I read the previous thread about bikes and it upset me so much I had to start this. I rode a bicycle for over 10yrs in Chicago & suburbs. I was hit only once from a distracted driver in which I was awarded $12,000. When you have a 2000+ pound car you have a responsibility to watch for people on bikes. When I rode, I wore reflective clothing and a very bright headlight/tailight. For those who want to "regulate" bicycles, how the heck would you enforce it??
Bicycles Rights On The Roadway.....
- Thread starter qwerty1234
- Start date
- Status
Over here in Clovis California bicycles are already regulated. They want you to have a front light and a tail light if you're gonna be riding at night. I don't think it's a bad idea considering on a couple of occasions, I was barely able to see a person wearing all black clothing on a black painted bike with no reflectors.
CT, at the time I had no job so yes it was worth it. The lady who hit me admitted to talking on a cell phone and running me over. I was in the hospital for 3 days with various issues.
I can't speak about the geography of other cities, but when I do bicycle here, which is rather infrequently, I deliberately choose routes to get me off the highly travelled roads, sticking to quieter commercial and residential areas. Heck, that's good practice in a car, too.
I'll tell you one thing I'm guilty of, I don't always check the right side if I'm making a right turn onto the street when pulling out of a parking lot. Some people riding their bikes like to ride down the sidewalk going against the flow of traffic; that's a bad idea.
Bicycles have the same rights as cars. Which is to say, sometimes they have right of way and sometimes the other vehicle does. The law does not say the car is alawys responsible for your safety. You're responsible for yourself.
There's a concept called defensive driving that all motorists and bicyclists should practice.
This is coming from someone who's ridden thousands of miles on a bike and never had an accident
There's a concept called defensive driving that all motorists and bicyclists should practice.
This is coming from someone who's ridden thousands of miles on a bike and never had an accident
Here in Chicago we have dedicated bike lanes. Outside Portland (I think) we are the most bike friendly. We aren't allowed on I-55 or I-290. I currently have a $500 bike and a $2000 Honda Civic. I'm back to riding the bike.
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2014
- Messages
- 1,187
I do not ride bicycles on the roadway; but I am a former State Certified Motorcycle Instructor. CT8 is correct. Ride like you have no rights.
You may have the right of way, witnesses that the other driver is wrong, so what if a policeman is a witness? Unfortunately, the laws of physics apply when two objects attempt to take up the same space; and there is no winning for a bicycle or motorcycle.
Why do we even ride at all? Answer: Because it's FUN. Is it possible to ride a bicycle/motorcycle safely? Answer per the State Curriculum I was furnished: NO. It is not possible to ride safely. It IS possible to ride defensively to minimize risk.
I would say that the survival skills I learned on a motorcycle have made me a better driver. ALWAYS look as far ahead as you can. What do you see? 4 lanes of brake lights? Anticipate other driver's moves, and stay clear of them.
I don't know why, some people turn very primitive behind the wheel of a vehicle. If you don't weigh enough to damage/hurt them; you do not exist in their brain.
Riding a motorcycle on the highway scares the **** out of me, and I've been riding since I was a teenager without an accident. I think maybe God gave us a sense of fear to keep us healthy.
I told every class I ever had; I don't care how long you've been riding, what make or value your bike has, whose name the title is in; etc. Once you throw your leg over that seat and hit the road, you don't own that bike; that bike owns you.
State Curriculum said that 70% of motorcycle fatalities are within 6 months of starting to ride. If you can live longer than 6 months riding, your odds of survival increase exponentially.
I guess to answer your question, I do not expect you to like this... I see no need to regulate bikes at all. You have the freedom to put your life at risk. I've seen the way they treat me on a motorcycle, and I can out-accelerate, out handle and out brake anything on 4 wheels on the road.
Anybody dumb enough to ride a bicycle in automobile traffic is asking to be eliminated from the gene pool because the people driving the cars aren't even going to skin their knees when they crush your rib cage.
If you want a safe place to ride a bicycle, it ISN'T someplace where the only thing between you and moving cars is a white line. Go find a park, bike path, residential street or a desert. And I could give a **** less what the law is. It's your life.
