Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I suggest you watch this fun video. I won't give the answer away now because then you won't have fun counting. My next post will explain why I included this here.
Does the sequel show the bear getting gang-beaten for having the bad idea to be in the wrong place at the wrong time?
Not quite as any other vehicle or they would be required to maintain minimum safe speed limits.
Actually not quite. There is no minimum speed posted on most city roads. There IS a minimum speed for limited access highways, and Cyclists are prohibited from riding on them, so the laws are applied the same.
Quote:
But even still, the laws won't mean much to a cyclist that's splattered all over the road. The bottom line is that a cyclist getting on main roads with faster moving heavier vehicles, in an age where people are constantly on their cellphones or dealing with a minivan full of kids, is taking a huge risk. To think that the laws somehow make it less of a stupid idea for the cyclist to be on the road in the first place is absurd.
This is coming to you from an avid cyclist. I'm just not stupid enough to ride on high traffic roads.
As an avid cyclist, I agree with this comment. Those of us who have the luxury should clearly choose carefully which roads we ride on, and I'd never choose Falls if I could take country roads instead. The thing is:
1. I think he was responding to another post where a poster was expressing an opinion (which they are entitled to have) that was wrong, and at odds with the law. The person can have that opinion, but they should not be ignorant of the law. The facts in the response were correct.
2. You are right about the actual outcome though. It's sad, but true. The law isn't going to save you if people don't follow it. (It's like saying laws will prevent me from being robbed at gunpoint, so I can walk down a dark ally at 2AM.)
3. The biggest thing though, as someone else pointed out, is that some people are on the road so that they can get to and from work. They are working hard to support their families, and provide a life for their children. People on their cellphones while driving is a sad fact, but if something were to happen, you can't blame it on the person who is legally riding on the road, when someone (breaking the law, BTW) on their cellphone is the culprit.
I try to stay out of these discussions, but just can't help it. It still baffles me how many drivers are ignorant of the law. Not directed at you, as I said, save for one small point, I unfortunately think your post is spot-on.
Our brains focus on what we're looking for/at and tune out the distractions and "noise" that might keep us from seeing what we're focused on. Drivers are looking for/at cars. Even very attentive drivers often do not see cyclists because they are being tuned out by the brain.
Yes, these roads are designed to accommodate cars... as someone pointed out about the southern part of Falls of Neuse Rd, it's BARELY wide enough to fit cars in side by side safely.
I'm not saying cyclists shouldn't be able to ride on them safely, I'm saying cyclists should be entitled to our own safe bike paths. Bikes and cars don't mix, period.
It takes all of a drivers concentration to be aware of what all the cars are doing. To throw in vehicles that are harder to see (not just bicycles but mopeds/scooters/ridiculously small cars) is just asking for an accident that is not in favor of the smaller vehicle.
I try to stay out of these discussions, but just can't help it. It still baffles me how many drivers are ignorant of the law. Not directed at you, as I said, save for one small point, I unfortunately think your post is spot-on.
Just as you pointed out, the average person in this area is working hard to support their family, commute to work every day, dodge layoffs and other woes; most of us do not have the time or inclination to memorize the DMV drivers manual, so we tend to only remember the important stuff.
In my younger days I once had to attend a driver safety course (due to speeding tickets), taught by state troopers as the instructors. One of the things the trooper kept saying, is that even though the manual won't tell you this, stay with the flow and don't go too slow. Slow drivers cause as many accidents as fast ones, according to him.
But I think we agree that at the end of the day, if a cyclist gets mowed over by a car, the level of regret is going to be much higher for the cyclist, and thus since they are at risk, they should be smart enough to stay out of harms way independent of whatever legal advantage they may have. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to look at some of these roads and see that they were designed with cars in mind, not cars and bikes.
I personally think that more effort should be make to create dedicated bike lanes (even with concrete dividers for true protection, but I doubt that most people -- especially those who don't ride bikes, want to foot the tax bill for that, so unless cyclists are willing to put special license plates on their bikes and pay a wicked high cyclist-tax, I doubt it will happen).
As far as the existing situation, I think that riding a bike on the street should be an at-own-risk activity, that a cyclist takes full responsibility for, just like bungee jumping or any other highly risky activity. If the primary goal is to save lives, then this solution would have the most impact. Right now there seems to be a sense of entitlement on the cyclists part: "well the law is on my side"... yes but that means squat if they end up road kill.
Agreed. That road is scary enough to navigate by car!
Thank you! Its just common sense! Some of the rural roads are barely wide enough for 2 cars driving in opposite directions?? Can we say wider roads with some of that Vehicle propery tax ripoff money ????
just as you pointed out, the average person in this area is working hard to support their family, commute to work every day, dodge layoffs and other woes; most of us do not have the time or inclination to memorize the dmv drivers manual, so we tend to only remember the important stuff.
