[Non-Tech News] Louis Rossmann injured in Accident

Egg-Roll · September 10, 2018

7 minutes ago, RobbinM said:

Does it need to? If it cares for it's citizens, isn't it justified?

When roads are renewed, it's little extra cost to facilitate it's users in a better way. It can take decades for all roads to be improved but why not start today?

Come to York Region where a sidewalk done 5 years ago gets a remake but parts of sidewalks 50 years old don't get fixed (and seriously need it)... It's the same with roads, and not just where I live, Toronto has had its fair share of media about bad road maintenance...

It costs a few hundred thousand dollars to pass a new bill stating if you go closer than 1 meter of a bike you get 5 years of jail time, $50,000 fine, no more license for life, and your home is sold to fund your time in jail. That said bill would repay itself within days of being put in place, even if the fine was only $500 What you are asking will never happen in any country run by idiots, I like the idea but equally I myself would never permit the project to go threw simply because I know it would likely cost upwards to 500 million to just do in Canada alone, now imagine the USA who has 10x the roadworks...

3 minutes ago, Razor Blade said:

Thing is though, you can't just make lanes narrower in the US due to the giant vehicles that have to drive on them.

The North American trucking economy would downright crash causing the whole economy to crash, even the box trucks wouldn't be able to do city deliveries... Tho granted I see more vans in Toronto now than trucks. Guess too many oopsies

Lady Fitzgerald · September 10, 2018

6 hours ago, Drak3 said:

It's not nearly as cut and dry as you make it out to be, speed bump. It largely bouls down to police interpretation, which is usually that cyclists are a hazard on the roads.

Beyond the same use pedestrians are restricted to, no, it shouldn't. Cyclists are a hazard to everyone else on the road.

I do not appreciate you partially quoting me, especially when taking it out of context. Below is the full quote:

7 hours ago, Lady Fitzgerald said:

Here in the U.S., except where specifically prohibited and it is posted (such as urban freeways), the roads are for everyone. Period. Deal with it.

Local laws are clear on what traffic is allowed on the roAds under what conditions. Police interpretation has nothing to do with. No one exclusively owns the roads. Everyone, within parameters set by law, have the right to use the roads.

Egg-Roll · September 11, 2018

7 hours ago, Drak3 said:

It's not nearly as cut and dry as you make it out to be, speed bump. It largely bouls down to police interpretation, which is usually that cyclists are a hazard on the roads.

Beyond the same use pedestrians are restricted to, no, it shouldn't. Cyclists are a hazard to everyone else on the road.

That's funny... Cops where I live can be fairly big dicks, yet I've only been asked to get on the sidewalk once while walking on the road, during winter when sidewalks are usually poorly maintained and the day before was one of those times. During the same winter me and 2 other people actually consumed a entire lane(really about half), we were not walking together but far enough apart that a car might not be able to see us beyond the person in front (who was walking close to the curb), it was around 4 AM. Guess what? Cops gave 0 F's as they drove by, tho I have been bugged in the past about visibility concerns by them nothing else.

There are laws stating pedestrians can use the road (esp if sidewalks don't exist or accessible), sure there are limitations, but as long as it's not a highway a cop generally as a rule can not prevent you from walking on a road if no sidewalk is available on that road. The worst they can do is provide you a ride (or call a taxi).

I along with others have used center bus lanes during winter (before/after bus service) because it was maintained before sidewalks(and better), once again one person who cared about me being in the lane was some twat in a support vehicle (20-40 minutes before service) who crawled up my ass endangering both of us after a icy snow storm... (they go up and down occasionally to check machines and look for debris) Their vehicle became a lovely death sentence if someone plowed into them at city speed vs nothing happening (likely)...

Here's a quick google for the states side: (so no one can use, "but thats canada" argument)

https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title41/Chapter6a/41-6a-S1009.html

Quote

(1) Where there is a sidewalk provided and its use is practicable, a pedestrian may not walk along or on an adjacent roadway.
(2) Where a sidewalk is not provided, a pedestrian walking along or on a highway shall walk only on the shoulder, as far as practicable from the edge of the roadway.
(3) Where a sidewalk or a shoulder is not available, a pedestrian walking along or on a highway shall:
(a) walk as near as practicable to the outside edge of the roadway; and
(b) if on a two-way roadway, walk only on the left side of the roadway facing traffic.

FYI #6 can't overrule #3

Edit: while this is for Peds, I'm sure similar laws are in place for drivers about cyclists (miss read the post)

Edit #2: Drivers are hazards to bikers, bikers are hazards to pedestrians, drivers are hazards to pedestrians as well, only time a pedestrian is a hazard to a cyclist (or motorized bike of any type) is when they stupidly jaywalk w/o looking.