You may have the right of way, witnesses that the other driver is wrong, so what if a policeman is a witness? Unfortunately, the laws of physics apply when two objects attempt to take up the same space; and there is no winning for a bicycle or motorcycle.
Why do we even ride at all? Answer: Because it's FUN. Is it possible to ride a bicycle/motorcycle safely? Answer per the State Curriculum I was furnished: NO. It is not possible to ride safely. It IS possible to ride defensively to minimize risk.
I would say that the survival skills I learned on a motorcycle have made me a better driver. ALWAYS look as far ahead as you can. What do you see? 4 lanes of brake lights? Anticipate other driver's moves, and stay clear of them.
I don't know why, some people turn very primitive behind the wheel of a vehicle. If you don't weigh enough to damage/hurt them; you do not exist in their brain.
Riding a motorcycle on the highway scares the **** out of me, and I've been riding since I was a teenager without an accident. I think maybe God gave us a sense of fear to keep us healthy.
I told every class I ever had; I don't care how long you've been riding, what make or value your bike has, whose name the title is in; etc. Once you throw your leg over that seat and hit the road, you don't own that bike; that bike owns you.
State Curriculum said that 70% of motorcycle fatalities are within 6 months of starting to ride. If you can live longer than 6 months riding, your odds of survival increase exponentially.
I guess to answer your question, I do not expect you to like this... I see no need to regulate bikes at all. You have the freedom to put your life at risk. I've seen the way they treat me on a motorcycle, and I can out-accelerate, out handle and out brake anything on 4 wheels on the road.
Anybody dumb enough to ride a bicycle in automobile traffic is asking to be eliminated from the gene pool because the people driving the cars aren't even going to skin their knees when they crush your rib cage.
If you want a safe place to ride a bicycle, it ISN'T someplace where the only thing between you and moving cars is a white line. Go find a park, bike path, residential street or a desert. And I could give a **** less what the law is. It's your life.
Originally Posted By: qwerty1234
Here in Chicago we have dedicated bike lanes.
We have dedicated bike lanes too, but sometimes the city makes a 4-lane road into a 2-lane road just so they can have 2 bike lanes going in each direction (4 bike lanes total). Guess who's fault it is when traffic is backed up because I'm driving 30MPH down the street ? Yeah, people blame me for it...
Here in Chicago we have dedicated bike lanes.
We have dedicated bike lanes too, but sometimes the city makes a 4-lane road into a 2-lane road just so they can have 2 bike lanes going in each direction (4 bike lanes total). Guess who's fault it is when traffic is backed up because I'm driving 30MPH down the street ? Yeah, people blame me for it...
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
I'll tell you one thing I'm guilty of, I don't always check the right side if I'm making a right turn onto the street when pulling out of a parking lot. Some people riding their bikes like to ride down the sidewalk going against the flow of traffic; that's a bad idea.
I've been there. I once pulled out of a lot onto a divided highway. Why look right? Some guy was rolling down the sidewalk on his stolen Huffy and flew over my hood. He was fine, his front rim was not. I hope to think we both learned a valuable lesson that day.
I'll tell you one thing I'm guilty of, I don't always check the right side if I'm making a right turn onto the street when pulling out of a parking lot. Some people riding their bikes like to ride down the sidewalk going against the flow of traffic; that's a bad idea.
I've been there. I once pulled out of a lot onto a divided highway. Why look right? Some guy was rolling down the sidewalk on his stolen Huffy and flew over my hood. He was fine, his front rim was not. I hope to think we both learned a valuable lesson that day.
Originally Posted By: qwerty1234
For those who want to "regulate" bicycles, how the heck would you enforce it??
Easy.
