Volvo Lifepaint

[silberdrachi]

Absolutely agree on cyclists being able to affect other traffic, but so does a pedestrian who crosses the road without paying attention. 

 

Pretending that you do nothing wrong is human nature and you see it in all kinds of road users.  People who double-park, who cross the line at a busy intersection knowing full well that they won't be able to clear it because other cars are already standing still there, bicycles swerving through traffic and riding on sidewalks, pedestrians walking on cycle lanes or crossing the road without even acknowledging the state of nearby traffic, etc etc.  People are egocentric, especially in traffic. 

Basically you'd need to let everyone get a license before they'd be allowed on public roads, even pedestrians and children.  Or the police should let lots of officers patrol wearing plain clothes and really crack down on traffic infractions, that would also help.

 

 

 

You said : "if I swerve in the bike lane to avoid a pedestrian, ...".  As an avid cyclist, these are the first 2 things that crossed my mind the second I read that :

- What is the pedestrian doing in the bike lane?  He/she has no business being there.

- Why do I need to slow down so I don't need to dodge the pedestrian but don't cars have to slow down and anticipate that I may need to swerve?

 

It's easy to only see it from our own perspective and decide that all others need to adjust to whatever mode of transport we use.  That makes discussions like this extra difficult. 

 

Well in reference to the second part, no they dont have business there, and yes they should. But that doesn't matter in the real world. Just like how drivers are taught to "drive defensively" both cyclists and pedestrians should ride/walk defensively. Those exact two questions are deflecting the burden of responsibility off onto another party. You cant trust that another driver isnt talking on their cellphone and drinking their coffee, just as much as you cant trust a pedestrian to not be on their cellphone and drinking their coffee. Hell ive seen cyclists doing the same as well. People are dumbasses when they are traveling and should be treated as such. Because when it comes down to it, it doesn't matter WHOSE fault an accident is, its that it happened in the first place. Who cares why it happened when someone is going to the hospital really, blame doesn't make it better. Basically yes i believe that everyone needs to be taught how to act in public whether its on the sidewalk, bike lane, or road itself, maybe not as tests but at the very least parents should be teaching kids these things.

[Trik'Stari]

They need to put this on road lines, I can never see that shit at night when it's raining.

 

Yes, my eyesight is terrible.

 

Well in reference to the second part, no they dont have business there, and yes they should. But that doesn't matter in the real world. Just like how drivers are taught to "drive defensively" both cyclists and pedestrians should ride/walk defensively. Those exact two questions are deflecting the burden of responsibility off onto another party. You cant trust that another driver isnt talking on their cellphone and drinking their coffee, just as much as you cant trust a pedestrian to not be on their cellphone and drinking their coffee. Hell ive seen cyclists doing the same as well. People are dumbasses when they are traveling and should be treated as such. Because when it comes down to it, it doesn't matter WHOSE fault an accident is, its that it happened in the first place. Who cares why it happened when someone is going to the hospital really, blame doesn't make it better. Basically yes i believe that everyone needs to be taught how to act in public whether its on the sidewalk, bike lane, or road itself, maybe not as tests but at the very least parents should be teaching kids these things.

 

They need to change the law to state "the pedestrian has the right of way, not that it matters when you're dead".

 

Pedestrians need to realize that the law won't stop a 2 ton guided missile on wheels. As for cyclist....they need to just get off the road, or pay for the same crap drivers have to, inspection, registration, license fee, etc.

[silberdrachi]

 

They need to change the law to state "the pedestrian has the right of way, not that it matters when you're dead".

 

Pedestrians need to realize that the law won't stop a 2 ton guided missile on wheels. As for cyclist....they need to just get off the road, or pay for the same crap drivers have to, inspection, registration, license fee, etc.

 

Yep, doesn't matter what the laws are if you just ran someone over because they were jaywalking. Sure they were in the wrong for crossing there, but you could get charged for manslaughter anyway.

