Bicycles do not belong on the roadways!

← Back to Forums


Anonymous #

I don’t expect you to have an answer for why cyclists get special privileges over lawn tractors or golf carts… that’s up to the lawyers and law enforcement.

“Pennsylvania law holds bicycles to the same rules as automobiles, along with a few supplemental rules specific only to bikes. The laws governing bicycles are outlined in Title 75 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes. Obey Pennsylvania’s regular vehicle laws as well as its bicycle laws to ensure your safety and the safety of fellow travelers.”

If you don’t stop at stop signs it is dangerous and you are breaking the law (I believe the new PA law states that bicycles are now considered vehicles). If you DO stop then it takes extra effort and time to cross and can be dangerous. I get it.

I don’t drive on train tracks but I am allowed to cross them at my own risk. Kind of the same thing. Think about it.


Drewbacca
Participant
#

” I try to get around cyclists as soon as possible to eliminate such a hazard and distraction.”

THAT, is just subjective opinion. Once in a while, you probably even go over the speed limit to make such a pass; that’s no different than a cyclist rolling through the occasional stop sign. I’m not defending the practice, but if I’m spinning along at 5-10mph, a full stop is not always necessary. It depends on the intersection, road conditions, my speed, etc. It’s a judgement call and a subjective opinion on the part of the cyclist.

Having a licence doesn’t change much. I once had an idiot pass me on a motorcycle at 80+ mph on the shoulder. I know his speed b/c I was driving at close to 70mph myself. Sometimes, often, people do stupid things. Does having a licence change that? Most of us already drive in addition to cycling. We are better drivers because we cycle; most of us already have a license.

Cyclists are a hazard? It sounds like anything that inconveniences you meets the criteria for a “hazard.” Well, if you want your own private road where you set the rules, best to start saving some money. Those of us who live in a society recognize that those who inconvenience us have just as much of a right to the space in question. Again, if you want to talk trash on some of the apparent negative attributes of cycling… lets talk about the true cost of driving a car, starting with the FREE parking that the city provides along the shoulder! Then we can discuss the TRUE cost of gasoline after removing all the hidden subsidies for gasoline consumption in this country. There’s no such thing as a one-sided argument and every position has its cons.


StuInMcCandless
Participant
#

When we are talking about pedestrians, are we talking about jaywalking (which is illegal) or merely walking from Point A to Point B along the side of the road? I do far more of the latter than cycling, usually in the dark, often in rotten weather, often enough when piles of snow along the roadway push me out into the driving lane. Yes, I am a hazard, but I also have a legal right to be there. I try as best I can to jump out of the driving lane into the nearest snowbank, or run or dive for a driveway, so as to arrive in one piece.

You, as a driver, must anticipate road hazards, be they pedestrians, cyclists, deer, downed branches, the mailman, whatever. Our being there is not an issue to be discussed. Your respect of the rules of the road, is.

Go back to that link I posted above, and pay particular attention to 3301(a)(2) and 3307(b)(1).


stefb
Participant
#

If this guy is going to fail to engage in a conversation, then this thread should be locked. He said that he isn’t going to change his mind. we aren’t going to Change his mind. Everyone’s responses are intelligent but he doesn’t want to her them. We all know the things we are telling him. Please consider locking this thread? There is no constructive conversation when someone doesn’t want to listen.


Anonymous #

“I don’t expect you to have an answer for why cyclists get special privileges over lawn tractors or golf carts… that’s up to the lawyers and law enforcement.”

Well, if your attitude is that the law is the law which seems to be the source of frustration at stops, then we’re not talking special privileges, we’re talking law.

Conversely, if we’re talking about what SHOULD be, I think there are plenty of neighborhood streets golf carts could be allowed on. You see it a lot in Florida. But I want something with bumpers once you’re going more than 15mph with the added weight of an engine. My 2c.

“If you don’t stop at stop signs it is dangerous and you are breaking the law (I believe the new PA law states that bicycles are now considered vehicles). If you DO stop then it takes extra effort and time to cross and can be dangerous. I get it.”

Well, neither should be dangerous as long as the bike exercises caution when entering the intersection. But that requires car drivers keeping calm and giving the bicyclist enough space. And there’s plenty of law to support this too, starting with the 4 foot rule but really it’s just common sense.

“I don’t drive on train tracks but I am allowed to cross them at my own risk. Kind of the same thing. Think about it.”

