Aren't bicyclists supposed to follow the same road laws as motor vehicles?

[charlie and algernon]

Obviously yes, they can, and should, ride on the shoulder where cars CAN'T go. But I can't tell you how many times I see bicyclists now ride AGAINST traffic. Even on one way streets! I'm going up a one way and there always some idiot on a bike coming AT me! Are they not supposed to go WITH the cars? I understand that if you're running or walking along a street, you want to go against the traffic, but that doesn't apply to bikes. Bikes should have to go WITH the cars.

And don't get me started on the assholes who run the red lights and stop signs. I especially love the ones where you pass them normally on the street, but then you stop at an intersection while they just blow right by it, forcing you to have to go around them again. One asshole not only blew past the stop light getting in front of the cars that just passed him before, but then proceeded to ride down the middle of the lane so we were all stuck behind him. :grr:

Maybe we need bicycle licenses too. Afterall, if you break the law in a car, you can lose your license. If you break the law in a bike, you lose your right to ride as well.

:rant:

[Iggo]

1. Yeah, we love you guys, too. (n/t)

[charlie and algernon]

3. I've got no qualms with the VAST majority of bicyclists out there

I want to get out riding more myself. But just because you're on a bike, doesn't mean you can break the laws that the other vehicles on the road have to follow. Yes, there are probably more assholes riding around in cars but some bicyclist is going to get him or herself killed for running a redlight or running headfirst into a car because the driver isn't expecting someone to be riding AT them.

[LaurenG]

2. It is against the law here. I understand why they might want to ride facing traffic...

they want to know who hit them. Our roads here have narrow shoulders and they are mostly 2 lane roads as it is. I have to take my bike in the car, to a bike path in order to ride it or risk death.

[pink-o]

4. We are supposed to follow the same laws as drivers....

And yeah, there's always some hotdogger giving the rest of us a bad name. But consider this re red lights and stop signs: Cyclists have a panoramic view of the intersection, there is no chassis encasing us and we can see for miles. I know the dif, because I drive and bike equally, and you know if you need to stop or you can go right through. A lot of us keep going because we're on a hill, and like when you were a kid, you go up those inclines as fast as possible. I go thru stop signs and lights after checking around me, and the drivers do get mad, but stopping and starting is a lot easier behind the wheel than with 2 pedals under your feet.

Ideally, every city and town would have streets for pedestrians, bikes and other non-motorized transpo that cars would not be allowed on. Till then, we have to live with each other. And the last word, to my fellow cyclists: do NOT let this happen to you! Cars are one thing, but pedestrians always have the right of way!

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/08/12/BAJ71KMA2L.DTL

[whistler162]

11. If you believe that second line you are as bad

as the guy who believes he can drink and drive! Stop means stop whether in a truck, car, motorcycle, or bicycle.

[charlie and algernon]

13. I agree, that's NOT contributing to the safety on the road

say three cars pass a bike on the road. They come to a stop at the next intersection. The biker doesn't stop, just blows by them. Even if the biker isn't swiped by a car he didn't see or know was turning, those three cars now have to pass him all over again. That means having to potentially cross into the opposing lane and putting more people at risk. Just because some biker can't be bothered to obey basic traffic laws.

[quakerboy]

21. On the one hand I agree

If a cyclist flouts the rules, they should be liable for consequences.

On the other, your example is a terrible one. If the cars cannot safely pass, then they should not pass. And if they do so anyway, because they are in a hurry, they are the ones fully at fault for any unsafe situations they create. Whether they had to pass the same biker twice, or two separate bikers, they are responsible for their actions. The only unsafe situation created by the biker was in blowing through a stop.

[Mendocino]

26. Who says the cars didn't safely pass

the bike? That is an assumption. I ride, I drive, I do each within the expectations of the state regs. Many don't.

[quakerboy]

27. to quote:

"That means having to potentially cross into the opposing lane and putting more people at risk."

It is implied in the words used. If it was a safe passing, it would not be putting anyone at risk.

[Mendocino]

30. That is the statement of

someone else, not mine.

If what you say is so, then no one has the right to pass a bike?

[quakerboy]

31. Are you kidding me?

You may note by the thread history that the response you responded to was indeed a response to someone else. So yeah, my response applies to what they said. What you said comes after that, so logically I could not have been responding to anything you had not yet said.

