Interesting article on bicycles and traffic laws

[Beerball]

Hmmm, where were you approximately 7 months ago???

You're asking the wrong guy. The Chef did it.

[BUFFALOTONE]

You're asking the wrong guy. The Chef did it.

 

Its gotta be the voice....I can't compete with that.

[ptannuzzo1]

like most things-- this is not a black or white issue. I ride daily.

 

Most importantly--

1) wear lights on the bike-- front and back-- cars cannot see you at night. they really dont want to kill you.

2) DO NOT ride on the sidewalk, unless you are not allowed in the street (ie 9 years old). The last thing you want to do is run someone over, a child, a pregnant woman.

[Just Jack]

From the NYS DMV webpage.....

 

Are there special traffic laws for bicyclists and in-line skaters?

 

Bicyclists, in-line skaters, and motor vehicle drivers must all use and obey the same traffic laws. A motorist must recognize that a bicyclist or in-line skater has the same rights as any another motor vehicle driver. Bicyclists and skaters must obey all traffic signals, signs and pavement markings. The bicyclists must use a signal to turn on a roadway, a bike lane or bike path. The bicyclists and skaters who break the law are subject to traffic tickets. Parents are responsible for the violations committed by their children who less than the age of 18.

[Chef Jim]

Im "outnumbered" only becuase the majority of people posting on this thread havent been on a bike in about a decade.

 

From the get-go Ive stated that my opinion and manner in which I operate any one of my bikes has been one that follows TO THE LETTER how the original article spells it out. Direct from the article:

 

Bikes occupy a gray area of the law. They're neither cars nor pedestrians. Most states do carve out special laws for bikes, but not enough to avoid confusion. Take this scenario: I'm approaching a stop sign on my bike. There are clearly no cars coming from either direction. Do I come to a complete stop? Can I cautiously slide through? The traffic laws say full stop. But in practice, few bikers hit the brake, put their foot on the ground, and then start pedaling again. Are they criminals?

 

The D.C. Code recognizes the special status of bikes. Bikes shall follow all traffic laws,[/b] the code says, except for rules that "can have no reasonable application to a bicycle operator." Presumably, this refers to laws governing highways, some sidewalks, and other non-bicycle-friendly turf. It doesn't apply to the stop-sign scenario, even though some bicycle advocates argue that stop signs "have no reasonable application to a bicycle operator."

 

The stop sign scenario above matches perfectly the one I described in my own experiences, too.

 

Based on speaking to and following the lead of many fellow cyclists I ride often with, some as advanced and experienced as having rode under their home Country's National flag in the Olympics and Cycling National Championships, and having read this, and many many articles on the subject, and having logged close to 4,000 miles/year on my own, Im comfortable that how I operate anby of my bikes, on the road or off it is in line with A) traffic law as it is currently intepreted and enforced and B) with keeping my safety and the safety of others in mind and C) common courtesy.

 

Ive NEVER in this thread advocated or excused stupid wrong-way riding, riding on sidewalks or ANY behavior that puts either the cyclists, the pedestrians or the driver's safety in ANY kind of jeopardy. Not once. The CLOSEST I came to that is tell inkman that he probably should of waited for the cyclist to pass him and even there, said that only becuase it was the cyclist, not inkman that was a selfish moron.

 

If thats not good enough for ya, theres nothing I can do.

 

I'm sorry, did you say something?

[RkFast]

I'm sorry, did you say something?

 

Yes....

 

except for rules that "can have no reasonable application to a bicycle operator." Presumably, this refers to laws governing highways, some sidewalks, and other non-bicycle-friendly turf. It doesn't apply to the stop-sign scenario, even though some bicycle advocates argue that stop signs "have no reasonable application to a bicycle operator."

 

While were on the subject of laws, Id like you to post for the audience how you approach complainace with food handling and health code laws in your kitchen. It would also be beneficial if you post the most recent inspection report your kitchen recevied. You ARE a pro chef, right?

[Beerball]

Yes....

 

except for rules that "can have no reasonable application to a bicycle operator." Presumably, this refers to laws governing highways, some sidewalks, and other non-bicycle-friendly turf. It doesn't apply to the stop-sign scenario, even though some bicycle advocates argue that stop signs "have no reasonable application to a bicycle operator."

