|
Post by professorx on Mar 10, 2009 21:50:49 GMT -5
ProfessorX, I can appreciate that and am fully willing to take those risks when I decide to ride down any particular road. When my audience is other bikers then I'll be preaching that same line to them. However, when my audience is motorist I'll be preaching to them on their responsibilities as drivers. For a motorist to ever say something like, "I didn't see him" should be a capital offense unless someone steps out from between two parked buses. If you can't see get off the road until the conditions are well lit enough for you to see. That is your responsibility as a motorist to be able to see the road. It is also your responsibility as a motorist to be able to stop before hitting anything. It is also your responsibility as a motorist to follow along behind a slower vehicle until it is safe to pass. If you are a responsible motorist you will accept your responsibilities and not run over bicyclist. I'll light myself up and accept the risks as I see fit. Please accept your responsibilities and maybe I won't wake up dead and you won't wake up with blood on your hands. I guess my main problem is that is is taken for granted that it HAD to be the motorists fault in this case. For the bike and the truck to have come into contact HAD to be the driver's fault. After all there is the 3 feet rule. The sad fact here is that Chattanooga is full of weekend cyclists who believe that if given half a chance they'd be the next Lance Armstrong. I've ridden in tours where tons of mistakes were made and sometimes people were hurt or almost caused accidents with motor vehicles. People who were fatigued and dehydrated and cycling erratically. People not knowing how to use their equipment and not controlling their bike (pedals, toe clips, chains etc.) Their self image doesn't match reality. You can't buy your way into shape with an expensive bikes and gear. I am not saying that this is the case with Mr. Meek, or even the pink scooter lady... I am just saying that if a person takes up a hobby with zero room for error, they have to accept the risks. I have a three feet rule with my truck too. Have I ever been hit by another vehicle? Yes. If I were on a bike, I would have been killed, luckily I was protected by 3 tons of steel. If I choose not to protect myself, then I guess I have assumed liability. Again, most cyclists do not have full control over their bikes. I guess you've seen a person on a road bike navigate railroad tracks, pot holes etc. There could be a 20 foot rule and people woud still get hurt. How long does it take a car to go a few feet? As for "I didn't see him". He might not have. Is that a capital offense? Is it automatically the motorist's fault. Not always, in my opinion. We are going to condemn a person based on a quote that they made in a super stressful situation? I think that is the first thing anyone says in any accident. "I didn't see them..." "They came out of nowhere.." I don't intend to blame this specific cyclist, or this specific motorist, either. The accident may have been totally unavoidable on both sides. That is not unreasonable. Things happen on bikes. Tires go out, chains come off, chains break, debris in the road will screw with a road bike. Many cyclists go to the side of the road as much as possible, then cut back out when they think the vehicle has passed. The ramp or whatever may have made enough contact with the saddle bags to cause a serious accident. Who knows? In general, I think there is a lot of blame to share overall. A lot of cyclists are idiots, a lot of motorists are idiots... Idiots on bikes (and motorcycles, and scooters) mixed with idiots in cars don't mix. I don't like the idea of making examples of people to serve a political cause. Let's stick it to the motorist, to make an example of past bike accidents. Let's stick it to Freeman, because we don't like police in general, etc. The system is not in place to cary out people's personal political vendettas or to make political statements... Well it's not supposed to be.
|
|
BlackFox
Senior Forumite
Stay thirsty my friends
Posts: 4,496
|
Post by BlackFox on Mar 10, 2009 22:09:14 GMT -5
Well said.
You are much more eloquent, and knowledgable on the subject, than I.
|
|
Babs
Senior Forumite
Diet Spryte
Even cuter?
Posts: 3,674
|
Post by Babs on Mar 10, 2009 23:45:04 GMT -5
I drive my car to work. Any kind of fatal accident could happen anytime. It wasn't this man's hobby, it was his way to get to work. He rode his bike to work. I'm not saying who's fault it is-I don't know. They both had a right to be there and neither expected to die. Sort of like all of us when we wake up in the mornings. I guess I should expect to be killed any time in my car, and it would be understandable from the other side of view.
|
|
RuneDeer
Senior Forumite
I look pretty young, but I'm just back-dated.