In my younger days i once had to attend a driver safety course (due to speeding tickets), taught by state troopers as the instructors. One of the things the trooper kept saying, is that even though the manual won't tell you this, stay with the flow and don't go too slow. Slow drivers cause as many accidents as fast ones, according to him.
But i think we agree that at the end of the day, if a cyclist gets mowed over by a car, the level of regret is going to be much higher for the cyclist, and thus since they are at risk, they should be smart enough to stay out of harms way independent of whatever legal advantage they may have. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to look at some of these roads and see that they were designed with cars in mind, not cars and bikes.
I personally think that more effort should be make to create dedicated bike lanes (even with concrete dividers for true protection, but i doubt that most people -- especially those who don't ride bikes, want to foot the tax bill for that, so unless cyclists are willing to put special license plates on their bikes and pay a wicked high cyclist-tax, i doubt it will happen).
As far as the existing situation, i think that riding a bike on the street should be an at-own-risk activity, that a cyclist takes full responsibility for, just like bungee jumping or any other highly risky activity. If the primary goal is to save lives, then this solution would have the most impact. Right now there seems to be a sense of entitlement on the cyclists part: "well the law is on my side"... Yes but that means squat if they end up road kill.
Just as you pointed out, the average person in this area is working hard to support their family, commute to work every day, dodge layoffs and other woes; most of us do not have the time or inclination to memorize the DMV drivers manual, so we tend to only remember the important stuff.
In my younger days I once had to attend a driver safety course (due to speeding tickets), taught by state troopers as the instructors. One of the things the trooper kept saying, is that even though the manual won't tell you this, stay with the flow and don't go too slow. Slow drivers cause as many accidents as fast ones, according to him.
But I think we agree that at the end of the day, if a cyclist gets mowed over by a car, the level of regret is going to be much higher for the cyclist, and thus since they are at risk, they should be smart enough to stay out of harms way independent of whatever legal advantage they may have. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to look at some of these roads and see that they were designed with cars in mind, not cars and bikes.
I personally think that more effort should be make to create dedicated bike lanes (even with concrete dividers for true protection, but I doubt that most people -- especially those who don't ride bikes, want to foot the tax bill for that, so unless cyclists are willing to put special license plates on their bikes and pay a wicked high cyclist-tax, I doubt it will happen).
As far as the existing situation, I think that riding a bike on the street should be an at-own-risk activity, that a cyclist takes full responsibility for, just like bungee jumping or any other highly risky activity. If the primary goal is to save lives, then this solution would have the most impact. Right now there seems to be a sense of entitlement on the cyclists part: "well the law is on my side"... yes but that means squat if they end up road kill.
As far as the existing situation, I think that riding a bike on the street should be an at-own-risk activity, that a cyclist takes full responsibility for, just like bungee jumping or any other highly risky activity.
but in another thread, you say
Quote:
Originally Posted by glazersight
What they really should do is start issuing class E felony assault charges against the pet owners that are too inconsiderate to obey leash laws in the first place and things get badly out of hand. Lesser charges when they don't, but enough to drive the point home.
So, if someone wants to ride their bike on the road, they should do so at their own risk with, and if someone in a car is too inconsiderate to obey the law, then too bad, but if you go to the park, and someone let's their dog off a leash, they should be hit with a felony?
As I've said many times, I agree that it's not the smartest thing to ride your bike on a busy road IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO, but I fail to see how it's not the driver's fault if he hits you by not obeying the law. (Yes, you are no less dead, but you're suggestion that the driver should get off scott-free due to cyclist riding at his own risk does not make sense to me.)
For those that are tired of the discsussion, I tried to ask Glazersight in a DM, but he suggested I should ask on the boards. I was interested in the answer, so I'm asking here.
The reason most moderators ban/reprimand or whatever for unproductive cross-topic instigation like this is because it pulls text out of the context as written.
Furthermore, you are now bringing parts of a conversation that you started with me in DM into a public forum, after much of that existing context exists only in DM.
To summarize, my point about dogs is that anyone should be able to walk in a public park without fear of getting mauled by some aggressive dog, and allowing a dog off leash that results in harm to others should be a felony charge.
I never said running over a cyclist should never be unlawful, I said that independent of any existing laws that might be in place for varying (good) reasons, the cyclists should be smart enough to recognize that most busy roads are not safe for cycling, and use common sense to stay out of traffics way.
Please stop abusing the forums by pulling bits from multiple threads and DM conversations into whatever thread you'd like to use the bits in.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
