U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > Austin
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-26-2009, 12:02 PM
 
8,239 posts, read 16,613,130 times
Reputation: 3690

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by orbius View Post
Lets ban traffic laws too, driving in Mumbai, India looks like fun. No more stopping for red lights!!!!!!! Weeeeeee!
Nice straw man.
We have plenty of traffic laws on the books that outlaw dangerous driving, which is what happens when people text while driving. Why do we need ANOTHER law?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-26-2009, 12:08 PM
 
Location: Lake Arlington Heights, IL
5,479 posts, read 11,673,328 times
Reputation: 2825
The numerous complaints against the 3' buffer for bicyle's is unfortunate. On roads too dangerous for this, why not ban bicycles from the road. As a cyclist I have no issue with this, as long as there is a reasonable alternate route. The 3' foot buffer law is very common in many states and municipalities. It is to reinforce the fact that bicycles (unless banned, as larger trucks are from some roads) have a legal right to safely use the road. Go grab a yardstick or a tape measure and look at how short 3' really is.
Yes I agree that some cyclists are real jerks. Most of us just want to ride safely and enjoyably and unfortunately the infrastructure in many larger towns for doing this is sub-par. Austin is one of the minority towns that generally embraces cyclists (or so I thought) Are people that impatient that they can't spend an extra couple of minutes to give the cyclist the safe space they deserve?! Or is there more to the animosity towards cyclists, that I as an outsider do not understand. And to those criticising the 3' buffer: have you ever tried cycling and know the vulnerable feeling of being "buzzed"?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 12:25 PM
 
804 posts, read 1,882,753 times
Reputation: 459
Default How old are we today hmm?

Quote:
We have plenty of traffic laws on the books that outlaw dangerous driving, which is what happens when people text while driving. Why do we need ANOTHER law?
Many people have an opinion that texting while driving is not dangerous, so they are not discouraged by it and feel it does not apply to them. Besides, those laws are rarely enforced. A more specifically worded law takes the "opinion" out of the question by reminding those who may be a bit stubborn that the habit is unsafe and may cause a collision. It penalizes those who continue to do so. Notice I did not use the word "accident" since this type of collision can be prevented.

If there are laws against dangerous driving, why do we still have collisions?

Last edited by nomore07; 08-26-2009 at 12:35 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 12:47 PM
 
8,239 posts, read 16,613,130 times
Reputation: 3690
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomore07 View Post
Many people have an opinion that texting while driving is not dangerous, so they are not discouraged by it and feel it does not apply to them. Besides, those laws are rarely enforced. A more specifically worded law takes the "opinion" out of the question by reminding those who may be a bit stubborn that the habit is unsafe and may cause a collision. It penalizes those who continue to do so. Notice I did not use the word "accident" since this type of collision can be prevented.

If there are laws against dangerous driving, why do we still have collisions?
Ah, so enforcing the present laws is not working.

What makes you think that enforcing texting laws will work? It will be just another law to break. Even the Statesman article today said that enforcing the texting ban will be nearly impossible.

We don't need more laws- we need to enforce the ones we have.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 12:53 PM
 
Location: Central Texas
20,963 posts, read 43,003,340 times
Reputation: 24665
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimimomx3 View Post
Ah, so enforcing the present laws is not working.

What makes you think that enforcing texting laws will work? It will be just another law to break. Even the Statesman article today said that enforcing the texting ban will be nearly impossible.

We don't need more laws- we need to enforce the ones we have.
Yes, this right here. If we have laws that should take care of the problem and they aren't, passing yet more laws, while it keeps the legislature and such in business, isn't going to solve the problem. Throwing yet more laws at a problem that existing laws aren't solving is much like doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different outcome. In fact, it IS doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different outcome.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 12:56 PM
 
Location: Dripping Springs , TX
786 posts, read 2,646,165 times
Reputation: 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady View Post
, it IS doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different outcome.
Isn't that the definition of insanity?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 01:05 PM
 
Location: Central Texas
20,963 posts, read 43,003,340 times
Reputation: 24665
Well, I wasn't going to say it, but . . . well, yeah.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 01:09 PM
 
85 posts, read 196,885 times
Reputation: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by cubssoxfan View Post
And to those criticising the 3' buffer: have you ever tried cycling and know the vulnerable feeling of being "buzzed"?
Indeed, I have. Which is why I now ONLY ride on back roads and off major, inner-city throughways. I learned that city streets are meant for auto traffic, not bike traffic. I think I would feel differently if I knew I could keep up with the flow of traffic. Some cyclists can. Most can not. Metro offers racks for bikes, and rides are very affordable. I don't mind cyclists in "my lane". It's just as much their lane as mine. BUT . . . cease the flow of traffic? Time to reconsider your means of travel. It's unsafe to ALL on the street. Not just the cyclists.

Case in point . . . Cyclist riding southbound on Lamar. He was crossing over Lady Bird Lake. He was staying as close to curb as possible (a rare occurrence with ATX cyclists). I was in the left-hand lane. There was a truck passing me on the right (yes, he was speeding). The truck slowed down (a little) right as he got alongside me, but suddenly the cyclists swerved over into the middle of the lane. The truck came into my lane, pushed me into oncoming traffic (no van filled with family . . . this time), and he clipped the backside of the cyclists.

When all was said and done, and the police finished speaking with everyone, you know why the cyclists had swerved? A piece of rubber tire in the street. That's it. He could have caused quite a catastrophe that afternoon. Granted, the truck WAS speeding, but how many of you have ever sped before? If even for 10 seconds? Exactly. Did the truck see the cyclists? Sure he did. But maybe he didn't. Maybe his kid in the backseat was choking on something. Maybe the kid was bleeding. Never know what can cause a distraction for one second. And that second happens to be the one when the cyclists outs in the middle of the road.

Bikes and cars don't mix. Personal opinion is that, if there is no bike lane, then there should be no bike.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 01:43 PM
 
139 posts, read 333,183 times
Reputation: 81
New laws are more laws and more laws are bad laws? Hmm, interesting thesis. How about just one, big law that says: Don't be a jerk. That cover it? $500 fine for each act of jerkitude. Done. What's for lunch?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 02:30 PM
 
Location: Holly Neighborhood, Austin, Texas
3,961 posts, read 6,280,140 times
Reputation: 2840
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinAaron View Post

Bikes and cars don't mix. Personal opinion is that, if there is no bike lane, then there should be no bike.
Yes I agree that is just an opinion. What the law says is very different. Aside from limited access highway mainlanes and CBD sidewalks bike are allowed everywhere in the Greater Austin region.

Do you ever think that guy riding the bike may be going to the job washing dishes or cooking at your favorite restaurant or maybe building the downtown condo you want to put a contract on?\

I couldn't afford a car when I was in college and bus service was sporadic. Should I just have not gone to classes?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > Austin

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top