Bicycle Safety and Licenses

:
: It also made me think about why drivers get so angry with cyclists. And
: once again, these drivers' anger spill over to safe cyclists. How do
: people feel about licenses to ride a bike ?

When we were in Germany, my sons were 10 and 7 years old. When a child is
10, they have to take a bicycle riding class, get a grade, and work to get
an official license. In Frankfurt am Main, where we were, there is a little
"town" set up just elementary-school-age-children size and they practiced
riding their bikes through the little streets with traffice lights, etc. It
is against the law to ride on sidewalks there.

We need something similar to this in the U.S. Too many people here think
bikes are toys and there are no guidelines that apply to the use of these
toys. I routinely see grown men riding their bikes on the sidewalks as well
as against traffic. These, however, are not serious cyclists (you can tell
by their bikes and their clothing). Children here in Texas behave as if
there are no rules whatsoever when it comes to bicycles and frequently ride
at night without lights. It's a wonder more cyclists aren't killed!

Pat in TX
:

mcahill said:

I've noticed some amazingly unsafe riding by what I assume are not serious cyclists. I saw a rider ride through a red light into a busy intersection while several cars stayed stopped at a green ...

I see "serious" cyclists running red lights all the time. They slow
down to almost a track stand, and then dart across when they see a gap.
I would say more "serious" riders do this than not.

Quoted message said:

It also made me think about why drivers get so angry with cyclists. And once again, these drivers' anger spill over to safe cyclists.

I agree.

Quoted message said:

How do people feel about licenses to ride a bike ?

I don't think it's practical or necessary. What's needed is
enforcement. When scofflaw cyclists start getting traffic tickets,
they'll think twice about running red lights.

Art Harris

Doesn't this post belong in rec.bicycles.soc or rec.bicycles.misc ? It seems
off-topic here since it does not concern technical issues.
Respectfully,
Blake

Just to frighten you even more : Boo!
--
Ron Hardin
[email hidden]

On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

Please don't have this discussion here -- it belongs in
rec.bicycles.soc.

Thanks,

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

Quoted message said:

How do people feel about licenses to ride a bike ?

No WAY!

There is a common law right of all people to travel on the public
roadways, going back to prehistoric times.

When the automobile appeared on the scene, it was immediately recognized
that this was an unprecedentedly dangerous device, so special
requirements were created to regulate it.

It is clearly understood that the permission to operate a motor vehicle
on public roadways is a priviledge, not a right..

None of this has any legal effect on everybody's right to travel the
roads under their own power.

Sheldon "A Right, Not A Priviledge" Brown
Newtonville, Massachusetts
+-------------------------------------------------+
| Some of my mother's paintings may be seen at: |
| http://sheldonbrown.com/joyce |
+-------------------------------------------------+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
http://harriscyclery.com
Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

Quoted message said:

stayed stopped at a green to keep from hitting him. I saw riders
riding down the wrong way on a one way street against traffic. I

Why is it safer to ride to the direction of traffic rather than against ?
If you always ride at the side of road or side walk and cross the street
just like a pedestrian
rather than like a car, isn't is safer if both cyclist and driver can see
each other ?
I am just curious of the reasoning behind the rule.
Is this a universal rule or only in US ?

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 20:28:53 -0700, "yk" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

stayed stopped at a green to keep from hitting him. I saw riders
riding down the wrong way on a one way street against traffic. I

Why is it safer to ride to the direction of traffic rather than against ?
If you always ride at the side of road or side walk and cross the street
just like a pedestrian
rather than like a car, isn't is safer if both cyclist and driver can see
each other ?
I am just curious of the reasoning behind the rule.
Is this a universal rule or only in US ?

Dear YK,

In many U.S. cities, the speed limit is 25-30 mph for cars.

It might be a bad idea to have bicycles coming at them in
the other direction at 15-30 mph as the cars turn right down
side streets or to pull over to park--or to have the bikes
turning left across the path of the oncoming cars.

Even the slower bicycles need to ride on the right in the
U.S. If you've ever come around a blind turn on a one-way
street in a bike lane with a car next to you and met someone
coming the wrong way in the bike lane, you'll understand.

(An illegally double-parked car blocking the bike lane is
one thing--someone coming at you head-on at 15 mph is quite
another. Quick, which way do you dodge, right or left?)

And think of the fun for parked cars trying to pull out into
traffic. The driver looking over his shoulder is likely to
smash head-on into a bicycle that wasn't visible a moment
earlier.

The same reasoning applies to motorcycles.

Carl Fogel

yk said:

Quoted message said:

stayed stopped at a green to keep from hitting him. I saw riders
riding down the wrong way on a one way street against traffic. I

Why is it safer to ride to the direction of traffic rather than against ?
If you always ride at the side of road or side walk and cross the street
just like a pedestrian
rather than like a car, isn't is safer if both cyclist and driver can see
each other ?
I am just curious of the reasoning behind the rule.
Is this a universal rule or only in US ?

I don't know if it's universal. Who knows what's happening around
Alpha Centauri? But it's certainly the rule in all developed
countries.

Here's something our club passes out. I think it was adapted from a
Bicycling magazine article:

Ride RIGHT!

The traffic laws in Ohio and every other state say:

Bicyclists must ride on the RIGHT side of the road,
WITH traffic - not against it!

Why is this? Why NOT ride facing traffic?

