« Bloody amazing Danny MacAskill | Main | Why are there stop signs on this traffic circle? »

04/21/2011

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

R Squirrell

It is precisely this arrogant attitude by Bill Bean and his followers that will forever doom the cycling fraternity. Counselling people on bikes to just "take the lane for yourself" is akin to promoting suicide. I hope he can comfort the families of every cycling fatality that is destined to occur by following his "mantra" (idiot).
And by the way, cyclists didn't pay for the roads - motorists did ! Once the cyclists have paid for licences,stickers,ownerships,insurances,plates,etc........then we can consider a fair share of the infrastructure entitlement.

Bill

Thanks to R Squirrel for prompting this brief response to roads ignorance. First, taking the lane for safety is legitimate and legal under the laws of this province and this country. Second, insurance doesn't pay for roads. It supports privately held insurance companies. Third, the first "hardened" roads were created at the behest of cyclists -- motorists came later. And finally, road improvements are paid from general revenue -- all of us who pay taxes, federally, provincially, and municipally. We all own the roads and we have a right to use them.

Alan M

@RSquirrel - if you don't believe Bill, check out this from the MTO:
http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/pubs/cycling-guide/pdfs/cycling-guide.pdf

Roads are public infrastructure, paid for out of general tax revenues, and intended for the movement of people and goods using a multiplicity of legal conveyances including horses, bicycles and motor vehicles. The operators of each have both rights and obligations under the law.

Car insurance benefits insurance company shareholders the most; car license fees only partially cover the cost of running the licensing program.

R Squirrell

Thanks for adding your ignorance to Bill's arrogance. Perhaps you should actually read the MTO publication as it relates to the HTA concerning cyclists. If those engaged in this (hobby) followed all the rules, like riding single file,staying to the right,proper signalling, etc. we might enjoy sharing the road. And if you cause an accident, what insurance do you carry? Another group wanting a free ride - GREAT!

Alan

Well, R Squirrell and I would agree on one thing here ... intense animosity towards those on bicycles (I wont' degrade the moniker by calling them "cyclists") who are ignorant of the rules of the road and who don't have sufficient social responsibility to care.

Bruce Mol, a CAN-BIKE instructor, created some apt descriptions of different types of people on bikes way back in 2002 and it remains applicable today. (see: http://www.gonecycling.com/commuter/Aspects%20of%20Transportation%20Cycling.pdf) Bruce calls the type of person I'm referring to as a "vagabond cyclist".

As for R Squirrel's other points, riding single file is not required under Ontario's law. In some situations, single file is best, and in many other cases, riding a tight double file is safest and the most responsible way to share the road. A tight double pace line is easier to pass as a motorist than a longer single file of riders. As a motorist, if it's clear enough to pull over to pass a single cyclist, it's clear enough to pass a double line, and I can move right again sooner.

Similarly, a bicycle as a slower-moving vehicle compared to surrounding traffic, is required to keep to the right as far as is practicable. This means riding in a safe manner -- predictable and visible, and staying out of the door zone and away from potholes, debris, etc.

Of course, going through a congested area, a cyclist is often going the same speed as motorists, and taking the lane is best for all concerned.

All vehicle operators fare best when all follow the rules of the road, with respect for all other operators. This includes motorists and cyclists alike.

As an aside, that paper of Bruce Mol's applies equally well to motorists. Fortunately, we don't see too many vagabond motorists on the road, unlike vagabonds on bikes. And vigilant operators are not a worry -- they're keen to learn, highly aware, and trying hard to improve. As for the (v)eloquent of both breeds, we're great at sharing the road, whether on the saddle or behind the wheel (and yes, the majority of cyclists are also motorists!). It's the volatile operators (cyclists and motorists) who are the most worrisome.

Deidre Hall

well said.. here in texas we feel like targets for motorists. i miss my friendlier Ontarioroads!!

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)