Off the Sidewalk

This is a common issue that arises: How do we get sidewalk cyclists off the sidewalk and onto the street.

* Make it the law.
* Convince them.

The first one is just out, most of us can't even begin to make that happen. Besides, why do it? There are occasions for sidewalk cycling.

So, the second option.

One way we can go about this is to simply state what so many of us perceive as fact: Riding on the sidewalk is more dangerous than riding on the street. Than we can go on to explain a few reasons why: Road crossings, commercial drives, out of sight out of mind, etc.

I think the trouble here is that you're leading with the wrong thing. You're first contradicting their sensibilities. Common sense tells us that the sidewalk is a safe place to cycle: If you don't believe me I direct you to observe where most folks ride their bike on a busy street.

So how about this direction:
1. Admit that one can safely cycle on the sidewalks.
2. Explain how:
* You must keep your speed low, say below 10mph.
* You must slow, even more, for every commercial drive and street crossing; then look behind you for traffic which appears likely to turn across your path; then look forward for traffic which appears likely to cross your path (or the other way around I think).
* You must consider it your responsibility to not get hit by cars who cannot see you.
* Always ride behind, or stop for, cars which intend to pull out onto the street from side streets and commercial drives.
3. Point out that this is how you should be doing things as a pedestrian as well, but it's a bit easier to do at that speed and with that extra balance and ability to stop and go quickly.
4. Explain how to ride safely in the street:
* Ride to the right when you feel it's safe (I'd say practicable, but no sane person cares what this word means).
* Follow the same rules of the road cars do.
5. Point out that 4 is easier than 3; and since it's easier it's more repeatable and so it's probably safer in the long run.
6. Show the normal statistics.

Scoff Law

Today I found an old article on our local Journal Star newspaper. The interesting part though, is the comments. They're about two years old, so it'd be silly to respond.

A lot of people complain about scofflaw cyclists. Those cyclists who run red lights, pass on the right (I'm not sure if this is actually illegal), run stop signs, and in general don't fulfill each motorists every whim.

Frankly, this is crap. I don't do any tallies, but maybe I should start. I make a mental note each time a motorist breaks a law around me (on my bike) or threatens my safety by doing something that should be illegal (we really need a minimum passing distance, although I think 3ft is far too big for most streets and far too small on the highway).

Pretty much everyday someone makes an illegal pass. I'll define what I mean by this: Their pass crosses a double yellow line or is within 100ft of an intersection. Many times this pass is in the left turn lane for the other direction with mediocre visibility ahead.

About once or twice a week I get a rude honk. These aren't illegal, but they really should be. I see it as a very minor form of yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. It makes everyone nearby turn their head and slow up, and it scares the poor cyclist 4ft away out of his mind!

Seriously, just because you have a car doesn't mean you have the right to go honking your horn at each vehicle you pass! I don't care if you're too uninformed to realize that bike has a right to be there, there should be an extra penalty for not knowing the law and operating a motor vehicle! Learn the law, jerk!

So we all break the law when it's convenient for us, big surprise. We tend to do it in ways we won't get caught for. Cyclists can probably get away with more in most places for a couple reasons:
1. If you don't drive, the cost of a city ticket is a joke. It's the insurance increase that hurts you.
2. For the cop, you look like an idiot who's going to get himself hurt. Doing the same in a car makes you look like an idiot who may kill someone else. I wonder why he doesn't enforce the law equally?

This is a hard thing for most motor vehicle drivers to understand: You have more responsibility than cyclists do. That's because you can hurt more people in worse ways. We all have the same responsibilities to each other, but in a motor vehicle you stand to do much more damage with a smaller mistake.
Of course, that doesn't have anything to do with traffic tickets. It has to do with civil lawsuits.

The next thing to get here is that we're not banning vehicles from roads because of the actions of a some users. If we were, cars would be the number one hit. They do, after all, kill 40,000 people a year. How many do bicycles kill? About 600, almost entirely the cyclists themselves and most of those involve a motor vehicle.


I will say this: It's too easy to get a license in the state of Nebraska. That's been made clear by the lack of understanding most citizens have for the rules of the road and by the number of DUI's (it's not especially high, but most states have this problem -- and it's a serious problem).

I'd propose an one hour written test, pass/fail (pass is 80% and above). Then a random drivers test where about one in four is tested. Anything less and many will bet on not being the one. You'd be allowed a retake of the drivers test only after retaking the written exam with either a higher score or an equally excellent score around 95%.

A DUI, by the way, would be a scale of punishments based on your level and the officers interpretation of how drunk you were (let's face it, if I'm at .05 I shouldn't drive, but I know people who are fine at .10). Something like, .08 (the legal limit) and you lose your license for a year. .12 and you lose it for life. No need to put them in prison, they're not violent criminals they're just idiots. Now, if they drive without a license, then it's time to throw them in the can.


This would mean a lot of drivers would lose their licenses. Fine. You'll see forms of public and alternate transportation take off, and we need this anyway.

Being that this is my opinion, it's subject to change. I predict I'll change my mind within the next month. Maybe I'll post it when I do :).

I'm not sure there's need for punishment for riding drunk. It's an incredibly stupid thing to do, but until we see more cyclists and pedestrians on the road they're mostly just endangering themselves. If it were like Amsterdam or Portland I'd say you need punishment there too.