 

While were on the subject of laws, Id like you to post for the audience how you approach complainace with food handling and health code laws in your kitchen. It would also be beneficial if you post the most recent inspection report your kitchen recevied. You ARE a pro chef, right?

So, that would be things like min/max speed limits right?

 

Stopping at red lights? Nope, that's covered (all the time).

 

Stopping at STOP signs? Nope, that's covered too.

 

Yielding the right of way? Nope, got that one as well.

 

I understand that you think you are in the right when the law shows that you are not. What I don't understand is how you can reasonably expect someone to understand your feeling that traffic laws only apply to you when it is convenient for you.

[Chef Jim]

Yes....

 

except for rules that "can have no reasonable application to a bicycle operator." Presumably, this refers to laws governing highways, some sidewalks, and other non-bicycle-friendly turf. It doesn't apply to the stop-sign scenario, even though some bicycle advocates argue that stop signs "have no reasonable application to a bicycle operator."

 

While were on the subject of laws, Id like you to post for the audience how you approach complainace with food handling and health code laws in your kitchen. It would also be beneficial if you post the most recent inspection report your kitchen recevied. You ARE a pro chef, right?

 

Where oh where should I start? Hmmm, well first of all what you posted and highlighted were opinions by bike riders not the law. I'm sorry but all bike riders MUST follow all the rules of the road all the time, at least here in CA. Look it up. Now redarding my professional chef record. Well seeing I have not been a professional chef for over 10 years I can't really post you my inspection reports. But I will tell you that as a chef I followed all food health and safety rules to the letter. I was HACCP certified and went through annual training and actually trained it for the last company I worked for. And you know what, I did this every day, not just when the health inspector was coming. You know unlike people like you who only follow the rules when it's convenient.

 

I used to ride a bike all the time. Did I follow the rules? Hell no, but I wasn't a smug bastard who said yes I follow the rules, but only when it's convenient, like the hours of.........

 

And I'm not alone here. Short little letter to the Editor in the SF Chronicle this morning and there usually one or two like this every week. It's a problem and you're part of it.

 

Bicycle rules of the road?

 

Recently I had to dodge two bicycles on the sidewalk as I walked five blocks on Market Street and collided with another pedestrian as we both jumped to avoid one particularly aggressive cyclist.

 

Later, driving on Montgomery Street was made impossible by the cyclist peddling against traffic in the middle of the street.

 

Am I no longer welcome in San Francisco unless on a bicycle?

 

LINDA MONTGOMERY

 

San Francisco

[DC Tom]

Im "outnumbered" only becuase the majority of people posting on this thread havent been on a bike in about a decade.

 

From the get-go Ive stated that my opinion and manner in which I operate any one of my bikes has been one that follows TO THE LETTER how the original article spells it out. Direct from the article:

 

Bikes occupy a gray area of the law. They're neither cars nor pedestrians. Most states do carve out special laws for bikes, but not enough to avoid confusion. Take this scenario: I'm approaching a stop sign on my bike. There are clearly no cars coming from either direction. Do I come to a complete stop? Can I cautiously slide through? The traffic laws say full stop. But in practice, few bikers hit the brake, put their foot on the ground, and then start pedaling again. Are they criminals?

 

The D.C. Code recognizes the special status of bikes. Bikes shall follow all traffic laws, the code says, except for rules that "can have no reasonable application to a bicycle operator." Presumably, this refers to laws governing highways, some sidewalks, and other non-bicycle-friendly turf. It doesn't apply to the stop-sign scenario, even though some bicycle advocates argue that stop signs "have no reasonable application to a bicycle operator."

 

The stop sign scenario above matches perfectly the one I described in my own experiences, too.

Based on speaking to and following the lead of many fellow cyclists I ride often with, some as advanced and experienced as having rode under their home Country's National flag in the Olympics and Cycling National Championships, and having read this, and many many articles on the subject, and having logged close to 4,000 miles/year on my own, Im comfortable that how I operate anby of my bikes, on the road or off it is in line with A) traffic law as it is currently intepreted and enforced and B) with keeping my safety and the safety of others in mind and C) common courtesy.

 

Ive NEVER in this thread advocated or excused stupid wrong-way riding, riding on sidewalks or ANY behavior that puts either the cyclists, the pedestrians or the driver's safety in ANY kind of jeopardy. Not once. The CLOSEST I came to that is tell inkman that he probably should of waited for the cyclist to pass him and even there, said that only becuase it was the cyclist, not inkman that was a selfish moron.

 

If thats not good enough for ya, theres nothing I can do.

 

So you operate your bicycle within the law, and offer as proof a real-life situation that you support with an article that specifically points out that you don't operate your bicycle within the law?

 

 

Have I called you an idiot recently? Because you're an idiot.

[RkFast]

So you operate your bicycle within the law, and offer as proof a real-life situation that you support with an article that specifically points out that you don't operate your bicycle within the law?

 

 

Have I called you an idiot recently? Because you're an idiot.

 

Tommy...if there is ONE thing on this !@#$ing mudball of Earth Im POSITIVE I know more about than you, its this topic. So step aside.

 

And Jimmy....I NEVER said I may skip out on following traffic laws WHEN ITS "CONVENIENT." "Convenience" NEVER entered into this discussion. Ever. And you now show me this letter about cyclists going the wrong way and riding on sidewalks???!!?? How many !@#$ing times to I have to drill it into your thick !@#$ing skull that I DO NOT advocate or excuse this type of riding??!!?? Holy ****, youre in BF territory with your inability to understand what Im spelling out here. Ive said about FIVE times in this thread that this type of cycling and flouting of laws is INEXCUSABLE. Im AGREEING WITH YOU on that. The ONLY place I part with you on these issues is where you think that cylists should obey traffic laws to the letter vis a vis stop signs and lights. And even there, I ONLY advocate for the cylcists being given leeway on those specific rules when road and traffic conditions make it acceptable and permissible for the cyclists to have it, like allowing cyclusts to forego making full stops for lights and stop signs when there is no auto or pedestrian traffic present.

 

A bit of MORE reading for you:

 

http://washcycle.typepad.com/home/2008/07/...yth-of-the.html

 

Now preach to me some more about who obeys laws and when. Becuase unless youre out there in your car counting 1,2,3 at stop signs and holding it to 55 MPH, youre a FOS hypocrite.

[DC Tom]

Tommy...if there is ONE thing on this !@#$ing mudball of Earth Im POSITIVE I know more about than you, its this topic. So step aside.

 

First, don't pretend that's a safe assumption.

 

Second...it doesn't change the fact that you claim to operate your bicycle within the law, and offer as proof a real-life situation that you support with an article that specifically points out that you don't operate your bicycle within the law. Any argument to what little authority you may or may not claim to have doesn't refute that simple point.

[Chef Jim]

Tommy...if there is ONE thing on this !@#$ing mudball of Earth Im POSITIVE I know more about than you, its this topic. So step aside.

 

And Jimmy....I NEVER said I may skip out on following traffic laws WHEN ITS "CONVENIENT." "Convenience" NEVER entered into this discussion. Ever. And you now show me this letter about cyclists going the wrong way and riding on sidewalks???!!?? How many !@#$ing times to I have to drill it into your thick !@#$ing skull that I DO NOT advocate or excuse this type of riding??!!?? Holy ****, youre in BF territory with your inability to understand what Im spelling out here. Ive said about FIVE times in this thread that this type of cycling and flouting of laws is INEXCUSABLE. Im AGREEING WITH YOU on that. The ONLY place I part with you on these issues is where you think that cylists should obey traffic laws to the letter vis a vis stop signs and lights. And even there, I ONLY advocate for the cylcists being given leeway on those specific rules when road and traffic conditions make it acceptable and permissible for the cyclists to have it, like allowing cyclusts to forego making full stops for lights and stop signs when there is no auto or pedestrian traffic present.

 

A bit of MORE reading for you:

 

http://washcycle.typepad.com/home/2008/07/...yth-of-the.html

 

Now preach to me some more about who obeys laws and when. Becuase unless youre out there in your car counting 1,2,3 at stop signs and holding it to 55 MPH, youre a FOS hypocrite.

