major highway, however all the roads leading to the highway were just as congested. How anyone can do that everyday, at least twice each day is beyond me. I did it once and it reminded me how much I prefer to commute on my bike, even though I may still be slower.

It just occured to me as well that I could have rode that distance in about 2 1/2 hours on my road bike, but then I'd have to leave the frame at home. Although I guess if I owned a trailer, I could used something like that to carry it, it was pretty dark too, damn, I'm painting myself into a corner on this one...

I'm not sure what this has to do with the topic at hand, I guess maybe motorists should take as a hint that they are not "all that" and create their own congestion and delays by virtue of sheer numbers w/o my help (except in last nights case).

Oh, I hate that ignorant comment that as a cyclist don't pay taxes. I guess the family school bus I bought in the spring which I paid the so called "gas and tire taxes" on doesn't count, or the house I own, or just about everthing else I buy/consume including bike parts. Oh wait I also hold a valid driver's licence which I renew every five years so I too can operate a motor vehicle when I need to, so p*ss off!

lil jon

There should not be just bike paths like other people have already mentioned because people don't see us on the road and don't know how to act. I think that if we are going to break the rules at east people are brought to the attention that bikers are around...many people tell me to ride on the side walk and if i do i will hit peds and there are more doors to open and hit me. I think that people have to drive safely in general wether a bike is there or not... I got hit ayear a go form on coming traffic there was nothing i could have done he came at me , if i was in a car he would of hit me . i think that if i would have beden mre aggressive to the cars in front i would of not been hit by going around the cars but i stayed behind the cars that were stopped and he hit me due to where i was.
if people will treat me as a vheicle and be polite drivers regardless of speed i will obey but since people are to eager to get to the red light i will go arond them and i will take the whole lane because if you rear end a car regardless of speed you are at fault. the same applies to bikes.
while your at itt you might as well try to make a lincese to bike with all the other laws that were metioned now does everyone want to have to get a bike leincese and all that i doubt it...

scrantr

<RANT ON>
The situation is not one cyclist vs. all the drivers. It is 1 cyclist and 1 driver at a time being able to cooperate and share the road. I commute on a bicycle, but I also have a car. I pay all the same taxes any other car owner does, and by this person's logic, derive *less* benefit from them. I don't tear up the roads, I don't raise the smog level to the point that mandatory emission inspections are enacted, and I certainly pose no threat to other users of the road.

By the logic of relative vulnerability, small cars should be banned because they come off far worse in a collision with an SUV. Pedestrians would be banned from every stepping outside, and heaven forbid that any farm machinery, highway maintenance equipment, or sobriety checkpoint should ever delay this guy on his way to *his* very important engagement. We should all be travelling around in Navigators, Yukons, and Hummers. C'mon, it's not an arms race, folks.

These always degenerate to a "my rights" shouting match, which instantly means you've stopped listening to the other guy. If we are evaluating this on a "rights" basis, then the cyclists win every time. You get access to the public byways by being a citizen. If you use a car, you must prove that you can do so without unduly endangering others (cars, trucks, cyclists, pedestrians, Mini Coopers, whatever). That ideal must be balanced against the reality that a driver distracted by kids, a cell phone, spilled hot coffee, or a CD player in the dash is not behaving as a competent driver and endangers all around him. I do not expect this to change. It is difficult enough to get a judge to lift a license for (multiple) DUI arrests. All these other sins are venial by comparison.

I don't have a lot of sympathy for the "Critical Mass" riders who stop traffic, then whine about being harassed by the police. They do us no good from a public image standpoint. I have even less sympathy for the morons who feel the need to throw something at cyclists from moving cars. If a cyclist retaliates at that sort of treatment, I understand. I don't support it, but I understand.

Driving an authomobile is a privilege, not a right. It requires that you share the road with other users in a civil manner. The same is expected of cyclists. I don't understand why this always has to become a confrontation.
<RANT OFF>

If roads were constructed at least two feet of decent shoulder and swept once in awhile to keep down the broken glass, mufflers, and other stuff that falls off cars, I doubt there would be so much debate on this subject.

Can't we all just get along? --Rodney King.

catatonic

Hi all, I am on a car mailing list and a discussion has come up this week about cyclists because one of the guys on the list was hit by a car on his bicycle. The following is what one of the guys had to say about the situation. I thought you guys might be interested in reading this:

"We see a lot of traffic signs around here about bicycle riders on the road,
etc., but they will never do any good as long as folks on bicycles ride in the
middle of a traffic lane, sometimes two abreast, at speeds from 15 to 50 mph
below the posted speed limit. Given the number of vehicles on the road at
times, bicycle speeds are not compatible with traffic speeds on most county roads
and highways, and in many cases even on city streets.


***If there is no bike lane, we are entitled to that section of road. Law is the law, despite how ***frustrating it is for you, remember we are the ones being frustrated by having a massive steel object ***nipping at our heels, so the discomfort IS mutual. Best fix is to help convince the city to add more ***bike lanes, and enforce their proper usage.