If you can safely pass a bicyclist, pass away. But if you can safely pass, it is not putting anyone at risk. So it doesn't matter if you have to do it one time, 2 times, or every other block for 30 miles. If you can not safely pass, and you chose to do so anyway, it is not the bicyclists fault that you put people at risk.

[Mendocino]

32. When did I put anyone at risk?

[quakerboy]

33. When did I ever say you did?

How are you even mixed in this conversation? This is getting surreal.

[Mendocino]

34. "It's not the bicyclists fault you put people at risk"

You said it.

[quakerboy]

36. Again, surreal. Is this deliberate?

So anything I may ever say on the internet is specifically directed at you?

In the corner of the post you quote it specifically denotes "response to reply 13". If you check reply 13 in this thread, you will find it was not by you.

It was in fact a post asserting that if the OP has to pass a bicyclist 2 times, it puts people "at risk".

So. Unless you feel that you must pass bicyclists when it is unsafe to do so, and that in doing so it is the bicyclists fault for causing risk, this had nothing to do with you.

[Mendocino]

39. Look at the history

Your response 27 was to my 26.

[quakerboy]

44. You first

Your response 26 was to my 21. Which was a response to someone else's post. In which that poster put forward their belief that having to pass a cyclist twice caused an unsafe situation which was the fault of the cyclist. I disagree(while agreeing with the other half of their assertion, that a cyclist blowing through a stop did create an unsafe situation which is their fault)

Since you responded to counter that post, (originally to someone else, mind you) my (I believe natural) assumption was that you wanted to continue that discussion, following the points that that poster laid out.

I am done with this farce. I hope not to encounter you too often, as this has been unpleasant and surreal.

[Mendocino]

40. "When did I ever say you did"

response #31

edit on a word error

[Mendocino]

43. Please tell me where I said

"That means having to cross into the opposing lane and putting more people at risk."

[quakerboy]

5. Sometimes we screw up

Yesterday I ran a red, accidentally. Sun was directly in my eyes, and it was near the end of a very long ride, and a car just slightly ahead of me had just gone through, so I went. I realized about half way it was red, and the slightly confused older man person in the purple car starting to go the other way was kind enough to forebear running me over. I screwed that one up.

On the other hand, in the middle of the night when I can see there are no cars anywhere near, I sometimes ignore stop signs, and feel no guilt about it. As another pointed out, all you have to do is step a little bit on a pedal. I have to put some real effort into starting movement after a stop. Also, as the DMV issued bike driver book points out, I have the right to commandeer a traffic lane. I've only done it a couple times, but I refuse to feel bad about it when I do feel it necessary for my own safety.

And while as a driver I can lose my license (although I do have to point out that it takes how many events for a drunk driver to lose theirs, and then they still drive anyway with relatively no consequences?), as a biker who flaunts the law I can easily lose my life.

[Xithras]

6. That last line is the really important one.

Several years ago a dear friend of mine was nearly killed on his bike. He was riding around sunset when he came up to a 2-Way stop. As he was coming up to the intersection, he glanced left, then right, and since he didn't see anyone he decided to blow through the sign.

As is the case with most other bikers, and drivers in general, he learned that the biggest risk to your safety is the car you DON'T see. In his case, he didn't see the car without its headlight on, lost in the glare of the sun setting behind it. He survived, but with a damaged back, a broken pelvis, and two broken legs. He's only alive because the car was lowered and moving at a pretty good clip, so his body hit the roof instead of the bumpers or windshield pillars.

He's still physically incapable of riding a bicycle, but whe he does I'm sure he'll follow the law. He learned the hard way that bicyclists pay a much steeper penalty when they screw up.

[bikebloke]

7. I'd like to see motor vehicles follow the road laws.

There are times on my bike when I feel like the only one on the road following the road laws. Cars and trucks just ignore stop signs and red lights. Some even driving along the center line almost over in the opposing lane. Yet, you rarely see any of them pulled over by cops. Most of the cops in this area are on donut duty in front of the offices of war profiteers.

There are asshole cyclists too, but their survival rate isn't long.

[snooper2]

8. If you see a bike coming AT you, you are in a 3000lb car, he/she on 37lb bike

um, who you think is going to win?