Posts: 2,937
|
Post by RuneDeer on Mar 11, 2009 6:11:11 GMT -5
It would seem to be a matter of simple common sense (whazzat?) - when you're on a narrow road and another car is coming toward you and there's an unprotected flesh & blood being on your right (be it cyclist, pedestrian, unsupervised child or stray animal), and it seems unavoidable that you're going to strike one or the other, which course of action is likely to do the most harm? And I'm not talking about "harm" to your driving record or your insurance rates. At the very least, it won't end up on the news, either.
The idea of hitting a pedestrian or cyclist is my worst nightmare ... much worse than the thought of getting honked at by the other impatient drivers on Wilcox when waiting for a cyclist to transition onto Riverside.
|
|
Police Moderator
Global Moderator
On The Job and Tangled Up In Blue
Posts: 9,821
|
Post by Police Moderator on Mar 11, 2009 6:18:53 GMT -5
If any good can come from this tragedy, maybe a heightened awareness of others on the road (on both sides) is a potential benefit for both motorists and bicyclists.
|
|
Bloodhound
Senior Member
Sparky
I like football
Posts: 872
|
Post by Bloodhound on Mar 11, 2009 6:29:05 GMT -5
I didn't know him well, but I have ridden with him a few times. He was a serious rider that was well aware of the rules and obeyed them. He was a lobbyist for proper cyclist etiquette and a promoter for cycling as an alternate form of transportation. The man wasn't just a weekend hobbyist. He knew what he was doing. That being said, we all know the risks involved, but there are traffic laws in place to protect all vehicle operators, regardless of how big or how many wheels you have on it. I do believe that this truck driver is guilty of vehicular homicide in the death of David Meek just as much as if he had crashed into a car and that driver had died. I'm sure it isn't a willful act of murder, but the truth is that it was not an accident. There are no accidents. Bad things like that happen when you are not paying attention to what you are doing. The driver is certainly guilty of that when he didn't notice a bicycle blinking like a Christmas tree properly and legally riding in the lane ahead of him, but he won't get charged with anything. Neither will the next guy that doesn't see a cyclist.
|
|
|
Post by coffeeshooter on Mar 11, 2009 9:08:54 GMT -5
I'd like to find more information than what is on this link. The link to the actual bill didn't work for me. My daughter uses a bike for transportation most of the time when the weather will allow. (Yes, I worry every day.) We've been even more concerned since last week's accident. This makes me want to discourage her from doing so. She sold her old car last year to get a better bike. Can you describe this 3 foot law in more detail? Does it imply that the motor vehicle must leave a 3 foot distance between them when they pass a cyclist? Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by cadillacdude1975 on Mar 11, 2009 9:19:13 GMT -5
correct me if i am wrong, but aren't bicycle riders supposed be on the side of the road so that they face oncoming traffic? when i was younger, that is the rule i always followed. you can see what is coming at you.
|
|
|
Post by blindsolitude on Mar 11, 2009 9:30:01 GMT -5
the website was just an informational page that popped up in a search. I thought it had some good information (which has been discussed on in this topic) on it regarding motorists' and cyclists' tips for sharing the road.
In response to your question- taken from the home page of the website: "Entitled the Jeff Roth and Brian Brown Bicycle Protection Act 0f 2007, this bill designates a safe passing zone of three feet for motor vehicles when overtaking a bicycle on the roadway and classifies violation as a Class C misdemeanor."
|
|
HonorH957
Senior Member
The Lieutenant
Posts: 797
|
Post by HonorH957 on Mar 11, 2009 9:30:37 GMT -5
State law provides that bicycles are considered motor vehicles, and as such, must obey all traffic laws AND be afforded the same road rights as any other vehicle. I don't have any problems with cyclists using the roads. I don't mind waiting to pass them safely, but I do have a serious problem with those who don't think traffic rules apply to them. I work downtown and have seen many cyclists blow through stop signs and red lights, and go the wrong way on one way streets, actions that would get drivers a ticket. I've had to slam on my brakes more times than I can count to avoid a cyclist who is not obeying traffic laws. While the helmet cam initiative may be a way for cyclists to record law breaking drivers, what is the drivers option?
|
|
|
Post by blindsolitude on Mar 11, 2009 9:31:06 GMT -5
I don't believe so. Cyclists are supposed to follow the rules of the road (that would include going with the flow of traffic, not against it).
|
|
|
Post by Warkitty on Mar 11, 2009 10:22:34 GMT -5
No, a bicycle riding AGAINST traffic is at even greater risk and more hazardous than riding with traffic.
Regarding the cyclists ignoring traffic signals, myself, the folks over at Outdoor Chattanooga, David Meek and many others have been arguing with them and telling them to obey the laws for years. It was one of David's pet peeves as well. We are continuing to remind them.
Something I've seen done in the little burgh of Avondale Heights is a police officer pulling over an entire peleton that had ignored a stop sign. He was unable to issue citations to 50 riders, but the message got across. There's far less shenanigans in that little area because everyone knows they risk being stopped, ticketed or taken to the police station for traffic violations if they can't produce an id.
|
|
HonorH957
Senior Member
The Lieutenant
Posts: 797
|
Post by HonorH957 on Mar 11, 2009 10:31:56 GMT -5
Something I've seen done in the little burgh of Avondale Heights is a police officer pulling over an entire peleton that had ignored a stop sign. He was unable to issue citations to 50 riders, but the message got across. There's far less shenanigans in that little area because everyone knows they risk being stopped, ticketed or taken to the police station for traffic violations if they can't produce an id. I wish they would do that in the downtown area. They'd rack up quite a bit in fines.
|
|
|
Post by Warkitty on Mar 11, 2009 11:44:13 GMT -5
It would probably make drivers happy to know the rules are enforced equally, just as it would make me happy to know the 3' passing rule was being enforced when and where possible.
|
|
|
Post by cadillacdude1975 on Mar 11, 2009 13:42:49 GMT -5
i was wrong in my thinking in my above post. i did a little looking on google, and according to tennessee sate law, bicycles are legal vehicles and should be expected on all public roads. this also makes other drivers responsible for treating the bike rider as if they are a car or truck.
if the driver of the commercial vehicle states that he never saw Mr. Meeks, then he was not aware of his surroundings and should not have been driving.
personally, i do not know how the hell you could miss someone on a bike pedaling. it is not like the bike rider is going the flow of traffic unless it is a down hill stretch.
this has the makings of a huge legal mess. that is all i know.
|
|
|
Post by professorx on Mar 12, 2009 20:18:53 GMT -5
Something I've seen done in the little burgh of Avondale Heights is a police officer pulling over an entire peleton that had ignored a stop sign. Peleton? Isn't that a little pretentious? Another local cyclists was critically injured today. This time there were no autos involved. His peloton of one became unstable due to speed bumps. chattanoogan.com/articles/article_146640.aspPoint #1 - There is no good place for cyclists to cycle in Chattanooga. Point #2 - Too many people buy bikes that are unsuitable for their skill level. "Hey I have virtually no cycling experience and bought a super expensive road bike with toe clips. I'll have all the cool gear and no experience. I'll ride in pelotons and be a menace to traffic and other bikers." You can have all the three foot rules you want, but I'd like to have a dollar for every time I saw a Chattanooga cyclist almost wipe out while reaching for a water bottle. Cars like when cyclists swerve out into traffic. Tell me you've not seen cyclists in town struggling to get out of their toe clips at traffic lights. I am sure your peleton ran the stop sign in order to not have to stop and unclip. The latest report on the other cyclist says "A police report on the traffic death of bicyclist David L. Meek says the truck driver who became entangled with him "could have seen the bike, but it is not likely that he should have seen the bike." Down play the role of a cyclist in his own safety all you want, but it is the cyclists responsibility ultimately. Riding in low light conditions though a construction zone? I wouldn't even walk down that road, let alone bike down it. Play the bike martyr all you want, but you might also get cyclists to accept their limitations and keep their own safety in mind. Have people buy bikes that match their experience rather than push the most expensive bikes and equipment. Publish safe places to ride. Educate about safety equipment. Sell more beach cruisers and beginner bikes, not everyone needs a $2,000 titanium model with toe straps or toe clips. I am sure you guffawed at the cruiser bike, but I wouldn't expect anything different from Chattanooga cyclists and their expensive fashion accessories. px
|
|
|
Post by daworm on Mar 12, 2009 20:43:48 GMT -5
I'd never heard of the 3' law until this thread. Since apparently it went into effect in 2007, I'd say 99.99% of all drivers in Chattanooga, who took their driving test before this law went into effect, haven't heard of it either (and who knows if it is even covered on current driving test or handbooks?).