You do have you right to ride a bicycle, but you don't have a right to delay
traffic, cause others to be late for appointments, extend travel times for the
majority, especially during peak travel hours such as "rush hour", which in
our case out here means folks going to work at approximately the posted speed
limit for 10- 30 miles from their homes, etc.


***Again, best bet to help with this is to encourage your area to add bike lanes.


People can talk about their "rights" all day, but as with many things,
attempting to enforce these rights with aggressive behaviors can have consequences.
The probable result of Steve White's grabbing a driver by the throat through
an open vehicle window in KY would result in a fatal shooting by driver who
was attacked in his vehicle (his private domain) while carrying a licensed
firearm, and while I don't give legal opinions on anything, one would certainly
expect a "justifiable homicide by self defense" plea if he were even to have been
prosecuted. My suggestion in circumstances like that is to just either learn
to take it, adjust your travel patterns, or advise law enforcement. Violence
on the street only begets escalating violence, and the "rednecks", as some
have referred to them, in their pickup trucks are generally far better armed and
ready to defend themselves than bicycle riders.


***If that was the exact story, then both sides were at fault. It takes quite an effort to anger someone ***who's huffing and puffing away on a bike to get them that angry. Either way, again if we had our own ***lane on that road, however that altercation started may not have happened.

The real solution to the problem is licensing and taxation of bicycles, (in
most jurisdictions bicycles do not pay for license plates and they certainly do
not pay gasoline taxes to contribute to road construction and maintenance)
just as is done with automobiles, with these funds utilized to construct bike
trails on the side of the highways to segregate bicycle traffic from real
traffic. I remember a traffic engineering course many years ago where they taught
that the way to set speed limits was to set out a traffic speed sensing device
and to set the speed limit between the 80th and 90th percentile of the traffic
speeds of the drivers. No politics, green or otherwise back then (which
probably ages me some), just simple engineering and safety.

***You are wrong here. That won't fix anyhting, and it's a near unenforcable law. We should not have ***to pay for gasoline taxes since we don't use any. We do still pay the county through our regular ***income taxes and sales taxes. Now, you do have some valid beef with the cost of incorporating bike ***lanes, but taxes for that can come out of other means. Taxing bicycles will just make the city lose ***money, not gain.


One final point. While many bicycle riders seem to think that automobile
drivers are "out to get them" (Could this be a result of their own recognition of
the adverse effects upon traffic flow of their conveyances and the
frustration that they cause among automobile and truck operators?) when in fact they are
just difficult to see in many ambient conditions. I remember, once again many
years ago, taking a motorcycle safety course where they emphasized utilizing
a head/tail light at all times to increase visibility. Motorcycles have far
better lighting than most bicycles, and they also move at speeds consistent with
surrounding traffic, yet there are many car/truck-motorcycle accidents due to
their limited visibility. The dangers to bicycles are exponentially
increased in comparison to these motorcycles. Sometimes, despite what the bicycle
riders think, it is just a visibility problem and not the malice that is inferred.

***Bike laws emphasize this already, it's just largely unenforced. Right now most places make rear lights ***optional (however a rear reflector is required...I think it should be light required). The front light ***however is mandatory in most states, however bikes are not sold with front lights, and that's where ***the problem lies...people buy a bike with reflectors and think it's fine for night...however if they all ***came with simple krypton bulb lights, then eventually people would start using them. I'm aware of the ***visibility angle, I use the brightest taillights availible to me, and a 10w halogen lamp on front. I like to ***be seen, and make it very clear.


The best solution, although perhaps not to the bicyclists liking, is for them
to stay out of rush hour or moderate and high speed traffic, stay as far to
the right as possible, utilizing road shoulders when possible, pull over and
stop when automotive traffic is building up behind you, ride in single file
only, and perhaps confine your rides to "bike paths" until your taxes can build
more suitable facilities for your use.

***Road shoulders are unsafe, they are not cleaned and often have shrapnel in them. Pulling over and ***stopping is even worse from a safety standpoint. As far as suitable facilites, we already have them, ***share the road.

These practical solutions recognize several factors. First of all, you will
NEVER WIN in a collision with an automobile, pickup truck or 18-wheeler. That
is a simple application of the laws of physics and of nature. You can demand
rights, talk about your freedoms, complain until the cows come home, etc.,
but you do need to recognize that the driver of the average 3/4 ton pickup truck
may not even notice hitting you if he clips you with his rear end due to the
protective values of automotive structure. Secondly, committing assaultive
crimes against drivers for perceived insults and infractions can result in your
arrest at best, and serious injury from an altercation with an individual
exercising his rights of self-defense against your aggression if you are less
fortunate. Just because you may consider your cause to be just doesn't mean that
you will win in practical applications. Staying off of the highways and out of
the way of automotive traffic may be the most effective way of preventing
injury or death while cycling.