I’m loosing the analogy here. If you want to clarify it might be interesting.


edmonds59
Participant
#

“Pennsylvania law holds bicycles to the same rules as automobiles, along with a few supplemental rules specific only to bikes. The laws governing bicycles are outlined in Title 75 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes. Obey Pennsylvania’s regular vehicle laws as well as its bicycle laws to ensure your safety and the safety of fellow travelers.”

100% correct sir. Despite the illogic of having a 200 to 300 lb bike/rider held to the same standards as 4,000 to 5,000 lb potential deadly weapon, most folks in this group will entirely agree, and follow those laws. On that issue you will be largely preaching to the choir. And while “cyclists” are not some monolithic community that meets in basements where we all decide which law to break that week, this group (and others) does/do take steps to educate others in appropriate road behaviour. Some people don’t follow the laws, some ride bikes.

Bottom line, the number of cyclists using the roads is going to continue to increase. Please drive carefully, that cyclist that annoys you so is someones son, daughter, brother, sister, father mother, aunt, uncle, or grandparent.


ajbooth
Participant
#

I’m with StefB on this one. The thread should be locked–these are the same arguments that we get into with the morons who post comments after the newspaper articles on the web. Bringing the post here, but then not being open to reasonable and intelligent discussion means this guy is a troll, and should be dismissed as such.


jonawebb
Participant
#

Why lock the thread? Ignore it and it will drop away. It’s not like the guy is posting 50x a day or anything like that.


Anonymous #

I would echo the ‘start riding and it will change your outlook’.

Cycling makes an immense amount of sense to me, and it didn’t all come together until I started riding. It changes the way you look at many things in your life, and I would highly recommend giving it a shot.

I think we’re beating a dead horse trying to justify it with laws and statutes. Just try it and even if you absolutely hate it, I’m almost certain you will be better off for it.


edmonds59
Participant
#

frfx has not attacked anyone on the board, he’s stated an opinion (he just happens to be wrong :)). I don’t see any reason to quash discussion or aggressively censor just because the thing has been hashed and re-hashed before.

I have come to the realization that a lot of people watch the board for information, learning, who never actually comment. Folks who are new cyclists are going to encounter frfx-y types occasionally. I think it’s an example of – here’s what you’re going to run into, and here’s how you do that. Knowing how to respond to this type of thing is no less valuable than learning how to change a flat, or select gearing.

(edit; anyway, just because someone says their mind won’t be changed, doesn’t make it so. Chipping at the hard soil of prejudgement and sowing the seeds of doubt is fun!)


Anonymous #

By posting here, and following up we know that he’s willing to engage. Why should we be the ones to step away? It would be one thing if it were cut/paste spam but I don’t see that here.

Even if he did make some rather telling choices in verbiage if he’s talking and not racking up GTA points it’s all to the good.

This is an opportunity people, don’t shut it down.


helen s
Participant
#

Last night on the Simpsons, Moe pulled out a shotgun and stated it was a no acronym bar (then someone said “OK”).

What are GTA points? Greater Theatricals Anonymous? Good Times, All?


Anonymous #

Grand Theft Auto.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Theft_Auto_(series)

its super fun to play. :D


Drewbacca
Participant
#

I’m with edmonds and byogman on this. While there is at least some level of trolling in the OP’s posts, he is engaging in conversation; I dare say, he’s even being at least somewhat constructive “I understand the commuting and I applaud the effort.” Of course, this is easily lost in light of calling us “crybabies” and “hazards.” I’d say he’s being a good sport in light of the personal info that was posted (just b/c it’s publicly available doesn’t make it fair game, imho).

Besides, this site is searchable. Mike may not be willing to consider our arguments (and who’s to say that he won’t?)… but, others might stumble on this thread and gain from it. This type of trolling hardly necessitates closing a thread; if anything, suggesting as much is only going to confirm his accusation of being cry-babys. If you feel that participating in this discussion is a waste of your time, no one is forcing you to follow it or contribute to it.


Anonymous #

Gah, I’m a victim of my own game!

Grand theft auto. You drive over pedestrians and get points. Really, you drive over anything and get points, the worse the better.

I need to hesitate truncating for understanding.


StuInMcCandless
Participant
#

The OP lives in the same general part of town I do, and thus faces the same challenges to transportation cycling as I do.

Maybe that’s a useful thought in & of itself: the concept of “transportational cycling”, i.e., I am not riding for fun, I am riding to get from Here to There. In the not-close-in suburbs, it is somewhat heretical to use Anything But The Car to get around. (Regular readers will note that this is the name of my blog.

