And this surprises you?

Yes, it's a fact.

Anyone living in these states is not to be taken seriously.

Others who are enlightened, well, you know where they choose to live.

:roflmao:

I always take cyclists in these states seriously when they have opinions on riding in Portland, OR. After all, since they obviously ride on the streets, roads, and highways here where I do every day, they must know what they're talking about. What I'd really like to know is where they get such excellent deals on airfare.

Yes, since Portland still has such bike unfriendly laws.

And that is what I do not understand, how is it possible that such “stay out of our way laws” are still on the books in such a bike friendly Mecca as Portland. Since Portland supports such “bike friendly” bike lanes and since Portland declares itself bike friendly, then certainly the city would remove the bike unfriendly mandatory use and stay right laws.

I and many VC’ers (including JF) believe that mandatory use and stay right laws should not be on the books and that the slow moving vehicle laws that apply to all vehicles are the laws that should also apply to cyclist. Same roads, same laws, same rights, same responsibilities.

The city has nothing to say about it. They are state laws.


And virtually every bicyclist I know agrees. I've never seen anyone on bike forums say anything in support of mandatory stay right laws. The lie that anyone who isn't a foamingatthemouthbikelanehater favors mandatory stay-out-of-the-way laws is either a strawman the VC-ists have created, or it's simply a misconception VC-ists have as a result of believing their own propaganda.

We can break it down further within each state. In Iowa, for example, anyone from near Mechanicsville, Springdale, Marshalltown, Jefferson or Galva can be trusted. I don't know that we can trust anybody else from Iowa.

I think the city would remove the bike lane law, were it a city law. It's a state law, and it's supported by the kinds of legislators who feel we should all be on the sidewalk all the time, period. It's certainly not on the agenda this legislative session, and even if it's on the agenda next biennium, I'm not sure if it would pass. Like many state governments, there are other political undercurrents that are completely unrelated to cycling. Sometimes they co-opt issues unrelated to what they're really squabbling about in the first place, and this mandatory bike lane law definitely falls into that category.

As to the "far right as practicable" law, I think getting rid of the bike lane law in this state would be more politically acceptable at this point in time. Since I don't think that is going to happen anytime soon, I'm not sure how feasable a campaign to get rid of the "far right as practicable" law would be.

Just because one city in Portland would be happy to see the laws change does not mean the rest of the state would support it. The general trend in Oregon is that if Portlanders would like to see something happen, that it reason enough for the rest of the state to oppose it. Politics. <sigh>

Oh, I see now, just like the foamingatthemouthVChaters claim that VC'ers are anti-facilities rather than simply opposed to unsafe facilities.

Any city officials openly push for the law removal?

All this reinforces my feeling that we all know how to ride wherever we have to, but it's our preferences that differ. The reasons behind those preferences also vary.

Sometimes, our discontent with those who are discontented with our discontent causes more discontent.

I'm content about that, I think...

We who are not hard-core VCers don't like mandatory use laws any more than anybody else. We want choices, not bans and directives, whether they come from the government or from VCers.

If that is the case, then how did we end up with these mandatory use laws?

Because politicians with an agenda bury then in other bills and get then through because it's easier for the other pols to let it slide than to start over with their original bill.:(

Er, I mean I'm "discontent."

Ach. :p

Again, very well put.

Is that how we also got bike lanes?

So you prefer lawlessness?

We got bike lanes because a sufficient portion of the population wanted them. Live with it.....democracy in action pal! As I said before, I am centrist in position, neither for nor against VC or bike lanes, I use both concepts. If there is a bike path or lane, I'll use it if it is more convenient or safer, or I'll road ride, either one! It just depends on circumstance. Now.....quit biting my ankles!;)

Here's some advice on how to ride properly in a lawful manner (emphasis added):

"Indeed, the standard advice to lawful, competent cyclists is to ride properly by ignoring the presence of the bicycle-lane stripe. Depending on the jurisdiction, this may involve disobeying the law..." - John Forester

http://www.johnforester.com/Articles...sportation.htm

:roflmao:

Thank you, Tom, for putting it far more succinctly than I did.

Not at present. Oregon politics requires you to pick your battles and keep silent about any further long range goals. I imagine other states operate in similar fashion. This legislative session the drive is for a 3 foot passing law, clarifying the brake law to make sure fixies are legal, legalizing Idaho-style stops, and doing something about how sober motorists who kill cyclists face a more serious consequence than a mere $242 fine when they are at fault.

Usually about 6 months before a legislative session begins is when they start deciding what to push through. In case you wondered, "they" usually consist of advocacy organizations, local government, interested private citizens, and sometimes even interested business concerns.

progressive, Donna!

and the rabidly anti-infrastructure VC continue to complain about Oregon.....

So we got bike lanes because of democracy and the population wanted them; but we got mandatory use laws because of evil politicians with a hidden agenda?

OK, I agree with that and those are all good projects, but I suspect that the mandatory use laws have been around a lot longer than the other concerns, yet the mandatory use law opposition always gets pushed to the side. In Hawaii, it got push aside for a mandatory helmet law.

Unfortunately, rider bills are another aspect of democracy. Deal with it or be an agent of change and lobby the politicians rather than railing on me about it. I'm not a politician, I'm a College student. As I said, quit ankle biting.:rolleyes: