The Cycling Dude

Approach of New Colorado Law Steams Motorists AND Cyclists

In Colorado things are getting a little, um, rocky, with regards to the realionship between Motorists, and Cyclists.

Legislators did, as Legislators do, pass new rules with regards to bicycles and vehicles road-sharing with a recent bicycle safety bill, set to take effect in August.

Problem is...on narrow mountain roads motorists are getting mad about cyclists "taking the lane", and cyclist don't like getting honked at.

Another source of aggravation is the fact that the new bicycle safety law was passed to protect cyclists, but the wording of the bill has left law enforcement agents with little options if a cyclist is being uncooperative. "There's nothing we can do about it," Pelle said. "Essentially, this law takes away our ability to enforce anything."

The article points out some of the requirements of the new law (and links to the bill itself), all of which are simply common sense, including the "3 Feet" part directed at motorists.

Read the article by Glorianne Scott at Examiner.com: Conflict on the road between bicyclists and drivers intensifies after bill signing.

Concerns and Solutions Regarding Proposed 3 Feet Law in Colorado

Last week, David Petersen, of Durango, tossed in his 2 cents about Senate Bill 148, in a Letter to the Editor of the Durango Herald:

Senate Bill 148, which would require motorists to keep 3 feet of space between vehicles and bicyclists - is not only an accident waiting to happen, as one opposing legislator has pointed out, but a slew of lawsuits as well. Just try driving Florida Road any nice weekend, and you'll encounter everything from polite defensive bikers strung out in their lane single file, to mobs of dozens huddled together blocking entire lanes and refusing to "line out" even when cars are stacked up behind them with horns tooting.

His solutions, to what he sees as a problem, involves wider bike lanes, making cyclists pay a road tax, setting a maximum legal size for groups of bicyclists traveling together, and "decreeing some county roads simply too narrow, winding, high-speed and dangerous to allow for bicycle traffic at all."

New Bike Law Will Just Cause More Problems

While the wider lanes idea seems a good one, the other ideas are totally unworkable.

The cost alone, in enforcing those notions, would be a problem for state governments, and citizens, especially in these hard economic times.

Setting group size, when there's no guarantee the whole group is even together at any given point on the ride?

A tax?

Does that mean toll booths are every major intersection?

A tax would especially be unfair to the poor...especially those who don't own cars, and rely on their bike as part, or all, of their transportation options.

Telling cyclists they can't travel on certain roads because they are dangerous?

When part of the problem causing the dangers on such roads can be laid at the feet of the motorists cyclists share the road with?

Cyclists Get Improved Mention in 2009 CA. DMV Drivers Handbook

I have been writing about the issue of Sharing the Road, and Trail, on this blog, for years, and here is my archive of stories, and images:

Share the Road and Trail! Safety Matters!

In over 2 years of writing state senators, assemblymen (women) and other state representatives, the Ca. Share the Road Campaign is seeing its efforts finally paying off.

They may not have their hoped for license plate yet, but they have succeeded in helping get some good verbiage in the new 2009 DMV drivers handbook.

Visit here to see for yourself.

Page 26, and 27 are a good place to start.

I especially like the wording, and images, related to passing a cyclist.

Now they hope to get them to add the bicycle and share the road signs to the "sign" pages (pg. 11-15) for 2010.

 

The Dutch and the Temptation of the Unlocked Bicycle

So there's this bicycle thief, see...

The cops set up an unlocked bicycle in a sting operation a few years back, and he ain't happey they did so.

So our low-life, was just hangin' out at the train station in Deventer, minding his own busines (He's a repeat practioner of thievery), when he says this poor, lonely, seemingly unwanted bike just appealed to good, kind, soft-hearted, helpful, nature...

What's a guy prone to taking things that don't belong to him to do?

His lawyers say the dude was tricked, enticed, ENTRAPPED!

That is not playing fair!!

The Dutch Supreme Court has rejected the lawyers arguement.

As the article reports:

Tuesday's court ruling said placing an unlocked decoy bike didn't make the suspect do anything he had not intended doing beforehand.

The station was being plagued by thefts, and the cops did the logical thing in an effort to catch the miscreants.

Good for them! ;-D

Pedaling While Plastered: Is there a Law?

Attorney Craig Renetzky, a  Criminal Attorney and DUI Specialist in Los Angeles, makes a point on his new blog that many cyclists may not be aware of, whether in Ca., or other states:

The law states that bicyclists are subject to the same rights as other vehicles, which conversely means they are subject to the same penalties, including DUI in California.

The California Vehicle Code states that it is unlawful for a person to ride a bicycle on a highway while under the influence of alcohol or any drug.

His blog is meant to bring attention to his business, I'm sure, but that doesn't make his point any less important.

He writes that a first time DUI offense is typically filed as a misdemeanor.

He says the penalties can include fines and mandatory community service.

A conviction remains on some sort of personal DMV record for 3 years.

Check the law in your own state to see how the state treats drunk driving cyclists.

Massachusetts Town Gets Cranky with Child Cyclists

The state has laws concerning Helmet Use.

Section 11B 1/2. Any person 16 years of age or younger operating in line skates, a skate board, a scooter or other manually-propelled wheeled vehicle or riding as a passenger on any such manually-propelled vehicle on a public way, bicycle path or on any other public right-of-way shall wear a helmet. Such helmet shall fit the person's head and be secured by straps at all times while operating in line skates, scooters, skate board or other manually-propelled wheeled vehicle and shall meet the standards for helmets established by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI Z 90.4) or subsequent standards or the Snell Memorial Foundation's 1984 standard for use in bicycling or subsequent standards. A violation of this section shall not be used as evidence of contributory negligence in a civil action.

A city or town shall not adopt any by-laws or ordinances to change the standards required by this section.

The town of Holliston has a perceived problem with the kiddies refusing to wear a helmet and, by extension, parents who don't encourage such use.

"We're not looking to take bikes away from the kids who forget their helmets," School Resource Officer David Gatchell told the Boston Globe. "This isn't something where we're looking to collect a hundred bikes. We don't want to seize bikes, but for the kids who repeatedly ignore the warnings, it will happen."

The department gives helmets, free, to kids who need them, but whose parents can't, or won't, spring for one at the store, and plans an awareness campaign about the law, and their enforcement effort.

Is confiscation a tad over the top?

It seems to me this might be Unconstitutional...unless they plan to give the bikes back at some point.

Will confiscation make the kids toe the line?

Kids, being kids, especially the more rebeliously inclined ones, that is an open question. ;-D

I think a fine, hitting the parents in the pocketbook, might be the better option.

It will certainly get the attention of the more responsible ones, but no doubt confiscation, or fines, might easily get the ACLU's dander up, as well.

Then again, some will say, don't the cops have something better to do than focusing valuable resources, and storage space, to teenage scoff laws on 2 wheels?

A Tip of the Hat to David Fiedler,  of About.com Guide to Bicycling.

Supremes Affirm Cyclists Right to Bear Arms

The meaning  of the 2nd Amendment is finally settled after 217 years.

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday, 5 to 4,  that American Cyclists have a right to own guns for self-defense while working on their bicycles in the garage, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.

The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment, in this, or any regard, since its ratification in 1791.

The amendment reads: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that the right of a bicyclist to bear arms is supported by "the historical narrative" both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted, and especially after the invention of the bicycle, and then the garage.

The Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense, including while working on one's bicycle, in the home," Scalia said.

Scalia noted that the handgun is the preferred weapon of self-defense by many cyclists in part because "it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand holds onto the bicycle, and the cyclist yells at the top of his or her lungs for another resident of the house, or a neighbor, to call the cops."

In a dissent he summarized from the bench, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate bicyclists uses of weapons."

He said such evidence "is nowhere to be found, hell, the bicycle hadn't even been invented then, for cryin' out loud!"

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, "In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house just because one is afraid of having a bicycle stolen."

Joining Scalia were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. The other dissenters were Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter.

Licensing is still required, and restrictions on criminals, and the mentally ill, as well as carrying weapons while riding a bicycle in sensitive places are not affected.

Based on  a story in Yahoo News, this morning. ;-D

Protecting Iowa County Gov. from Cyclist Lawsuits

There is an interesting story out of Iowa about a proposed new law working its way through the Legislature.

A proposal that would provide some protections to counties when bicyclists use those county roads is making its way through the Iowa Legislature this session.

The proposal is receiving a rather high profile after one family sued Crawford County over a bicycling accident. In that case, the bicyclist was competing in RAGBRAI, an annual, multi-day bicycle event that travels from border to border and attracts thousands of participants.

If a bill offering counties some sort of protection is not passed, some have openly wondered about the future of the event, sponsored by the Des Moines Register.

How could such a law have such an effect?

Under the current bill, the only way counties or other local governments would be liable for a bike accident is if it could be proven that the local entity was notified of the road problem and failed to take action before the accident took place...

Another proposal, which never received much traction, would have held counties and other local governments blameless no matter what the circumstances.

While the Counties have some legitimate concerns I think the lawmakers, if they are smart, will work something out that does not endanger this popular event.

FROM: Proposed plan would protect Iowa Counties from bicyclist lawsuits By KEN BLACK, of the Times-Republican.

Bicycle Friendly Rumble Strips Spreading Across the Country

What's good for Illinois, and other states, is good enough for Delaware! ;-D

Delaware Department of Transportation officials will be installing Bike Freindly bike lane/rumble strips near the Maryland state line.

As John of Philadephia Bicycle News writes:

Key features of this type of facility is the gap in the strip to allow bicycle movement out of the lane, the divots are shallower and there is a white stripe on both sides of the rumble strip. This may improve the bicyclists comfort on wide shouldered high speed arterials.

He has a photo of the type of strip, from Illinois, and pictures of what the locals in Philly have to deal with.

Yes, Says Virginia, Cyclists CAN be Abusive Drivers

In Virginia cyclists apparently have to REALLY mind their P's and Q's.

Virginia political leaders defended the civil remedial fee speeding ticket tax by insisting that they did not apply to minor offenses and only the "worst of drivers" had to worry about them. On January 10, the Newport News General District Court disagreed and imposed a $1050 fee on the driver of an 18-speed Huffy (That's a representative model of the naughty vehicle, used to commit the "crime", in the photo.) ...

The intent of the law was that real abusers -- those with a chronic record of dangerous driving that endangers other road users -- would be made to pay for their reckless driving.

Bicyclist Kajuan Cornish, 19, has not accumulated a bad driving record because he does not own an automobile. That did not stop Newport News Police Officer George Evans for writing up Cornish as he pedaled down Warwick Boulevard near Denbigh Boulevard on December 27. Cornish was headed back to work after taking a lunch break.

"The officer who pulled me over said I was going too fast," Cornish told WAVY-TV. "He said it looked like I was in a rush."

Apparently a judge saw things the Officers way so Cornish must either pay the fee or fight his case in court.

Cornish says his reckless driving ticket might one day be funny, if it weren't so confusing.

"I get some people who laugh," he says, "and I get some people, like me, that are lost."

He reads his ticket out loud.

"Year?  None.  Make?  None.  Type?  Bike.  License?  None.  State?  None."

Cornish has to pay an abusive driver fee - he says $350 each year for the next four years - for a ticket he got on his lunch break.

"So I turn and I go into the parking lot," he remembers, "and I get pulled over for recklessly driving on a bicycle."

State Delegate Dave Albo (R-Springfield), the mastermind of the fees -- and a traffic attorney (figures!) -- is more than a bit surprised that a judge would apply them to a bicyclist.

Considering the ignorance and prejudice many display toward cyling and cyclists I'm not surprised at all.

Mr. Albo apparently didn't think his idea thru far enough before fighting to get it enacted into law.

The Governor is looking into overturning the law.

Considering the outrage from the Cycling Community, and others, that seems like the prudent thing to do. ;-D

Hat Tips to:

Bicyclist hit with $1050 Abusive Driver Fee by Alex Roy of Team Polizei 144.

Bicyclist gets ticket for reckless driving- WAVY-TV.

Virginia: Bicyclist Hit With $1050 Abusive Driver Fee
A Newport News, Virginia court applies the abusive driver fees to a man riding a bicycle - thenewspaper.com.