***In closing, I have no clue where riders were going 50mph slower than traffic...that would assume an interstate....as far as I know there are few interstates where cyclists are allowed, and those that do, are in such remote areas that it's not even a traffic issue. As far as taxing cyclists, that would hurt everyone since such a measure will be extremely hard to enforce due to the sheer number, and identification factors on each bike. As far as infractions against the rider, most states take points off the rider's driver's license if they have one. As far as taxation, I'll have to think on that...maybe it can be done as a community thing...you wnat bike lanes in your area, you donate towards it or whatever....however I see it more as a both sides chip in to everyone's advantage thing...since if cyclists pay for it, you guys gain from our sweat so to say and we gain from not having cars breathing down our neck, so might as well go 50/50.

Bottom line is, bike lanes, law enforcement, bike lanes, and community awareness. So much crap would be avoided if we had our own lanes, lights and traffic laws were enforced better, and the public understood that cyclists are supposed to be on the road, and not hte sidewalk.

derogis

Hi All,

I didn't read all the thread but surely the post of robncindi... My god....
It is stupid.... and so aggressive..... It has nothing to see with my
commuting experience here in Montreal... I don't feel like it is a war, car
against cycles, we share the road and try respect each other. I do not
say that there is not idiot cyclist and/or idiot care drivers but it is
little minority.

Bockman

"Personal liberty largely consists of the Right to locomotion – to go where and when one pleases – only so far restrained as the Rights of others may make it necessary for the welfare of all other Citizens. The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but the common Right which he has under his Right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Under this Constitutional guarantee one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another's Rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct." - American Jurisprudence 1st, Constitutional Law, Section 329, p. 1135.

LOTS of very good information here: https://sggoodri.home.mindspring.com/...humanpower.htm

Dave

cyclingshane73

The following is a news release from Toronto Police Services. It focuses on the result of a traffic law campaign called, "Operation Impact" which took place over Canadian Thanksgiving long weekend, just this past weeked. I thought the stats were interesting... I'd really like to know the specifics of the cycling related charges, and if a number of charges were given to cyclists who hold a valid drivers licence. I suppose I could e-mail the detectives, however may no get any answers.

2004-10-13

The following News Release has been posted:

Operation Impact – Campaign Update Toronto Police Service Stops Over 9,400 Vehicles

https://www.torontopolice.on.ca/newsr...se.php?id=6299

Traffic Services
416-808-1900

The results of the fourteenth annual 'Operation Impact,' which took place over Thanksgiving weekend, are in. The campaign, which ended at midnight Monday, October 11, 2004, brought together police services from across Canada to raise awareness to ensure safer roads are a public priority.

Toronto Police Service officers stopped 9,412 vehicles and issued 4,709 charges to motorists, cyclists and pedestrians found committing offences. Of the charges laid:

- 72 Drinking and Driving charges were laid,
- 316 Roadside Breathalyzer tests were conducted,
- 292 tickets were issued for seat belt offences,
- 589 tickets were issued for speeding offences,
- 87 pedestrian offences were laid,
- 44 charges were laid against cyclists,
- 49 charges were laid against motorcycles, and
- 3,260 other charges were laid against motorists.

This year to date there have been 40 traffic fatalities within Toronto. All motorists, cyclists and pedestrians are reminded to obey all traffic laws and be diligent when using our city streets; road safety is everyone’s responsibility.

For further information on Operation Impact, please contact Constable Stephen Burns at 416-808-1919 or Sergeant Devin Kealey at 416-808-1926.

https://www.torontopolice.on.ca/newsr...se.php?id=6299

This release will expire on: 2004-11-12

cyclezealot

H23's reply started this thread's reply out on the right foot..Cyclists add to lessening congestion..But, motorists clump us all together as recreational..We must fight that..I use my bike for errands, work commutes, just like a motorist...Many might disagree, I would pay for a reasonable bike fee to assure our rights to the road. It should be based on the fact, we do not damage asphalt as do motorized vehicles. Sort of how they base truck fees based on weight...We lessen the demands on our transportation system...But, road construction should be required to consider cyclists need when roads are built..that makes modifications far cheaper.

d2create

Assumming this person is talking about one lane of traffic in each direction, I agree with EVERYTHING he said. And i think it's cyclists' egos that make the whole car/bicylce situation worse for cyclists. I am fortunate enough to live in an area where all main roads are at least two lanes wide on each side. But when i'm on a small residential road i always make sure that other traffic can pass me if they need to. The road may be my only choice, but i am considerate to cars in hopes that they will be considerate to me when needed. If i see a car purposely wait for me to pass before pulling out I give a thankful wave. When i have to move into a busy intersection I make sure i pedal my a$$ off so they at least see i'm making an effort and then i move over as soon as possible.
I know there are going to be assmunches out there that will treat a cyclist poorly now matter how we treat them back, but for the most part we need to realize that they do have the "bigger guns" and we need to respect the fact that the roads WERE built for them, not us. Be grateful that we are givin the right to share the road with them in the first place. Maybe you'll even save your own butt.

grahamja

There is a good point. Why not use some of that tax money we all pay to create cycling friendly roads? It wouldn't take much...an extra 2 feet (or 3) of shoulder and we're all happy.