I say that to say this: While Mike is not likely ever to get on a bicycle, no matter what prodding and invitations we proffer, if he or anyone physically close to him ever does, he is going to run into what I run into every time I pull out of my own driveway: An infrastructure built around and for the automobile.

To some extent, Mike is right; yes, it is difficult to learn how to drive in a multi-modal community. The roads were built for cars, and 10 miles out into the ‘burbs, they’re not likely ever to change. People like me are a rarity, probably 1 in 1,000 — possibly 1 in 10,000 — who seriously try NOT to use a car to do routine transportation.

Mike, if you’re paying attention still, I used to own four cars. Twenty years ago, I made a conscious decision to downsize the fleet to one, and to try to use buses and bicycles to get around. In that time, I saved $100,000+ in transportation costs. That’s real money. Money I used to give my family a better standard of living, money I used to put myself through grad school, money I used to pay off my mortgage early.

That also means I am occasionally on a bicycle riding around the North Hills, “getting in your way”. Lifestyle choices, man.


Swalfoort
Participant
#

I am glad that the original poster has come back and is following this thread. He is clearly being educated in the process.

He is right. Bicycles are considered vehicles under the PA Code. However, neither bicycles nor horses (also a vehicle per PA Code) are defined as “motor vehicles.” As vehicles, cyclists and horse operators are required to obey the rules of the road – same as motor vehicles – other than some special provisions that have been referenced elsewhere in this thread.

Note that in his original statement, the poster raised the question of why he cannot drive his golf cart or ATV on local roadways, if cyclists can operate their bikes on those same roadways. That goes to the definition of vehicle and motor vehicle. In order to be titled in PA, a motor vehicle must meet certain criteria for lighting, braking, safety equipment, etc. ATVs and golf carts do not meet those standards (neither do motorized stand up scooters, by the way). Therefore, they cannot be operated on the roadways in Pennsylvania, except in very certain circumstances. Snowmobiles are also prohibited from using public roadways in PA, in part at least because they are registered and titled by DCNR, not by PennDOT. Note that the operation of a titled and registered vehicles on PA roads requires a statement of financial responsibility, a license, insurance, etc.

If the original poster has an issue with what TYPES of vehicles are permitted to legally use Pennsylvania roadways, Cburch is correct — he should contact his local legislators. The section of the PA Code he should reference in Chapter 75.

If he has a problem with the manner in which a vehicle (motorized or otherwise) is being operated, he should contact local law enforcement and request enhanced traffic monitoring and control.

If he has a gripe about cyclists in general, he is welcome to his opiniopn. We all have opinions and that is our right as Americans. He has chosen to share that opinion in a community where I suspect he knows there will be some disagreement. He is either looking to be educated, or looking to stir up some emotion. On the first, he’s been educated by knowledgable people on this board. On the second, well, you will win more friends with honey……

Welcome, Mike. We may never win you over to the point of making “friends” with you, but hopefully we can come to an agreement as to who has a right to use local roadway, and why; and the simple fact that all users are supposed to obey all traffic laws, but many don’t.


Anonymous #

“I don’t drive on train tracks but I am allowed to cross them at my own risk. Kind of the same thing. Think about it.”

I’m loosing the analogy here. If you want to clarify it might be interesting.

The point is that I could drive down the rail road tracks made for trains but I will probably loose in an accident with a train. After all I should stick to the roads that were made for cars.

Every time a cyclist is killed or hurt on the roadways you guys are up in arms(as you should be). Now look at the new PA law that says that autos have to give a 4′ space and ARE allowed to cross the double yellow line in order to do so. To me this sounds like a “band aid” rather than the solution (the solution would be to remove “pedacycles” from the roadways all together). I know I ruffled feathers but hopefully this makes you think about the other side of the coin. I’m thinking that cyclists have the attitude that “we have the right to the road and autos have to get out of my way” rather than you are a guest and should assume most of the risk.

Out of curiosity (and I don’t know the answer to this) how often are cyclists pulled over for blowing through a stop sign, not signaling, speeding or other violations?


Anonymous #

“Out of curiosity (and I don’t know the answer to this) how often are cyclists pulled over for blowing through a stop sign, not signaling, speeding or other violations?”

I feel like it’s very rare, it’s never happened to me, though I am quite cautious. Speeding would be an interesting one, I suppose the only place we would get pulled over is school zones.

The most illegal thing I do is ride in the bus lane. But I never impede the progress of buses and make sure to never pass them on the right. The police do not seem to care about this.


jonawebb
Participant
#

Yeah, here in America we’ve got lots of laws, but a lot of them don’t get enforced. It’s a tradition that runs right back to the Puritans — they wanted to create their ideal society, with laws against working on Sunday, etc; but there were lots of folks who wanted to live out in the woods someplace and follow their own laws. So we still have those ideas around today.

It’s not like that everywhere — in places like Germany, I understand, they maybe have fewer laws (e.g., it’s OK to sunbathe topless) but those they have do get enforced (cycle the wrong way up a one-way street and you’ll get a ticket.)

This flexibility doesn’t apply only to cyclists, of course.


Pseudacris
Participant
#

@frfxlii:

again, I urge you to ask these same questions about your fellow motorists.

-is driving actually a right? I was taught from day one in driver’s ed class that it is a privilege.

-where does the money actually come from that builds and maintains roads?

-do you ever get frustrated waiting for some jagoff to turn left?

-do you ever find other drivers to run lights, pass annoyingly close, tailgate, cross the double line or a median out of impatience?

-do you ever witness other drivers failing to signal or speeding?

-do you find it annoying to wait for old folks and mothers to cross the street?

As with my original [response to your] post, I don’t intend to justify any particular behavior.

I think if you do a bit of accounting, you will find that cyclists are not actually holding you up all that much, frustrating as it may be on the occasions that they do.

Just try to smile and wave. Give yourself 60 seconds to see how a situation on the road plays out before blowing your lid and you may be surprised to find that you are on your way before a full minute has passed more often than not.

Finally, if you are a sports fan, please try biking to an event at one of the arenas, especially during the summer. Getting places by bike is a lot of fun: you will feel great and spare yourself the frustration of gridlock and paying for parking.


Pseudacris
Participant
#

Here is a brief article explaining how, in fact, non-drivers are subsidizing the infrastructure that car-owners use & not the other way around. It is based on Pew Charitable Trust research.


edmonds59
Participant
#

^

^

Ok, there’s so much wrong up there, let me attempt…

Roads are not made for cars. Roads are built so that the public can travel to where they need to go, conduct business, and do what society needs to do. Numerous user groups are allowed to use the roads, one of which is automobiles. So lose that assumption.

In fact, you probably didn’t know this, but in the late 1800’s it was cyclists groups that led the push for paved roads, and the modern transportation system we now enjoy. You’re welcome.

Cyclists are not guests on the roads, that is blatant nonsense, they are permitted road users. Yes they are obligated to follow the laws, but they are no more required to defer to automobiles than is any other vehicle. And yes I’m pretty sure most cyclists are well aware of the risks of not traveling in a multi-ton protective cage, however they do have the reasonable expectation not to be injured, killed, or even simply harassed by the stupidity or impatience of motorists.

I have not seen any cyclists pulled over by the police for any of the insignificant infractions you mention. On the other hand, I can count on one hand the the number of motorists I have seen pulled over for speeding, running lights, not yielding to pedestrians, etc., and there are thousands more motorists. I am both a cyclist and a driver (and a motorcyclist), and the appalling driving behavior I see when I’m driving just amazes me. So tell all your driving friends to wise up and follow the laws.


Anonymous #

@frfxlii:

again, I urge you to ask these same questions about your fellow motorists.

-is driving actually a right? I was taught from day one in driver’s ed class that it is a privilege. IT IS A PRIVILEGE AS LONG AS YOU HAVE A DRIVERS LICENSE, INSURANCE, INSPECTION, REGISTRATION,PLATES.

-where does the money actually come from that builds and maintains roads? 100% TAX MONEY… AT LEAST $.50 OF EVERY GALLON OF GAS GOES TO “ROAD TAX”. i KNOW YOU BUY GAS FOR YOUR CAR BUT YOUR BIKE IS A SEPERATE VEHICLE.

-do you ever get frustrated waiting for some jagoff to turn left? IN FRONT, BACK, OTHER LANE, WHAT???

-do you ever find other drivers to run lights, pass annoyingly close, tailgate, cross the double line or a median out of impatience? OF COURSE -do you ever witness other drivers failing to signal or speeding? YES

-do you find it annoying to wait for old folks and mothers to cross the street? YES

As with my original [response to your] post, I don’t intend to justify any particular behavior.

I think if you do a bit of accounting, you will find that cyclists are not actually holding you up all that much, frustrating as it may be on the occasions that they do.