Every driving age adult who wishes to ‘commute’ with a bicycle must purchase a permit-- not a license endorsement-- from their local municipality which helps to pay for infrastructure. (And before you refer to gasoline tax paying for roads by the bicyclist who journeys long distances via car… let’s just say there are great amounts spent on ‘alternative transportation’ that the average American does not consume, therefore, the bicyclists are more or less receiving a ‘free ride.’ Remember, a percentage of gasoline tax is sent from state governments to the Federal Government and then doled back to the states pending whatever projects meet their fantasy or vision. And to certain degree city projects can also be granted Federal funds… which Portland, OR, certainly receives their fair share of ,or if you will pardon me, maybe their unfair share, to be sure.) A 'cycling permit' could be granted at time of driver's education completion or a refresher course for post-license operators could be taken with those wanting to gain their motorcycle endorsement. Cyclist should also be required to carry bicycle insurance which could be a declaration associated with auto or home or umbrella depending on how the actuary or underwriters see things.
Those under legal ‘driving’ age are exempt from requirements of permitting. Driving age adults and every other citizen is exempt from the permit if cycling within a 1 mile radius of their listed residence. That is- they would not be fined for not having a permit if found responsible for violating traffic law but would be liable for suit or infraction fines if in the stated distance.
If hypothetical cyclist is outside of the ‘one mile radius’ without permit + insurance and stopped for a traffic violation, then the infraction penalty is due along with an immediate $1,000 (or X determined by the local government) fine for lack of permit or insurance or both and automatic revocation of a legal cycling permit for a specified period of time per local code.
Quite easy to enforce as well. The local municipality simply charges a fee for the permit to cover additional staffing cost, if needed for permit acquisition, plus whatever margin they desire and reports legality to the insurance agencies. Local law enforcement verifies insurance and permitting via wifi in their patrol vehicles on the insurance company’s website during an infraction. Thus, most costs associated with enforcement and legal cycling is born upon the users of such transportation and not the population that does not.
Problem solved.
For those who want to "regulate" bicycles, how the heck would you enforce it??
Easy.
Every driving age adult who wishes to ‘commute’ with a bicycle must purchase a permit-- not a license endorsement-- from their local municipality which helps to pay for infrastructure. (And before you refer to gasoline tax paying for roads by the bicyclist who journeys long distances via car… let’s just say there are great amounts spent on ‘alternative transportation’ that the average American does not consume, therefore, the bicyclists are more or less receiving a ‘free ride.’ Remember, a percentage of gasoline tax is sent from state governments to the Federal Government and then doled back to the states pending whatever projects meet their fantasy or vision. And to certain degree city projects can also be granted Federal funds… which Portland, OR, certainly receives their fair share of ,or if you will pardon me, maybe their unfair share, to be sure.) A 'cycling permit' could be granted at time of driver's education completion or a refresher course for post-license operators could be taken with those wanting to gain their motorcycle endorsement. Cyclist should also be required to carry bicycle insurance which could be a declaration associated with auto or home or umbrella depending on how the actuary or underwriters see things.
Those under legal ‘driving’ age are exempt from requirements of permitting. Driving age adults and every other citizen is exempt from the permit if cycling within a 1 mile radius of their listed residence. That is- they would not be fined for not having a permit if found responsible for violating traffic law but would be liable for suit or infraction fines if in the stated distance.
If hypothetical cyclist is outside of the ‘one mile radius’ without permit + insurance and stopped for a traffic violation, then the infraction penalty is due along with an immediate $1,000 (or X determined by the local government) fine for lack of permit or insurance or both and automatic revocation of a legal cycling permit for a specified period of time per local code.
Quite easy to enforce as well. The local municipality simply charges a fee for the permit to cover additional staffing cost, if needed for permit acquisition, plus whatever margin they desire and reports legality to the insurance agencies. Local law enforcement verifies insurance and permitting via wifi in their patrol vehicles on the insurance company’s website during an infraction. Thus, most costs associated with enforcement and legal cycling is born upon the users of such transportation and not the population that does not.
Problem solved.
Originally Posted By: qwerty1234
I read the previous thread about bikes and it upset me so much I had to start this. I rode a bicycle for over 10yrs in Chicago & suburbs. I was hit only once from a distracted driver in which I was awarded $12,000. When you have a 2000+ pound car you have a responsibility to watch for people on bikes. When I rode, I wore reflective clothing and a very bright headlight/tailight. For those who want to "regulate" bicycles, how the heck would you enforce it??