Now, I know ignorance of the law is no excuse, but just because a cyclist knows about this law, he or she should not expect a driver to know about it, and certainly should not act as if they do. That would be just plain stupid.
|
|
|
Post by Justin Thyme on Mar 12, 2009 21:37:58 GMT -5
Worm, would you drive closer than 3' to a cyclist whether there was a law or not? I think most people would give a cyclist that much berth regardless of the law.
|
|
|
Post by Warkitty on Mar 12, 2009 21:42:16 GMT -5
*sigh*
It wasn't a construction zone.
The reporter used words not used in the synopsis of the police report I was provided. I suspect reporter bias, he certainly seems LIKE YOU to want to make it where no one can ride a bike anywhere but on the sidewalks where bikes can threaten pedestrians instead of slowing you a tad bit in your rush to drive 1/2 mile to your next big mac. The report I read indicated that the driver could/i] have seen the bike, and that the tail light could[/b] have been washed out by the ambient light in the area. NOT that the driver "should not" have been able to see the bike.
Pretentious? No. It's the proper term when speaking of a group of around 50 cyclists to call it a peleton. Like it or lump it, that's the word much like it's a flock of geese and a herd of horses.
Like it or not, argue about how wrong you think it is for someone to spend a grand on a nice bike and then go out to learn how to ride it safely all you want, but you can expect to see more and more cyclists on the roads, commuting to and from work. The place they belong by law is on the road.
|
|
|
Post by professorx on Mar 12, 2009 22:04:18 GMT -5
*sigh* It wasn't a construction zone. The reporter used words not used in the synopsis of the police report I was provided. I suspect reporter bias, he certainly seems LIKE YOU to want to make it where no one can ride a bike anywhere but on the sidewalks where bikes can threaten pedestrians instead of slowing you a tad bit in your rush to drive 1/2 mile to your next big mac. The report I read indicated that the driver could/i] have seen the bike, and that the tail light could[/b] have been washed out by the ambient light in the area. NOT that the driver "should not" have been able to see the bike. Pretentious? No. It's the proper term when speaking of a group of around 50 cyclists to call it a peleton. Like it or lump it, that's the word much like it's a flock of geese and a herd of horses. Like it or not, argue about how wrong you think it is for someone to spend a grand on a nice bike and then go out to learn how to ride it safely all you want, but you can expect to see more and more cyclists on the roads, commuting to and from work. The place they belong by law is on the road. [/quote] I expected as much. I have never argued that it should be illegal for bikes to be on the road. I only suggest it violates common sense. Just as I would never ride a motorcycle, scooter or rollerblades in traffic. How about people learn to ride a easier to operate bike in a safe enviroment, then hit the public roads on a more complex biking system? NOPE, learn in traffic. Even if you did not intend to write that, that's exactly what many cyclists do. If most people knew how negligent and poorly skilled most cyclists were, they laws would probably prohibit them from public roads. FYI a peloton is the main body of cyclists in a race, not a group of doughy causal cyclists decked out in lightspeed gear from head to toe.
|
|
Babs
Senior Forumite
Diet Spryte
Even cuter?
Posts: 3,674
|
Post by Babs on Mar 12, 2009 23:40:43 GMT -5
You don't make much sense. I'd rather see a cyclist never remove their eyes from the road and grab a water bottle that never moves an inch from it's holder than a motorist grope in their visor or passenger seat for directions, CD, or cellphone. Next time you're waiting at a stop light, see how many people are on their cellphones going 30+ mph and weaving or going too slow or fast. No motorcycles on the streets?! Hah! 18 wheeler trucks are more dangerous and cause more road tear than a car, but they are used and needed and drive as safely as they can. Dangerous to cars that don't know how to drive with them....like bikers.
|
|
rebelgrunt
Full Member
Wheres my wrench???
Posts: 374
|
Post by rebelgrunt on Mar 12, 2009 23:48:50 GMT -5
Well I guess everybody has chosen sides and they all agree that the other one is wrong...
I have no problem with the bikes on the roads...I do wish that if they want all the rights other drives have; they should all have to take a driver/rider test and get a license like the rest of us and also register their bikes like the rest of us...If I have to get a license and register my bike (granted it's a 1978 750cc Hondamatic) in order to ride it on the road, then why shouldn't they???