I would just turn on the turn signal for whatever side he/she is on and watch for reaction.
:P

[charlie and algernon]

10. well yeah, that's the point

I don't want to be held responsible for killing a biker that's moronically riding at me down a narrow one way street. At least if the biker is going in the same direction as you, you can judge how fast he's going and can pass safely, not so much if they're flying at you.

[Shagbark Hickory]

9. In my state, bicycles are considered vehicles.

Personally, I think that's bullshit.

I can't really blame someone for driving opposite of traffic so they can see the car and get out of it's way. Bikes aren't equipped with rear view mirrors ya know.

[Arkansas Granny]

12. Not only are they supposed to follow the same laws, but other motor vehicles are supposed

to treat them as any other vehicle on the road. That means that they are accorded the entire width of the lane they are riding in and not just an edge. When passing a bicycle, the motorized vehicle should move to another lane than the one the cyclist is riding in.

[charlie and algernon]

14. and what if the opposing lane is busy?

Bikes are a hell of lot thinner than cars, we can't just hug the yellow line and pray we don't crash head first into oncoming traffic.

[Arkansas Granny]

16. Having been passed by cars in the same lane I was riding in, I can tell you that

it's pretty scary. I've had cars come close enough that I could have reached out and touched them. I know it can be an inconvenience sometimes, but it's really dangerous for the cyclist to be crowded that much in their lane.

[quakerboy]

19. No joke

I am told in Oregon, if a car passes a cyclist at over 35 MPH, they are only allowed to do so if they have a wide enough margin that even if the cyclist fell over they would not hit them.

In the 2 months since I got a bike, I have seen exactly one car move over, and 2 slow down. I did have to duck the jutting out mirror of one monster truck who thought he should stop halfway into the bike lane at a light.

[quakerboy]

18. Then you get to wait

same as you would if the guy in front of you was a visually impared 70 year old going 15 MPH, who really shouldn't be driving but got the automatic renewal of their license anyway, because driving is their right and their kids don't want to step up to the old man.

[KamaAina]

15. We have over 50 miles of bike lanes in San Jose

and yet I still have bikes whizzing past me on the sidewalk all the time. :grr:

[pink-o]

25. Yeah, that drives me crazy. Gives us all a bad name.

Look: even Google maps will give you bike directions so you can mostly avoid going through dense traffic, and find the bike lanes. There's another site: Bikely.com which shows rides mapped by other cyclists and you can follow.

I don't have one, but there's probably also a program on a GPS that will guide you through a city via bike routes. No reason to crowd pedestrians, they always have the right of way. I stop for them 100 percent of the time!

[iris27]

37. Bike lanes are more dangerous, IMO.

I would rather a cyclist fully take up the right lane than have to worry about the skinny-mini bike lane. Most of the time here in Austin, it's nothing more than the shoulder repainted to read "Bike Lane", anyway.

I always feel unsafe and paranoid when making a right turn across such a lane, even after repeatedly checking that the way is clear...the same way I would feel if I were in the right lane and not allowed into the left lane for some reason, but still had to cross over it to turn left.

[Deep13]

17. Yes. The problem...

...is that in any contest of will, the cyclist will lose. Just they are supposed to be on the road--not thew sidewalk--and go with the traffic--not against it--and follow all traffic rules. The reality is that most motorists do not accept that bicycles are a legitimate part of road traffic because they see cycles as toys and because they are so slow. Most motorist think they own the road and act like it which makes following the rules very dangerous for cyclists. I'm not speaking to your specific examples necessarily, but in general.

[cwydro]

20. yeah..

I have NEVER seen motorists blow stop signs, change lanes illegally, blow red lights, tailgate, cut someone off...I never see that in motorists - only in bike riders.

Those damn bicycles!

[Mendocino]

22. I ride bicycles reguarly,

I know the rules. Today though while driving my car I came to a t-stop, let the left hand turner go ahead of me,(they had the right -of-way), then proceeded to try to turn right . After passing three cars already stopped behind me, a bike went by me on the right, straight through a red light intersection rather than stop or even slow before my turn. I gave a little beep and was rewarded with a single-fingered salute. Well buddy may I wish a long life because you sure aren't going gain one on your road skills.

