Dear Austin Bicyclist, (Hutto: safe neighborhood, safe, move)

[atxcio]

Originally Posted by scm53

I wasn't the one making the "if we pay for registration, then we are entitled to a dedicated lane" arguement. That would be your fellow worshiper at the First Church of Virtuous Bicycling, atxcio. Go argue with him.

Didn't say anything about dedicated lane, that's your own fabrication.

I simply said if cyclists get licensed and registered, they may feel they should utilize a whole lane, as any other vehicle does. Which they already have permission to do legally, they do not need to be riding in the shoulder. So the argument was not me asking for dedicated lane; simply the normal lane which all vehicles can use.

However, if you actually paid attention to the issue, you might come to your OWN conclusion that separate right of way for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists would probably work best for everyone. But I must remember to never assume...

[woodinvilleguy]

Originally Posted by scm53

The question is, why should I share the state highways with a recreational cyclist? A cyclist whose use of that highway makes no contribution to the construction or maintenance of that highway? A cyclist who has plenty of opportunities to recreate on neighborhood streets, in public parks, etc. Drag out all of your virtue stats - Middle East oil, pollutants in Town Lake, hail Mary, full of grace - oops, sorry, wrong church. But not a one of them applies to what my jaundiced eye guesses is predominantly for recreation.

The reason I would is that we all have to be courteous to one another. If it takes me an extra five seconds to slow down to be courteous, then no big deal. The problem comes with the rampant sense of entitlement present in many cyclists, and contained in most of the pro cycling posts in this thread. I will be courteous to you if you don't act like you own the damn road - which, since you haven't paid for it, you don't. Stop at stop signs and red lights like I do. When there are shoulders, pass your slower cyclists on that shoulder and not in the 60 MPH lane. If you have to wait, then so be it. Don't chose to ride on the narrow shoulder vice the wide one on the right. Recognize that the yield signs apply to you just like they do vehicles. Plan your ride so you ride places there are shoulders, and not on a two lane 1826. Sorry, you aren't entitled to recreationally cycle any place there is pavement.

if your cycling is for transportation, then you get even more courtesy. I just doubt there is really that much going on here. But YMMV.

I bike for both, And I also drive for both. Do you drive only for work? Remember if you run me over, I have a camera on my bike and can use it in court.....

[noellestar]

Originally Posted by woodinvilleguy

I bike for both, And I also drive for both. Do you drive only for work? Remember if you run me over, I have a camera on my bike and can use it in court.....

[ScoPro]

Originally Posted by atxcio

Doesn't matter -- and you can't be serious with the fuel tax argument, can you? Would you argue then that fuel efficient car's shouldn't be entitled to the same infrastructure as normal vehicles? What about hybrid and electric cars?

No taxation without representation, as far as I'm concerned -- you want to tax and register bikes like cars, then the minimum speed on the highways will have to be reduced, I guess. Not my idea, but it seems to be where certain folks want to take it.

No they don't have to be reduced.

Just make sure the politicians use your bike tax money for separate bike lanes where needed.

That way the bicyclists will not obstruct motorized traffic.

[Spacepup]

Originally Posted by woodinvilleguy

I bike for both, And I also drive for both. Do you drive only for work? Remember if you run me over, I have a camera on my bike and can use it in court.....

It is amazing how people's demeanor changes when they see that little lens, isn't it? What model do you use? I was considering upgrading to an HD model.

[atxcio]

Originally Posted by ScoPro

No they don't have to be reduced.

No, but I don't see the willingness to put taxes towards the smarter alternative (seperate right of way), so I guess speed reduction is the next best thing.

It's a shame that we've become such a nanny state that drivers can't be bothered to observe the rights of other vehicles. They have to be forced via things like the 3 foot rule, rules against texting, etc. Perhaps a much higher driving age is the answer? That way more young people can utilize bikes, and curb pollution and their poor health. Perhaps then they will be more mature when they finally learn to drive.

[atxcio]

Originally Posted by woodinvilleguy

On a complete tangent... When was the last time you saw someone on a bicycle on the phone, eating, texting, and putting on make up? And when was the last time you saw someone driving doing these?

1)Never and 2)about 1 hour ago on 360. The driver in 2) missed the fact the light was red, and ended up slamming the brakes stopping half way into the intersection. Big SUV, too, could have killed someone had the other traffic not been paying better attention.

[ScoPro]

Originally Posted by atxcio

No, but I don't see the willingness to put taxes towards the smarter alternative (seperate right of way), so I guess speed reduction is the next best thing.

It's a shame that we've become such a nanny state that drivers can't be bothered to observe the rights of other vehicles. They have to be forced via things like the 3 foot rule, rules against texting, etc. Perhaps a much higher driving age is the answer? That way more young people can utilize bikes, and curb pollution and their poor health. Perhaps then they will be more mature when they finally learn to drive.

Actually I think we're being a nanny state by declaring bicycles to be equal to cars, trucks, & buses.

Pretty freaking stupid, IMO.

I've seen first hand how smart planning worked, and putting a 10 pound 30mph bike in 30+ mph motorized traffic is not smart.

Even the Chinese/Taiwanese knew that several generations ago.

Looks like Texas and Austin have a long way to go before catching up with that 3rd world era.

[woodinvilleguy]

Originally Posted by Spacepup

It is amazing how people's demeanor changes when they see that little lens, isn't it? What model do you use? I was considering upgrading to an HD model.

I use a GoPro camera. Takes 1080p video, with the fish eye lens you can see the full width of the road. I have video of a truck that decided to toss a drink at me while I was in the shoulder with two lanes in my direction and not only room to pass in the lane I was in but the left lane was empty as well. Passed the video along to Cedar Park Police and they saw the license and had a discussion with the licensed driver about it.

[atxcio]

Originally Posted by ScoPro

Actually I think we're being a nanny state by declaring bicycles to be equal to cars, trucks, & buses.

Tomato, Tom-ah-to, I guess.

Personally I think the drivers in this town epitomize the entitlement, nanny-state mentality. It's made driving in Austin miserable, and biking even worse. They would do well with a couple of months of riding a bicycle to understand the rules of the road, IMO.