nfitz
Superstar
If by your own estimate, 60-70% of cyclists don't obey the rules of the road, than wouldn't this demonstrate a lack of civility among most cyclists?
|
|
|
General cycling issues (Is Toronto bike friendly?)
- Thread starter rp07
- Start date
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
I estimate 30-40% civility among cyclists. I don't get why your turning it around. If you want me to say that the majority of cyclists don't obey the rules of the road and create some degree of anarchy on roads & sidewalks, I would agree with that. I won't defend the indefensible!
junctionist
Senior Member
I'm guessing that it's about the same rate for drivers. Their common violations include lane changes without signaling, going over the speed limit, rolling stops, forcing the right-of-way etc. Yet some complain that cyclists are unique in that most don't follow the rules of the road. Every time I'm in a vehicle I see nearly every driver disobeying some rule of the road.
vic
Senior Member
Exactly. I would be willing to bet that 90%+ motorists break traffic laws on EVERY trip they make.
This morning at Perth and Ernest, I came to a complete stop. Had the right way to proceed, but then the motorist heading south on Perth rolled the stop, and had the nerve to wave at me as she cut me off. Great.
nfitz
Superstar
With cyclists obeying the rules of the road, we're not talking about rolling stops, failing to signal, speeding (yes, I see bikes speeding - I live on a hill). Generally we are talking about the basics. Lack of lights, lack of helmets, riding on the sidewalk, not stopping at red lights. I can't remember the last time I saw a car knowingly run through a red (not a yellow, not a just turned red, but a full red) light! Or the last time I saw a car heading down the sidewalk, and giving shit to the pedestrians in his way.
Though I agree ... there are some pretty bad car drivers out there.
Though I agree ... there are some pretty bad car drivers out there.
confusion
Active Member
Get over yourself, you'll never see a cyclist doing this without yielding first. Last time I saw a car run a red, there was no yield, it was just 2 tons of steel barrelling through.
Besides, the cyclist running the red is equivelent (in commen sense terms) to a pedestrian, they are risking their lives to do so, not others.
nfitz
Superstar
Why the rudeness? We've had cyclists killing pedestrians of late. What's wrong with asking questions? I've almost been hit crossing a green light by a cyclist who wasn't paying attention to what might suddenly walk off the sidewalk.
Whoaccio
Senior Member
Besides, the cyclist running the red is equivelent (in commen sense terms) to a pedestrian, they are risking their lives to do so, not others.
That doesn't make any difference. If a driver is street racing on an empty road, he is still liable for reckless driving. Road regulations, like traffic lights, exist on the principle that individual road users are unable to properly assess risk in certain situations. How does a cyclist know he is only a risk to himself? What if a pedestrian is using a cross walk only to be struck by a cyclist? What if he forces an opposing driver to break or swerve suddenly, causing an accident? In the event an accident did occur, the driver would commit a criminal offense to carry on with his daily routine. At best this is a major delay and stress factor, at worst it could result in serious damage to property, mental stress and even possible criminal investigations. All of which because someone chose to disregard road rules.
That doesn't make any difference. If a driver is street racing on an empty road, he is still liable for reckless driving. Road regulations, like traffic lights, exist on the principle that individual road users are unable to properly assess risk in certain situations. How does a cyclist know he is only a risk to himself? What if a pedestrian is using a cross walk only to be struck by a cyclist? What if he forces an opposing driver to break or swerve suddenly, causing an accident? In the event an accident did occur, the driver would commit a criminal offense to carry on with his daily routine. At best this is a major delay and stress factor, at worst it could result in serious damage to property, mental stress and even possible criminal investigations. All of which because someone chose to disregard road rules.
CDL.TO
Moderator
I witnessed a car outright run a red on Bathurst today as I was cycling in to work. Not even two hours ago. I already had the green light and started crossing the street when it blew by right in front of me. If I had been a couple seconds earlier, I would have been run over. Scary stuff.
And cyclists over 17 are not required by law to wear helmets.
Cyclists (plural) killing pedestrians (plural) as of late (indicating a trend)? News to me.
`
Last edited:
simply Dan
Active Member
I may be wrong, but I think there have been 2 separate pedestrian deaths from cyclists so far this summer in Toronto.
confusion
Active Member
I'm only aware of one, and it was a teenager on a bike riding on the sidewalk. I'm not advocating riding on the sidewalk, you'll never see me do it, but based on the wheel size, the teenager was in his full right to be there. This did not happen at an intersection, this was just one of those cases where accidents combined with bad luck occur. No need to use this one incident out of context as our main statistic for all future arguments.
nfitz
Superstar
Really ... that's not what I recall when it came into effect. Hmm ... reading the history ... originally it was passed in 1993 for everyone, but amended in October 1995 to only be under 18. Well I'd bought my helmet by then already ... and I haven't really cycled much since 1996. Somehow I missed the change in the law.