 

Why do you advocate that bikers should not have to follow the rules? Ohhhh I see so it make your lives easier. Yup you are definately the biker type that I hate, it's all about you guys right? The rules of the road revolve around you and should be changed to make things more convenient for you. "The rules of the road should be changed for US." Listen I don't care if you blow through a red light or stop sign, but don't tell me that you should be allowed to do that. Let me ask you one question. Should the driver of a car be allowed to blow through a stop sign or red light if no one else is around?

[RkFast]

Why do you advocate that bikers should not have to follow the rules? Ohhhh I see so it make your lives easier. Yup you are definately the biker type that I hate, it's all about you guys right? The rules of the road revolve around you and should be changed to make things more convenient for you. "The rules of the road should be changed for US." Listen I don't care if you blow through a red light or stop sign, but don't tell me that you should be allowed to do that. Let me ask you one question. Should the driver of a car be allowed to blow through a stop sign or red light if no one else is around?

 

Its becuase, Jim...here is the REAL truth......bikes DONT have to follow the rules.

 

I have to admit to something.

 

I lied. I really dont follow the traffic laws EVER.

 

I was just trying to make a good case. If you and your ilk dont like me blocking your lane, or blowing through a light, too !@#$ing bad. And if you come within an ants dick of me or worse, hit me, Ill get so lawyered up and sue your ass so bad, youd never know what hit you. Andf the best part? Even though I was the one who was the how-you-say? Smug !@#$? Ill win the lawsuit. Heck, at the WORST, youll be financing my NEW bike. For example, one of my buds go hit by some "perfect law abiding driver" a few months back...now hes riding a brand new $8,000 Tarmac.

 

Come to think of it, I WANT you to hit me...my Madone's getting a little long in the tooth and I got a C50 I got my eye on. Would be SWEET if YOU paid for it!

[KD in CA]

Its becuase, Jim...here is the REAL truth......bikes DONT have to follow the rules.

 

blah..blah...blah

 

 

Remind me the grab the tissues next time everyone is crying over some obnoxious biker that is DOA.

[Beerball]

For example, one of my buds go hit by some "perfect law abiding driver" a few months back...now hes riding a brand new $8,000 Tarmac.

Nice to know that someone your age still has heros.

[ieatcrayonz]

Yes....

 

except for rules that "can have no reasonable application to a bicycle operator." Presumably, this refers to laws governing highways, some sidewalks, and other non-bicycle-friendly turf. It doesn't apply to the stop-sign scenario, even though some bicycle advocates argue that stop signs "have no reasonable application to a bicycle operator."

 

While were on the subject of laws, Id like you to post for the audience how you approach complainace with food handling and health code laws in your kitchen. It would also be beneficial if you post the most recent inspection report your kitchen recevied. You ARE a pro chef, right?

Your post highlights who is really at fault. It is the government's for being a bunch of Los Gatos and not standing up to the bicylists. The "main roads" were physically designed for cars, not bikes. Some roads have added a bike lane to pander to the spandex mafia. When there is no bike lane, there should be no bikes. It is a matter of physics. If bikes cannot go the proper speed, cannot stop in a timely manner and have physical characteristics different from the cars for which the road was designed, then they have no business on the roads. The cyclists belong on neighborhood roads, period. It is a matter of safety for the bicyclist.

 

Talking about cars driving defensively is a joke. If there is a gnat flying at your head do you alter your course or stop until the gnat flies by or would you expect the gnat to do that? Cars don't need to "defend" against a bike any more than you need to "defend" against a gnat.

 

Having bicycles on car roads is EXACTLY like cars driving up and down runways at airports.

[Chef Jim]

Its becuase, Jim...here is the REAL truth......bikes DONT have to follow the rules.

 

I have to admit to something.

 

I lied. I really dont follow the traffic laws EVER.

 

I was just trying to make a good case. If you and your ilk dont like me blocking your lane, or blowing through a light, too !@#$ing bad. And if you come within an ants dick of me or worse, hit me, Ill get so lawyered up and sue your ass so bad, youd never know what hit you. Andf the best part? Even though I was the one who was the how-you-say? Smug !@#$? Ill win the lawsuit. Heck, at the WORST, youll be financing my NEW bike. For example, one of my buds go hit by some "perfect law abiding driver" a few months back...now hes riding a brand new $8,000 Tarmac.

 

Come to think of it, I WANT you to hit me...my Madone's getting a little long in the tooth and I got a C50 I got my eye on. Would be SWEET if YOU paid for it!