Just try to smile and wave. Give yourself 60 seconds to see how a situation on the road plays out before blowing your lid and you may be surprised to find that you are on your way before a full minute has passed more often than not.IT’S NOT SO MUCH THE TIME AS THE FACT THAT IF A CYCLIST SWERVES TO AVOID A POTHOLE OR CARCASS INTO MY PATH AND i KILL OR INJURE SOMEONE, I AM THE ONE THAT HAS TO LIVE WITH IT.

Finally, if you are a sports fan, please try biking to an event at one of the arenas, especially during the summer. Getting places by bike is a lot of fun: you will feel great and spare yourself the frustration of gridlock and paying for parking. I’M NOT AGAINST CYCLING BUT WITH ANY SPORT OR ACTIVITY THERE IS A TIME AND PLACE, FOR CYCLING I BELIEVE PARKS, ARENAS, NEIGHBORHOODS, TRACKS (WASHINGTON BLVD) OR WHERE THERE IS A BIKE LANE.


Anonymous #

Ok, there’s so much wrong up there, let me attempt…

Roads are not made for cars. Roads are built so that the public can travel to where they need to go, conduct business, and do what society needs to do.

Roads are made for cars, bike lanes are made for bikes. If roads were made for bikes they would be 2′ wide with a “cyclist” symbol.

Cyclists are not guests on the roads, that is blatant nonsense, they are permitted road users.

Then why are golf carts, dirt bikes, ATVs, or riding tractors subject to the same rules? just because they have engines? My whole point of this to to promote safety and awareness and to be honest the safest solution is to remove the cyclist from the roadways, even if you don’t want to admit it.


edmonds59
Participant
#

I’M NOT AGAINST CYCLING BUT WITH ANY SPORT OR ACTIVITY THERE IS A TIME AND PLACE,…

100%. Bikes are vehicles per the law. Biking is transportation. Biking is done where and when transportation is needed. QED.

And saying roads are made for cars repeatedly does not make it so. It is not.


schmenjamin
Participant
#

From post #1: “Bicycles should not be on public roads! Period!”

From above: “…OR WHERE THERE IS A BIKE LANE.”

Progress!


Anonymous #

wow.

this keeps going?


CPollack
Participant
#

I’m going to ride my bike. Later.


Anonymous #

Title 75 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes contains the laws which govern the operation of vehicles on Pennsylvania roads. In Pennsylvania, a bicycle is considered a vehicle and, as such, is governed by a general set of rules (common to all vehicles) and a specific set of rules (designed for bicyles.) Section 3501. Applicability of traffic laws to pedacycles. (a) General Rule-every person riding a pedacycle upon a roadway shall be granted all of the rights and shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle by this title…

3505 (a) General Rule-except as provided in subsections (b) and (c), every person operating a pedacycle upon a highway shall obey the aplicable rules of the road as contained in this title. (c) Slower than prevailing speeds.-A pedacycle operated at slower than prevailing speed shall be operated in accordance with the provisions of Section 3301 (b), unless it is unsafe to do so. (3301 (b) states that slower vehicle should keep to the right, which is the normal expectation of all road users, while permitting bicyclists to make movements consistent with their intended route)

Section 3508 Pedacycles on sidewalks and pedacycle paths.Subsection b) Business districts- a person shall not ride a pedacycle upon a sidewalk in a business district unless permitted by official traffic-control devices, nor when a useable pedacycle -only lane has been provided adjacent to the sidewalk.

Blah Blah Blah. Bicyclists are not “guests”. They have equal rights to use the roads as drivers of cars. They must obey the laws. Should a bicyclist ride in the middle of the road of a highway when they are not even close to the speed limit and it is unsafe? Sure sounds like they should not and common sense should be used as to the route taken. The sidewalk is NOT the place where bicyclists should/must be and they in particular are not supposed to ride on the sidewalks in a business district ( entire downtown???)

Bicyclist are subject to being cited for traffic violations. Bicyclists should respect the rights of vehicle drivers and obey the law. Vehicle drivers do not have the right to assume bicyclists must get out of the way, which happens frequently and with fatal consequences. Otherwise good people that I know do not have a clue about bicycle law and presume that car drivers have absolutely greater rights than bicyclists and always get angry when they are behind a person who is just trying to get from A to B by way of a different mode of travel. They really do not know!!


edmonds59
Participant
#

Pbeaver, do you mean in this instance or on a societal basis? Yes. :D :D

Oh yes, and the old “but what if I kill one of ‘you people’ and you screw up my life by dying” approach…

A. Exactly the same thing happens as if you kill another driver or (gasp!) a pedestrian – the law looks at the circumstances and decides if any punishment is warranted.

