Wouldn't the impact to society from people driving cars be higher than that of bike riders when calculated on a per vehicle basis? Bikes don't burn fuel, they provide exercise and I bet fewer die in drunk biking accidents compared to drunk driving.
What it comes down to is that most people are selfish. They have very little respect for others and don't want to share so much as even a bit of space on the road. When they have to slow down a little and drive around someone in the bike lane it just pisses them off.
I'm not saying bike riders are special people. They tend to be asshats in about the same proportion as anyone else. What I am saying is that we could all do with would be a little more compassion and respect for other. Changing our hearts would fix damn near every problem facing humanity.
I don't have an issue with cyclists, but I don't care what the law says, stay on the sidewalk! They need to change the law that says that cyclists should use the road, that is the most retarded thing ever. They should have to use the sidewalk or in some cases the strip of pavement between the sidewalk and the road, depending on how that particular stretch of road is made.
A TYPICAL cyclist is not going near the speed of a car, so get off the road! Just move over when there's a pedestrian and give them room too.
This thread reminded me, I gave my old bike away, I need to buy a new one. I wanted to last summer but it went by so fast and was so short and next thing you know there was snow on the ground.
In my state, it is the person in the car's fault if they open the door into the path of a cyclist. So if a driver opens the door in the path of cyclist, the driver will be on the hook for damage to their own car, damage to the bicycle, and any injuries, pain and suffering, etc. to the cyclist.
Your state may have different laws. As always, please be aware of your local laws.
Depends where you live. In my city, you're at fault.
Well we actually use our sidewalks here for walking so how about no.
Well we actually use our sidewalks here for walking so how about no.
Where I live right now, there aren't many cyclists to watch out for. But I travel to CA often, and the place is just riddled with them, especially the San Diego area. I'd like to know the CA law. Can anyone point me to this?
22517. No person shall open the door of a vehicle on the side available to moving traffic unless it is reasonably safe to do so and can be done without interfering with the movement of such traffic, nor shall any person leave a door open upon the side of a vehicle available to moving traffic for a period of time longer than necessary to load or unload passengers.
Ok. I'll accept that the law is the law, but I certainly don't agree with that one. I mean, honestly I am vehemently against that law. If I can't do something (and this is just due to repetition...I've gone through my whole life opening my car door when I please) then god help the mindless masses out there who have 1/10th the brain activity I do.
Where I live right now, there aren't many cyclists to watch out for. But I travel to CA often, and the place is just riddled with them, especially the San Diego area. I'd like to know the CA law. Can anyone point me to this?
I suppose once I've digested the fact that I would be on the hook for something like this, I might be able to force my brain to think about it before I open my car door.
Wouldn't the impact to society from people driving cars be higher than that of bike riders when calculated on a per vehicle basis? Bikes don't burn fuel, they provide exercise and I bet fewer die in drunk biking accidents compared to drunk driving.
There are more cars than pedestrians, and bicycles only go slightly faster than pedestrians. From a safety standpoint it makes a lot more sense. A pedestrian and cyclist only occupies about half or even 1/3 of a typical sidewalk so there is plenty of room for both without getting in each other's way. The particular road in the video does not even seem to have a proper shoulder to ride on nor lot of traffic so the cyclist should actually move over when he hears a car coming.
There are more cars than pedestrians, and bicycles only go slightly faster than pedestrians. From a safety standpoint it makes a lot more sense. A pedestrian and cyclist only occupies about half or even 1/3 of a typical sidewalk so there is plenty of room for both without getting in each other's way. The particular road in the video does not even seem to have a proper shoulder to ride on nor lot of traffic so the cyclist should actually move over when he hears a car coming.
Yeah! Rather than letting people with all the protection that spandex gives them use the sidewalk and have a collision with a pedestrian in a low speed accident, let's let those morons ride on the road and get into collisions with a 1+ ton object moving two times the speed of the spandex clad guy!
I don't have a problem with bike lanes, as they generally don't interfere with traffic, except at road crossings, but making them ride in the lanes is stupid. On a 35MPH road, they are a hazard.
Beat me to it......walk not side-ride.Well we actually use our sidewalks here for walking so how about no.
Beat me to it......walk not side-ride.
How about just a little common (or uncommon) courtesy from both sides. Ride to the far right, single file....and don't run over cyclists.
There are group rides that come out of GA and use 2 lane, 55MPH, country roads near here. They'll ride 4 wide, take up the whole lane. 2011, some guy plowed through a group of 15, killing one and sending several to the hospital. Driver got a felony reckless homicide and 90 days
People on bikes regularly injure or even kill pedestrians, mixing the two modes more doesn't sound like a good idea. All it would do is shift the greater risk from cyclists to pedestrians for the benefit of the drivers. Mode separation is what should be done via raised/curb protected bike lanes. Instead of trying to change everyone's behavior let the engineering do the work instead.
Beat me to it......walk not side-ride.
How about just a little common (or uncommon) courtesy from both sides. Ride to the far right, single file....and don't run over cyclists.
There are group rides that come out of GA and use 2 lane, 55MPH, country roads near here. They'll ride 4 wide, take up the whole lane. 2011, some guy plowed through a group of 15, killing one and sending several to the hospital. Driver got a felony reckless homicide and 90 days
I agree that bike lanes are the best solution, but that requires enforcement of the law in regards to cyclists, which is pretty non existent. I don't, however, feel the risk of cyclists on side walks puts pedestrians at anywhere near the risk of cyclists on the road. 1 pedestrian was killed in 2012 by cyclists. It is far easier for pedestrians and cyclists to avoid each other safely than it is for cars to avoid cyclists.
I agree that bike lanes are the best solution, but that requires enforcement of the law in regards to cyclists, which is pretty non existent. I don't, however, feel the risk of cyclists on side walks puts pedestrians at anywhere near the risk of cyclists on the road. 1 pedestrian was killed in 2012 by cyclists. It is far easier for pedestrians and cyclists to avoid each other safely than it is for cars to avoid cyclists.
:thumbsdown: That's not enough. Man, I would have loved to be on that jury.
Conviction was right but due to the severity he probably should have gotten a lot more time, not knowing the specifics of the case. Motorists very often get of lightly for causing death or severe injury to cyclists and pedestrians.
The guy pled and that's what the judge gave."On a straight road in ample daylight and having 4/10ths of a mile, and 40 seconds to perceive a group of 15 blinking and glowing cyclists," argued Solicitor Strom Thurmond.
I don't have an issue with cyclists, but I don't care what the law says, stay on the sidewalk! They need to change the law that says that cyclists should use the road
The guy pled and that's what the judge gave.
Those guys riding 4 wide will definitely piss you off when you can't get around them. My guess is Johnson had a little road rage.
SC law says they can legally ride 2 wide.