Having the entitled mindset that you do, that people should and must see you on your bike makes you apart of the problem. Visibility in a car or truck is much worse than on a bicycle. That is not disputable, it is a fact. As a courtesy to drivers I don't complicated their day by being somewhere I shouldn't on something that offers me no protection.
I read the previous thread about bikes and it upset me so much I had to start this. I rode a bicycle for over 10yrs in Chicago & suburbs. I was hit only once from a distracted driver in which I was awarded $12,000. When you have a 2000+ pound car you have a responsibility to watch for people on bikes. When I rode, I wore reflective clothing and a very bright headlight/tailight. For those who want to "regulate" bicycles, how the heck would you enforce it??
Having the entitled mindset that you do, that people should and must see you on your bike makes you apart of the problem. Visibility in a car or truck is much worse than on a bicycle. That is not disputable, it is a fact. As a courtesy to drivers I don't complicated their day by being somewhere I shouldn't on something that offers me no protection.
gen, you can't be serious in large urban cities are you? You think NYC, Chicago, Miami, Baltimore, ect..., should regulate every bike rider? I live on the West side of Chicago & to think that they would ticket me riding a bike home is laughable.
Originally Posted By: genynnc
Originally Posted By: qwerty1234
For those who want to "regulate" bicycles, how the heck would you enforce it??
Easy.
Every driving age adult who wishes to ‘commute’ with a bicycle must purchase a permit-- not a license endorsement-- from their local municipality which helps to pay for infrastructure. (And before you refer to gasoline tax paying for roads by the bicyclist who journeys long distances via car… let’s just say there are great amounts spent on ‘alternative transportation’ that the average American does not consume, therefore, the bicyclists are more or less receiving a ‘free ride.’ Remember, a percentage of gasoline tax is sent from state governments to the Federal Government and then doled back to the states pending whatever projects meet their fantasy or vision. And to certain degree city projects can also be granted Federal funds… which Portland, OR, certainly receives their fair share of ,or if you will pardon me, maybe their unfair share, to be sure.) A 'cycling permit' could be granted at time of driver's education completion or a refresher course for post-license operators could be taken with those wanting to gain their motorcycle endorsement. Cyclist should also be required to carry bicycle insurance which could be a declaration associated with auto or home or umbrella depending on how the actuary or underwriters see things.
Those under legal ‘driving’ age are exempt from requirements of permitting. Driving age adults and every other citizen is exempt from the permit if cycling within a 1 mile radius of their listed residence. That is- they would not be fined for not having a permit if found responsible for violating traffic law but would be liable for suit or infraction fines if in the stated distance.
If hypothetical cyclist is outside of the ‘one mile radius’ without permit + insurance and stopped for a traffic violation, then the infraction penalty is due along with an immediate $1,000 (or X determined by the local government) fine for lack of permit or insurance or both and automatic revocation of a legal cycling permit for a specified period of time per local code.
Quite easy to enforce as well. The local municipality simply charges a fee for the permit to cover additional staffing cost, if needed for permit acquisition, plus whatever margin they desire and reports legality to the insurance agencies. Local law enforcement verifies insurance and permitting via wifi in their patrol vehicles on the insurance company’s website during an infraction. Thus, most costs associated with enforcement and legal cycling is born upon the users of such transportation and not the population that does not.
Problem solved.
Maybe they should require riders carry insurance, so when they hit a car or kill a pedestrian they are covered.
Originally Posted By: qwerty1234
For those who want to "regulate" bicycles, how the heck would you enforce it??
Easy.
Every driving age adult who wishes to ‘commute’ with a bicycle must purchase a permit-- not a license endorsement-- from their local municipality which helps to pay for infrastructure. (And before you refer to gasoline tax paying for roads by the bicyclist who journeys long distances via car… let’s just say there are great amounts spent on ‘alternative transportation’ that the average American does not consume, therefore, the bicyclists are more or less receiving a ‘free ride.’ Remember, a percentage of gasoline tax is sent from state governments to the Federal Government and then doled back to the states pending whatever projects meet their fantasy or vision. And to certain degree city projects can also be granted Federal funds… which Portland, OR, certainly receives their fair share of ,or if you will pardon me, maybe their unfair share, to be sure.) A 'cycling permit' could be granted at time of driver's education completion or a refresher course for post-license operators could be taken with those wanting to gain their motorcycle endorsement. Cyclist should also be required to carry bicycle insurance which could be a declaration associated with auto or home or umbrella depending on how the actuary or underwriters see things.