Fair enough. I should have written "Cyclists killing pedestrians". It's a regular occurrence (though not as common as pedestrians being hit by cars) but I don't think it's increasing. Here is a report a couple of weeks ago in London, where a cyclist killed a pedestrian. It notes that "On average, three pedestrians die each year in Britain in collisions with cyclists.".
CDL.TO
Moderator
From yesterday's Freakonomics blog:
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/28/who-causes-cyclists-deaths/
August 28, 2009, 1:30 pm
Who Causes Cyclists’ Deaths?
More than 52,000 bicyclists have been killed in bicycle traffic accidents in the U.S. over the 80 years the federal government has been keeping records. When it comes to sharing the road with cars, many people seem to assume that such accidents are usually the cyclist’s fault — a result of reckless or aggressive riding. But an analysis of police reports on 2,752 bike-car accidents in Toronto found that clumsy or inattentive driving by motorists was the cause of 90 percent of these crashes. Among the leading causes: running a stop sign or traffic light, turning into a cyclist’s path, or opening a door on a biker. This shouldn’t come as too big a surprise: motorists cause roughly 75 percent of motorcycle crashes too.
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/28/who-causes-cyclists-deaths/
August 28, 2009, 1:30 pm
Who Causes Cyclists’ Deaths?
More than 52,000 bicyclists have been killed in bicycle traffic accidents in the U.S. over the 80 years the federal government has been keeping records. When it comes to sharing the road with cars, many people seem to assume that such accidents are usually the cyclist’s fault — a result of reckless or aggressive riding. But an analysis of police reports on 2,752 bike-car accidents in Toronto found that clumsy or inattentive driving by motorists was the cause of 90 percent of these crashes. Among the leading causes: running a stop sign or traffic light, turning into a cyclist’s path, or opening a door on a biker. This shouldn’t come as too big a surprise: motorists cause roughly 75 percent of motorcycle crashes too.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
A bicycle is a vehicle.
A automobile is a vehicle.
A vehicle drives in a lane marked accordingly. Most vehicles try to drive in the middle of a lane.
Since a bicycle is also a vehicle, it can drive down the middle of a lane in traffic. Therefore, a bicycle can use the curb lane for its lonesome self by peddling down the middle the lane, and any faster moving traffic can pass them by moving into the faster middle or outside lane.
If there are no bicycle lanes, then the curb lane (the entire curb lane) can be used by bicycles, since they are also vehicles.
A automobile is a vehicle.
A vehicle drives in a lane marked accordingly. Most vehicles try to drive in the middle of a lane.
Since a bicycle is also a vehicle, it can drive down the middle of a lane in traffic. Therefore, a bicycle can use the curb lane for its lonesome self by peddling down the middle the lane, and any faster moving traffic can pass them by moving into the faster middle or outside lane.
If there are no bicycle lanes, then the curb lane (the entire curb lane) can be used by bicycles, since they are also vehicles.
confusion
Active Member
Grinds My Gears
You know what really grinds my gears?
All the people on the street, in the news, and commentors on the Internet, all complaining that cyclists are the problem.
But, if motor vehicles are already being courteous and are obviously not the problem then why is it that when there is traffic stopped on the north end of Bay Street, in a designated bicycle/taxi/bus lane, that the entire stretch is filled with cars that are not supposed to be there, hugging the curb, not even leaving space for a cyclist to pass. Today there was a parade for some U of T kids or something, I don't know, I don't care, so all the cars were slowed to a crawl. What really bothers me is that from Gerrard all the way until Wellesley going north on Bay, I had to walk my bike up the sidewalk in a designated bike area, because I was completely blocked off by cars (yes I walked my bike, some people actually do that on the sidewalk).
Until the simple concept of being courteous with the space on the road is demonstrated by motor vehicles, there will always be agression between cyclists and cars because the cars are too close and not giving space where it is due.
Maybe another day I'll complain how I hit every stoplight and watch the faster cars hit all the timed greens... but I'd rather wait until I don't have to fear for my life anymore to do that.
You know what really grinds my gears?
All the people on the street, in the news, and commentors on the Internet, all complaining that cyclists are the problem.
But, if motor vehicles are already being courteous and are obviously not the problem then why is it that when there is traffic stopped on the north end of Bay Street, in a designated bicycle/taxi/bus lane, that the entire stretch is filled with cars that are not supposed to be there, hugging the curb, not even leaving space for a cyclist to pass. Today there was a parade for some U of T kids or something, I don't know, I don't care, so all the cars were slowed to a crawl. What really bothers me is that from Gerrard all the way until Wellesley going north on Bay, I had to walk my bike up the sidewalk in a designated bike area, because I was completely blocked off by cars (yes I walked my bike, some people actually do that on the sidewalk).
Until the simple concept of being courteous with the space on the road is demonstrated by motor vehicles, there will always be agression between cyclists and cars because the cars are too close and not giving space where it is due.
Maybe another day I'll complain how I hit every stoplight and watch the faster cars hit all the timed greens... but I'd rather wait until I don't have to fear for my life anymore to do that.