Just a thought...
|
|
Police Moderator
Global Moderator
On The Job and Tangled Up In Blue
Posts: 9,821
|
Post by Police Moderator on Mar 13, 2009 2:35:05 GMT -5
I think their is some fault on both sides. Based on the number of bicyclists I am seeing on the roadway, the fact that vehicle/bicycle crashes are pretty rare seems to point out that vehicles and bicycles are commingling pretty well, considering. That, in and of itself, is amazing considering a lot of motorists fail to see, or hear, a bright, lime green, massive fire truck, running numerous lights and an awfully loud siren (But, they can invariably notice a police car not using turn signals or exceeding the speed limit, every time). Some motorists fail to see, or hear, marked police cars, also running hot, and huge freight trains (with flashing lights on the train and the intersection) that run along a pretty visible path. Not much comfort to the family/friends who have lost a loved one in a car versus bicycle crash, though. Lessons learned (From this crash and the following discussion): - Motorists should pay as much attention in driving their cars as they would handling a loaded weapon in the mall
- Just driving the speed limit is not enough attention
- Bicyclists should use all available equipment (Lights, reflectors, clothing, helmets etc.) to make themselves even more visible to other motorists who seldom see fire trucks and trains
- Bicyclists and motorists should abide by the traffic laws (Even if they think that the laws are draconian and big-brotherish)
- LE should pay more attention to the "Three foot" rule violations
- Bicyclists and motorists should know their equipment and be familiar with the safe operation of their vehicle in any condition
- Bicyclists and motorists should know that the "right of way" is really not a "right"
- Bicyclists and motorists should realize that the unit with the largest momentum (Velocity times weight) usually "wins" any "right of way" disagreement
- Bicyclists and motorists should drive with a little more patience and kindness
- Bicyclists and motorists should divide their attention as little as possible when operating a vehicle
In this instant case, LE did a good job investigating the crash which can result in concrete steps being taken to minimize these crashes. The public awareness increased as a result of the coverage and discussion may reduce future crashes as there will be more and more bicyclists/scooterists on the road.
|
|
|
Post by fftspam on Mar 13, 2009 3:45:10 GMT -5
Wow. I wished I had known him. I didn't know that there was a living God amongst us. Someone who absolutely could never ever do wrong. He must have been Jesus 2.0.
Whatever the law is.... would you allow your children ride a bike on Ashland Terrace in the pre-dawn hours? And why not? The law says that its against the law to run over bicyclists in the predawn rush hour.
|
|
RuneDeer
Senior Forumite
I look pretty young, but I'm just back-dated.
Posts: 2,937
|
Post by RuneDeer on Mar 13, 2009 6:13:11 GMT -5
Wow. I wished I had known him. I didn't know that there was a living God amongst us. Someone who absolutely could never ever do wrong. He must have been Jesus 2.0. I hope some equally nice words are shared about you on the occasion of your demise.
|
|
Felix
Global Moderator
Tepid One
Happy Morning
Posts: 4,137
|
Post by Felix on Mar 13, 2009 8:52:47 GMT -5
This has been an interesting discussion, with lots of divergent opinions seriously aired and rebutted. There have also been the usual snarls from the Troll Gallery. One important point made by the PM: Bicyclists and motorists should realize that the unit with the largest momentum (Velocity times weight) usually "wins" any "right of way" disagreement Right. Terrific forces are involved in moving masses of metal along our streets, even at "slow" speeds under thirty or so. As long as drivers and riders pay attention, everything moves smoothly and routinely. Driving is so much a part of daily routine for all of us, however, that we lose sight of the potential for destruction involved in the physics of collisions; familiarity breeds inattention and carelessness. The many photos appearing often in the news of mangled steel marking more carnage on the roads illustrates the consequences. As several people have pointed out here, the investment in reshaping the street grid to separate motorized and people-powered transportation is not going to happen. It would cost too much. A fact of life, not an endorsement on my part. Another consideration: if cyclists are at risk, how much more so are pedestrians? Should pedestrians be barred from all streets, and not just limited-access expressways? Have you ever walked across the Market Street Bridge? Scary. Not as much as before the revamping, when the sidewalks were the same level as the many-layered pavement on which cars, trucks and buses ran by. Roll on, motorized, wheeled and foot travelers. But be careful out there.
|
|
|
Post by tinkerbellybutton on Mar 13, 2009 9:50:28 GMT -5
As a cyclist who occasionally commutes to work, I can tell you that from my point of view, I cannot be too visually ostentatious or too paranoid of drivers. So far, so good.