Those under legal ‘driving’ age are exempt from requirements of permitting. Driving age adults and every other citizen is exempt from the permit if cycling within a 1 mile radius of their listed residence. That is- they would not be fined for not having a permit if found responsible for violating traffic law but would be liable for suit or infraction fines if in the stated distance.
If hypothetical cyclist is outside of the ‘one mile radius’ without permit + insurance and stopped for a traffic violation, then the infraction penalty is due along with an immediate $1,000 (or X determined by the local government) fine for lack of permit or insurance or both and automatic revocation of a legal cycling permit for a specified period of time per local code.
Quite easy to enforce as well. The local municipality simply charges a fee for the permit to cover additional staffing cost, if needed for permit acquisition, plus whatever margin they desire and reports legality to the insurance agencies. Local law enforcement verifies insurance and permitting via wifi in their patrol vehicles on the insurance company’s website during an infraction. Thus, most costs associated with enforcement and legal cycling is born upon the users of such transportation and not the population that does not.
Problem solved.
Maybe they should require riders carry insurance, so when they hit a car or kill a pedestrian they are covered.
Originally Posted By: qwerty1234
I read the previous thread about bikes and it upset me so much I had to start this. I rode a bicycle for over 10yrs in Chicago & suburbs. I was hit only once from a distracted driver in which I was awarded $12,000. When you have a 2000+ pound car you have a responsibility to watch for people on bikes. When I rode, I wore reflective clothing and a very bright headlight/tailight. For those who want to "regulate" bicycles, how the heck would you enforce it??
Were you riding at night around the city?
I read the previous thread about bikes and it upset me so much I had to start this. I rode a bicycle for over 10yrs in Chicago & suburbs. I was hit only once from a distracted driver in which I was awarded $12,000. When you have a 2000+ pound car you have a responsibility to watch for people on bikes. When I rode, I wore reflective clothing and a very bright headlight/tailight. For those who want to "regulate" bicycles, how the heck would you enforce it??
Were you riding at night around the city?
Were you riding at night around the city? [/quote]
Yes, and in the "big city" like Chicago it's okay to be out past 1AM. Better I bike than drive.
Yes, and in the "big city" like Chicago it's okay to be out past 1AM. Better I bike than drive.
Last edited:
I do typically ride as if I had no right to the road. I do get in the correct lane for a left, or if it's busy, make an alternate plan. I don't ride next to other cyclists, except to pass them, and only then when there isn't traffic. The only times I'll get 'entitled' are in places that doing so make it dangerous for me to act otherwise.
I do usually avoid holiday traffic, and definitely avoid rush hour, even out here in the middle of nowhere. Yet, simply being on the road draws yelling, throwing objects, games of chicken, and clouds of diesel smoke from time to time. For that matter, I've seen this done to people walking on the grass by the shoulder. Talk about entitlement...
For all the drivers that need to play vigilante, and gripe about all the laws that cyclists are breaking, where are you for these things done out of the blue ?
What is it with drivers and the hate towards cyclists ? The roads are shared, using them requires all your attention, whether cycling, walking or driving. If that is too hard to do, you shouldn't be using it. If you don't like the law, get it changed, and get officials to enforce it.
I do usually avoid holiday traffic, and definitely avoid rush hour, even out here in the middle of nowhere. Yet, simply being on the road draws yelling, throwing objects, games of chicken, and clouds of diesel smoke from time to time. For that matter, I've seen this done to people walking on the grass by the shoulder. Talk about entitlement...
For all the drivers that need to play vigilante, and gripe about all the laws that cyclists are breaking, where are you for these things done out of the blue ?
What is it with drivers and the hate towards cyclists ? The roads are shared, using them requires all your attention, whether cycling, walking or driving. If that is too hard to do, you shouldn't be using it. If you don't like the law, get it changed, and get officials to enforce it.
- Status