 

To me it makes sense if you have bike lanes on roads that you need to pay for part of the infrastructure. You're using it, you should pay for it. It shouldn't be as much as a car, but it shouldn't be free. In areas that DON'T have bike lanes, bikes shouldn't be on the road because that's going to cause even more problems. More and more areas around me (Ann Arbor/ Metro Detroit) are putting them in and it seems like a good balance. The only problem are areas where they are removing a needed lane to make the bike lane, causing traffic problems at rush hour.

[Trik'Stari]

Yep, doesn't matter what the laws are if you just ran someone over because they were jaywalking. Sure they were in the wrong for crossing there, but you could get charged for manslaughter anyway.

 

To me it makes sense if you have bike lanes on roads that you need to pay for part of the infrastructure. You're using it, you should pay for it. It shouldn't be as much as a car, but it shouldn't be free. In areas that DON'T have bike lanes, bikes shouldn't be on the road because that's going to cause even more problems. More and more areas around me (Ann Arbor/ Metro Detroit) are putting them in and it seems like a good balance. The only problem are areas where they are removing a needed lane to make the bike lane, causing traffic problems at rush hour.

I live in a rural area, pack of cyclists rove around during the spring and summer like they own the road, and when a car comes up behind them they don't even have the courtesy to move to the side or pull over to let the car pass.

 

No, they just keep on going down the road, obstructing traffic, wearing those douchebag looking outfits and helmets, making people want to do this:

[smjpl]

Notice how in one of the videos, the cyclist passes a car that has stopped in the middle of the road for no good reason, only to be then almost hit by a car that the aformentioned car was giving way to? That accident would have been the cyclists fault and no one elses. Paint or not - if he wasn't a spanner the near-miss would never have happened.

 

I completely disagree.

 

Just becuase the stopped car (in the right lane) was giving way to the oncoming car, that doesn't mean the oncoming car has right of way to cross all of the lanes. Cyclist was in the left lane (there was no stop/yeild sign so they have right of way) yet oncoming car went to pull out infront of them. Just because the right lane car had stopped, does not give the oncoming car the right of way to cross the entire road.

 

 

You said "the cyclist passes a car that has stopped in the middle of the road for no good reason". What video are you looking at? The cyclist was travelling in the left lane. He/she did not undertake the stopped car.

 

You seem to think you know the rules of the road better because you did some lessons and a test? Hmmm, I have my doubts.

[hak4fun]

Don't get me wrong, i'm all for saving lives. This is a fantastic idea. 

 

But when cyclists wax lyrical about "sharing the road" and "being treated equally"  - they can get fucked, frankly. 

 

They don't have to do any right-of-way tests, or learn ANY road rules at all to be allowed to ride on the roads like motorised vehicle users do.

They don't pay tax to have the right to use the roads like motorised vehicle users do. 

 

Most cyclists have no idea at all about give-way or right-of-way rules and thus are generally the ones causing accidents. Notice how in one of the videos, the cyclist passes a car that has stopped in the middle of the road for no good reason, only to be then almost hit by a car that the aformentioned car was giving way to? That accident would have been the cyclists fault and no one elses. Paint or not - if he wasn't a spanner the near-miss would never have happened.

 

IMO if they want to be "treated equally" then they need to get fucking licenses like we do. They need to learn the road rules. It makes no sense at all that they are using the same roads yet don't have to learn the rules in order to use them.

I personally a few summers ago got a hefty fine for being an idiot well riding my bike. I wasn't signaling, stopping at stop signs, and was just being a douchebag of the road. Defiantly not doing that again!

 

 We as bicylists are suppose to follow the same rules as a car has to. Stop at stop signs and crosswalks, use signaling, etc, etc, etc. And if we don't we  get crippled with hefty fines  often bigger then the same offense in a car. 

 

So yes, I see your point. making bicyclists get licenses might get rid of a few idiots. But that also means it gets rid of the good bicyclists too who don't have the time or money to take  a test. therefore putting more cars on the road, equaling more pollution and traffic. And do you want an idiot with a car barreling towards at 60mph an hour, or an idiot with a bicycle barreling towards you at 20mph.

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

Of course the infrastructure must be up to par.  Can't blame cyclists for swerving over here.