[oneshooter]

23. In Texas bikes are concidered the same as a vehicle.

And they can be written traffic tickes by LEO's. The fines are the same and you can ge written up for biking while drunk!
As for the riders I personally believe them to be drunk AND insane! The way they run red lights, fail to signal lane changes, weave around cars stopped at lights, fail to signal turns.................

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[BiggJawn]

24. Bikes are only required to ride as far to the right as SAFELY possible.

And it's the guy on the bike's call as to how far to the right that is. There's a lot of shit on that shoulder that can shred tyres.

Sorry you were "stuck" behind a bike and so sorely inconvenienced.

Your other points you make are valid, and are pet peeves of mine, too. And I'll add to your list adults who ride on the damn sidewalk.

[Coyote_Bandit]

28. I share your thoughts

There is a bike path that uses the city streets through my neighborhood.

You forgot to mention the riders that wear earphones and ride in the middle of the street. They can't hear the cars and the traffic cannot get around them.

You also forgot to mention the riders that travel together in groups sometimes six abreast. They are impossible to go around and often unwilling to pull over to allow traffic to pass.

And then there are the riders that have a large dog running alongside (maybe) on a 20 foot leash attached to the bike.

[csziggy]

41. Around here, the groups of bicyclists do dangerous things

That not only put them at risk, it pisses off drivers who might then take it out on other bicyclists.

Once group of twenty bicyclists deliberately blocked cars from passing them in a legal passing zone by filling BOTH lanes of traffic whenever a car tried to pass. I was the second car in a line of cars forced to stay behind this gaggle of asshole bicyclists for at least five miles.

If I drive my tractor down a rural highway, as a slow moving vehicle, I am required to pull over where possible to allow other traffic to move at normal highway speeds. Bicyclists should do this every so often - it would reduce road rage.

Most bicyclists in this area are very good drivers and obey the rules of the road. Those obnoxious few, such as the group I mentioned above, give them all a bad name.

[applegrove]

29. In my city they have their own little lanes in the middle of divided roads. I hate that. So glad I

don't drive.

[chrisa]

35. I just stick my arm out and clothesline them while driving by.

[jobycom]

38. Yes. Good cyclists do. Bad cyclists, or bad people, don't.

Nix the idea of a bike license, though. More of an infringement than it's worth.

I've been a motorist since I was fifteen, a cyclist since I was born. My grandfather owned a bike shop before I was born, and I've grown up putting them together and taking them apart and riding them. Some periods in my life it was the center of my life, other times a periphery.

So I've seen the good and bad from both sides of the hood, and sympathized with cyclists more than motorists usually. But I gotta say, there are some cyclists out there that deserve to be flattened. People who take the center of a lane when there is no obstruction, people who deliberately slow traffic just for the power of it, people who blow through stop signs and lights, people who ride through pedestrians without slowing down (I witnessed a cyclist shatter a woman's leg once, and then flee when he realized he'd seriously hurt her. There was a pedestrian killed her a couple years ago by a cyclist, and one up in Dallas last year)... Worst part is, they encourage other cyclists to do that.

A good cyclist doesn't take the lane unless they have to. A good cyclists takes less busy or better suited side streets when possible--which is almost always, in any decent size town. A good cyclist stops every time at a sign or light and stays put until it's their turn to go. A good cyclist shares the road, and doesn't try to hog the road. (Good motorists have their criteria, too).

Used to be that cars were more of a problem for bikes than bikes for cars. These days, at least in Austin where bikes have their own lanes and even their own bridges, bikes are the problem, not the cars. Most cyclists are good, but there is a small percentage of them who endanger everyone else. The sad part is that sooner or later the laws are going to start coming down on cyclists because a few can't control egos and power-needs.

[rrneck]

42. But they have

moral superiority. That's the difference.

[hifiguy]

45. The stoplight/sign runners deserve to be run over

and with no consequences. Not long ago I had to hit the brakes and almost flat-spot my tires twice in the space of six blocks because I was going through an intersection - WITH THE GREEN LIGHT, I MIGHT ADD - and some asswipe on a bike blew through the intersection directly in front of me cos they decided that the red lights weren't applicable to them. Even worse, one of them looked straight at me with an expression of "Fuck you, chump - I can do whatever I want."

I want to take baseball bats to these "people."