 

I won't be financing your new bike because you'll be dead. I have great aim.

[RkFast]

I won't be financing your new bike because you'll be dead. I have great aim.

 

No I wont becuase you know if you even TRY, you will be in jail for a very very long time, and your familes in the poor house (and mine supremely wealthy). And I can handle a 15% hill with switchbacks at 45 MPH...you think I cant dodge out of YOUR way? LOL.

 

Thats the best part here...all you cowards talking about "taking out" a cyclist?

 

No you wont...and that the best part of this. For all your tough talk, you, for some reason, place value on your fat, pathetic lives that have this jealousy for people like me who actually have the motivation to get OFF our asses and DO SOMETHING with ourselves besides park at the bar and down two dozen wings.

 

So I WILL make you slow down and do what I want....and you pathetic fat losers cant do a thing about it. You arent hitting ANYONE with your cars. Or even making a false move. Becuase you know if you even try, Ill be on the celly forwarding a picture of your plate, or even your silly mugs to the cops within about ten seconds.

 

I swear...this is too good. The more I see all of you getting your panties in a wad over an itty bitty bicycle getting between you and your Big Macs, the more Im motivated to just move on over to the left and make you wait longer to get to it. Becuase...ya know...if Im gonna obey dem traffic laws, Im entitled to that lane!

 

So sit back there and slow down, tubby(s).

[DC Tom]

No I wont becuase you know if you even TRY, you will be in jail for a very very long time, and your familes in the poor house (and mine supremely wealthy). And I can handle a 15% hill with switchbacks at 45 MPH...you think I cant dodge out of YOUR way? LOL.

 

Thats the best part here...all you cowards talking about "taking out" a cyclist?

 

No you wont...and that the best part of this. For all your tough talk, you, for some reason, place value on your fat, pathetic lives that have this jealousy for people like me who actually have the motivation to get OFF our asses and DO SOMETHING with ourselves besides park at the bar and down two dozen wings.

 

So I WILL make you slow down and do what I want....and you pathetic fat losers cant do a thing about it. You arent hitting ANYONE with your cars. Or even making a false move. Becuase you know if you even try, Ill be on the celly forwarding a picture of your plate, or even your silly mugs to the cops within about ten seconds.

 

I swear...this is too good. The more I see all of you getting your panties in a wad over an itty bitty bicycle getting between you and your Big Macs, the more Im motivated to just move on over to the left and make you wait longer to get to it. Becuase...ya know...if Im gonna obey dem traffic laws, Im entitled to that lane!

 

So sit back there and slow down, tubby(s).

 

 

Did you just have stroke or something?

 

 

 

And I can handle a 15% hill with switchbacks at 45 MPH

 

That can't possibly be legal - at least 15 over.

[ieatcrayonz]

No you wont...and that the best part of this. For all your tough talk, you, for some reason, place value on your fat, pathetic lives that have this jealousy for people like me who actually have the motivation to get OFF our asses and DO SOMETHING with ourselves besides park at the bar and down two dozen wings.

 

I swear...this is too good. The more I see all of you getting your panties in a wad over an itty bitty bicycle getting between you and your Big Macs, the more Im motivated to just move on over to the left and make you wait longer to get to it. Becuase...ya know...if Im gonna obey dem traffic laws, Im entitled to that lane!

 

So sit back there and slow down, tubby(s).

Some of those tubbys are indeed on their way to get Big Macs while others are actually producing for a society that builds the roads you have taken over. Some of these drivers, unlike bicyclists, might even understand concepts of physics like mass, velocity and momentum. They are not spandex wearing Marys pedaling where they don't belong just looking for an opportunity to disrupt and whine. Some of them have jobs which require them to drive to their place of business.

 

Some of them might even work for spandex companies. You wouldn't want to make them late for work as it might delay the release of this fall's fuschia/chartreuse color pallettes.

 

As a matter of fact some of them might not even be tubbies at all. Some might be in shape due to their manly occuapations or participation in manlier sports than biking. By manlier sports than biking I mean stuff like soccer, badminton, curling and pretty much all other sports not requiring streamline clothing. Of course cycling doesn't require goofy clothing but it might help you get that 7:00 minute mile instead of 7:01.