1. Drivers of cars, walkers, and other cyclists never expect to find
you there.

2. You can't see traffic signs or signals from the left side of the
street.

3. If you're riding toward the cars, you come together faster. There's
less time to avoid a crash.

4. If you're riding toward the cars, you'll hit much harder if there's
a crash.

5. When drivers of cars pull into the road (from a stop sign or
driveway), they won't look for somebody coming the wrong way. They'll
pull right in front of you. And it'll be your fault!

6. If there isn't enough space for the car to pass you on the road, the
driver can't wait until it's safe to pass. You'll get forced off the
road into the ditch - or worse, into a head-on crash.

7. A wrong-way bicyclist is a real problem for another bicyclist riding
correctly. Someone has to go into the ditch or into traffic.

8. Riding against traffic is one of the leading causes of serious
bicycle accidents.

9. Riding against traffic is against the law. But don't worry about
this one. They won't arrest you unless you're alive.

Is there any reason you SHOULD ride on the left, facing traffic?

1. You can see the driver's look of surprise just before he hits you!

IF YOU WANT TO KEEP AN EYE ON TRAFFIC, GET A REAR VIEW MIRROR.

- Frank Krygowski

Quoted message said:

How do
people feel about licenses to ride a bike ?

My feelings toward this are only slightly more charitable than my
attitude toward current US leadership.

Licenses do not guarantee rational behavior; if they did, it would
work for automobiles, which my daily observations reveal is not the
case. Your sample is probably just a randomly awful example.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

Let us not forget that motor vehicles require licenses. I don't know where
you live, but I routinely see the following:

* running yellow/red lights
* speeding
* failure to come to a complete stop
* turning without signal
* weaving
* tailgating
* passing bicycles without leaving enough room (3' per the Oregon drivers
manual)

I think people hold bikes to a higher standard; maybe because they know the
chances of a cyclist getting a ticket are much lower.

A license would solve this how?

-Dion

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

While riding around the past several days I've noticed some amazingly
unsafe riding by what I assume are not serious cyclists. I saw a rider
ride through a red light into a busy intersection while several cars
stayed stopped at a green to keep from hitting him. I saw riders
riding down the wrong way on a one way street against traffic. I
routinely saw riders blast off the sidewalk through the intersection
without looking or stopping. Further, these where the majority of the
cyclists I saw while riding through my neighborhood.

All of this made me think that bicycle safety statistics have almost no
meaning to the serious cyclist. After all what does the accident rate
of this group have to do withj the way I ride ? Alligator hunting is
probably as relevant.

It also made me think about why drivers get so angry with cyclists. And
once again, these drivers' anger spill over to safe cyclists. How do
people feel about licenses to ride a bike ?

A license could accomplish two things:

1. A bicycle rider would have to know the laws appicable to bicycles
in order to obtain the license.

2. The threat of license revocation would aid in law enforcement in
the same manner as with the automobile license.

A license could accomplish two things:

1. A bicycle rider would have to know the laws appicable to bicycles
in order to obtain the license.

2. The threat of license revocation would aid in law enforcement in
the same manner as with the automobile license.

The use of public roadways has been somewhat restricted since the
advent of the automobile. I can't ride a horse or even a moped on an
Interstate Highway. And as a pedestrian I am restricted as to where
and how I can cross the roadway (jay walking laws).

Quoted message said:

7. A wrong-way bicyclist is a real problem for another bicyclist riding
correctly. Someone has to go into the ditch or into traffic.

BING BING BING! That's my biggest gripe. All the other reasons have to
do with the rider's own safety - you break this rule and you jeopardize
MY safety... and that gets me hot.

--
My bike blog:
http://diabloscott.blogspot.com/

Oops...i clicked twice

At least the "serious" cyclist you described looked for an opening. I
often see people blast through without even looking.

I agree with you that enforcement is necessary and I think the license
could play a part in enforcement.

"Sheldon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

How do people feel about licenses to ride a bike ?

No WAY!

There is a common law right of all people to travel on the

public

Quoted message said:

roadways, going back to prehistoric times.

In the United States, there has always been regulation of the
right of public access, notwithstanding the whacky arguments on
the internet ranting against motor vehicle licenses and
registration. Not that I think bicycle licensing is necessary.

Quoted message said:

When the automobile appeared on the scene, it was immediately

recognized

Quoted message said:

that this was an unprecedentedly dangerous device, so special
requirements were created to regulate it.

It is clearly understood that the permission to operate a motor

vehicle

Quoted message said:

on public roadways is a priviledge, not a right..

None of this has any legal effect on everybody's right to

travel the

Quoted message said:

roads under their own power.

Except that states have power to regulate public safety and have
passed laws keeping bicycles off certain roads and walks, and
those laws are always upheld, IME. Again, not that I am for
bicycle licensing -- I am just against whacky arguments based on
the "common law" -- which seems to be a wish-list for people with
agendas. The early American "common law" allowed for slavery,
wife rape and a lot of other things that have been rejected as
wrong. If you were hit and killed while riding a bicycle, under
the English and American common law, there was no right to
recover for wrongful death. It was cheapert to kill a person
than to scratch him. -- Jay Beattie.

Art Harris said:

mcahill said:

How do people feel about licenses to ride a bike ?

I don't think it's practical or necessary. What's needed is
enforcement. When scofflaw cyclists start getting traffic tickets,
they'll think twice about running red lights.

OTOH, what we *really* need IMO is more cops *riding* bikes in their
jobs. Houston has a fairly large bike squad which patrols primarily
in the downtown area and a few others. Not too surprisingly, the fact
that a good number of Houston cops are on bikes seems to have made the
force as a whole more reality-driven on the subject of traffic law
enforcement against both cyclists, and motor vehicle drivers who
ignore bikes.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.