|
|
|
Post by professorx on Mar 13, 2009 21:27:42 GMT -5
As a cyclist who occasionally commutes to work, I can tell you that from my point of view, I cannot be too visually ostentatious or too paranoid of drivers. So far, so good. Sounds like good advise. I've never said bikes shouldn't be allowed on the roads. I only wrote that I am not taking my bike on the road again. Today I passed the little memorial set up for Mr. Meeks. Its very sad that a person lost their life. BUT not fifteen minutes later I was lined up with cars at a red light and a bike came zipping though the line of cars waiting at the light. Hey what about the 3 foot rule? This biker violated it about 8 times in 30 seconds weaving in between cars at a light. I am sure the cyclist violated the traffic rules so he wouldn't have to stop and unclip at the light. He cut though the narrow path beteen the cars and jumped in front of all the cars. 1rst that was very dangerous. 2nd now he has forced 4-6 cars to have to pass him in traffic. This guy looked like a very exprienced cyclist too. Not the typical doughy posuer Chattanoogan with a Lightspeed cyclist. Say this guy got twisted up while weaving though the cars, I am sure the newpaper would say "Another cyclist killed." People here would write "What about the 3 foot rule?" and blame it on the motor vehicles. Like I wrote before I was a regular cyclist back in the day. I could thow a football a quarter mile, and I could hammer out 35 miles an hour like it was nothing on my bike. Its a great hobby, pastime, lifestyle or whatever you want to call it, but your saftey as a cyclist is solely in your hands. While cycle/auto incidents are supposedly rare I don't think they are. I saw one 4 months ago where the guy didn't even make it out of the bike store parking lot while testing a bike before he encountered an auto (he lived). Lone cycle accidents are not rare. I've sat in ERs with several buddies all day. I made a ton of mistakes that could have seriously injured or killed me. Have fun, but accept the risks. If they ever properly pave the area around Moccasin Bend, I'll be back out there.
|
|
|
Post by Warkitty on Mar 14, 2009 6:53:36 GMT -5
Ok, when on two wheels I assume everyone on 4 or more is actively trying to kill me and behave accordingly. I never said that every cyclist is behaving in accordance with the rules of the road (in fact, I think some of my comments indicate I support ticketing and charging them when they do break the rules... but you thought I was being pretentious).
However, we're not talking to a bunch of cyclists here. On THOSE forums I'm busy telling them to behave with something resembling a sense of self preservation. HERE we're talking to a bunch of drivers that think cyclists are idiots that should stay on the sidewalks or off the road entirely. To THEM I say "watch where you're going instead of dicking around on your cell phone and give the courtesy of passing with safe distance."
Capice?
|
|
|
Post by daworm on Mar 14, 2009 17:53:48 GMT -5
Me personally, I give them much more room than that, and if I can I pass in the other lane entirely. But that's me, someone who's been on the bike instead of in the car.
All I'm saying is that most people have no experience sharing the road. They don't know there are such things as Three Foot laws, they don't even know that legally bicycles are to be considered the same as any other vehicle, and for many of them it doesn't make sense that they are.
Common sense, whether true or not, tells most people that a 5000 lb car going 45 mph and a 15 lb bicycle going 15 mph is not a safe combination, and if asked, most people would be surprised that such a situation is legally allowed to exist. After all, jaywalking is not allowed for much the same reason. So yes, I can easily see where most drivers would think that cyclists are idiots and should stay off the road. And that's why people will be frustrated by cyclists hogging the road, because rightly or wrongly, they don't believe cyclist should be allowed on the road in the first place. At the first perceived opportunity, they'll get around them, whether its 100% safe, or obeying the 3' rule, or not. Is that right? Is it just? No, it isn't. But it is reality. And just because you happen to be right, it is completely unreasonable to expect people to change overnight. And trying to nail drivers to the wall any time there is an incident is going to make your position worse, not better. Don't be surprised if you find backlash in the form of a movement to get bicycles off the roads, rather than to get more on them. Or at the very least to require drivers license, tags, lights, helmets, etc. before cyclists are allowed on the road. As those who propose tougher DUI laws are ever so quick to point out, use of the public road ways is a privilege and not a right.
Hopefully, this spring I'll be able to get a new (at least to me) bike and get back to riding. I think I'll stick to where I preferred before, the Brainard Levee and River Walk, and if I ride on the streets it will be only at organized events where dangerous roads and intersections will be monitored by safety officers, or perhaps in the various public parks with low speed limits. I don't trust either myself or motorists enough to ride on the streets in this town. I've been there, done that, and don't have near the death wish I've had in the past.
|
|