Actually the odds of any driver facing any consequences for killing someone are incredibly remote, it’s pretty much a free pass. So just keep driving your little toy and don’t worry your pwetty wittle head.

You should really worry much more about killing or being killed by one of your fellow motorists, that is much more likely to happen, that would be much more effective use of your worryin’ time.


Erica
Participant
#

this guy is really boring. I’m going to bed.


salty
Participant
#

faulty premise + faulty logic = faulty conclusions.

shocker.


Anonymous #

Actually Swalfoort has the right answer “motor vehicles” vs. “vehicles” this is why cyclists are able to transverse our highways and byways.

Ride safe.


TeamDecaf
Moderator
#

@salty – I just noticed you’re a moderator – has it been long?

And related, but not related, frfx4lii should be a freewheeler soon.


Anonymous #

“My whole point of this to to promote safety and awareness and to be honest the safest solution is to remove the cyclist from the roadways, even if you don’t want to admit it.”

Even if you don’t want to admit it, the safest solution is no motor vehicles, motor vehicles that in addition to running into cyclists, run into large stationary object (cars running into buildings is fun thread here), run into each other, run into pedestrians and from their mass and speed are the cause all the death out there. It’s obvious on the face of it even if it’s more convenient to blame the victim.

“Roads are made for cars, bike lanes are made for bikes. If roads were made for bikes they would be 2′ wide with a “cyclist” symbol.”

If the road were made for cars it wouldn’t go directly alongside where people live work and play and thus put them at risk, it would be left to countryside and race track recreation and have a little “car” symbol.

So see, you can do this both ways. Both are ignorant of reality and fundamentally stupid as a result. We’ve both gotta get where we’re going we’ve got the roads we’ve got. Improvements are possible, segregated infrastructure can be built, and if you want to advocate for it please be my guest, but it’s not going to be a complete answer. We have to learn to get along out there.


helen s
Participant
#

Having heard all of these no cyclists on roads before let me offer the suggestion to Mr. Schneider that to limit his frustration with “hazards” that are slower than him, he should limit his driving to limited access highways only. However there might be the occasional heavy truck doing the legal lower limit, so you will just have to wait a bit in those instances.


sloaps
Participant
#

This thread is all incredibly unique. Could you imagine 20,000 of us cycling in Pittsburgh? The horror, the traffic! Why someone would cry foul and demand we register our menacing conveyances!

It’s like trolleys, motor vehicles and cyclists will never get along… I’d ask you to mind this child while driving, but he’s probably died of old age.

Southside, Summer of ’35


quizbot
Participant
#

Out of curiosity (and I don’t know the answer to this) how often are cops pulled over for blowing through a red light?

Just wondering because on my commute home tonight, all the other motor vehicle drivers I encountered while in contention for shared transportation resources seemed to be able to follow the law pretty well and stop when the bright red things were in the air.

This was heading outbound on Friendship at N. Aiken tonight around 7:20. You can see sharrows around :06.

Ya, I know, I ran it too, but only to try to catch up with the plate. At least they did cross the double yellow to pass and give me the required 4 feet. I’ll applaud them for that. But I mean come on. The light was clearly yellow before they began to pass.

I guess they don’t like waiting around behind cyclists as they should legally? No lights, sirens, no emergency. Why not wait for 30 seconds?

@frfx4lii: What do you think of drivers who create hazards by not following the laws? Do me a favor. While you’re out driving, count the number of infractions you see drivers committing vs. the number you see cyclists committing. Include running red lights, not coming to a full stop at a stop sign, and texting while driving (Section 3316). Include cyclists riding without lights at dark (Section 3507). Do this for a week and post your numbers on who is creating the most hazards on our roadways.


StuInMcCandless
Participant
#

Since it has not been specifically mentioned here, I will point out that in Idaho, cyclists may treat stop signs as yield signs, and red lights as stop signs. That law has been in place for years, and seems not to be a problem. Paris France is testing a similar ordinance.

@frfx4lii – I am assuming you are old enough to have been driving prior to 1992. You certainly held to the 55 mph speed limit in that 1974-1992 period, right? I say that less to point fingers and more to point out that laws can be changed to suit the needs of the people the laws serve.

If you are upset about cyclists rolling stop signs, we fix that by changing the law.

← Back to Forums

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Click here to login.

Supported by