What happens when bike fanatics push limited mobility on a mobile populace?
85 Replies to “We Don’t Need No Stinking Bike Lanes”
Accidents happen. In this case, people “accidentally” drove over all the plastic poles. Repeatedly.
I must say though, it takes a really special kind of genius to reduce the car lanes so much that two cars can’t pass each other. Strong evidence that the Greenies hit bottom a while ago and have been busy digging.
When the 2 wheeled,human powered “vehicles” pay the same insurance and liability rates as me,THEN they can be on the road.
As someone who has been a bicycle commuter for most of my adult life (year round in both Edmonton and Calgary… guess what? axle grease freezes at -37C), bike lanes are a horrible idea. It is much better to have to follow the rules of the road like every other vehicle, and to PAY ATTENTION to all those vehicles weighing 50 times what you do. And I want to find the guy who came up with the idea of bikes driving on the left side of the road against oncoming traffic, and bitchslap him senseless.
I wouldn’t consider those of you who don’t cycle to be mobile. The whole time you’re stationary, sitting on your ass and the vehicle is the mobile one.
Justthinkin. What insurance do you want a cyclist to hold? Can you give a single example of a cyclist causing more than a few hundred dollars in damage? Why hold $500,000 liability when it’s not an actionable amount? Most cycling commuters (95% +) also own cars and are insured as a vehicle operator at the same liability as my auto insurance. Do you want to know more about why you’re wrong?
The plastic bollards were likely taken out one or two at a time, when someone had to drive into the bike lane to avoid hitting a passing vehicle. From the looks of it, if there was a breakdown or a car pulled over, there would be barely enough room for a car to pass it. It either was a box truck or delivery van, there would not be enough room, and a few pylons/bollards get sacrificed. Fortunately the bike lane was under-utilized, otherwise the biker would lose.
There is a lot of room between the sidewalks to install a separate bike lane in the right of way. Why wasn’t that done?
I’d also like to note that it’s funny seeing a rabid pack of law and order conservatives disregarding the law because it’s not convenient for them.
Those bollards got Michael Bryanted.
Bicycles are contemporaries of the horse and buggy. They are a step backwards. They should have been banned from roads at the same time that horses were.
“I wouldn’t consider those of you who don’t cycle to be mobile. The whole time you’re stationary, sitting on your ass and the vehicle is the mobile one.”
…and that is part of the problem with you cyclists, you have this irritating holier than though attitude. I could give a $hit if you have insurance, cycle by the rules of the road and we’ll be fine.
As far as Saskatoon is concerned , I hope we can avoid the current stupidity calling for dedicated lanes (at the expense of vehicle commuters) and the removal of parking spots. There is little in this city that has been proposed that rivals that for idiocy. 7 months a year where the only cyclists that venture on the streets are a dozen or so hardcore riders. Yet the lobby wants to reduce 4th avenue to 2 lane traffic. The root of this is not only that they want to allow for more room for cyclists, they want to punish those of us who drive. That is the goal of their efforts. They want the point of a policy gun used to meet their goal.
Urban Pedal-pusher purists are just an extension of the self centered zombie left –
The “me first, it’s my right to travel on your dime” and the “you don’t count because you ain’t me” attitude is in full bloom in the the urban bike lane whiner genre. First they want paved lanes but don’t want to pay the taxes/licence fees needed to make and maintain them, then when they do get bike lanes they won’t share them by ban other slow moving vehicles like e-bikes or wheel chairs from using them. yeah, show me a bike rights activist and I’ll show you another narcissistic bratty diaper-wetting leftard – like the soggy diapers trying to “Ban” e-bikes in the metro areas
When an idiot cyclist(bike,not motorcycle) goes over my hood,and through my windshield,s/he has caused way more damage then a few hundred.Not to mention,who pays for the funeral/hospital of said idiot and my costs? You want the same rights as me,then pay the same cost,from YOUR pocket,
We do you idiot…these are all included in our car insurance, licences, property taxes, etc. And if you have CAA coverage it includes your bike.
When you start paying for the damage done to the roads and picking up your garbage, you can talk.
“I’d also like to note that it’s funny seeing a rabid pack of law and order conservatives disregarding the law because it’s not convenient for them.”
Don’t make too many assumptions. Supine compliance with petty bureaucratic ordinance is not something I admire, and I doubt many self-described conservatives do.
In my experience bikes have no place on the road. They’re a nuisance at best and a hazard at worst. Ride on the sidewalk, even though you’ll look nerdy.
FYI an e-bike weighs around 200lbs (not including the lard ass rider) and can easily go 40-kph (if you hack the software even faster). The rider doesn’t need any license or training. And you wonder why cyclists don’t want them on bike paths/lanes.
Trying to cross a Toronto street from the Subway exit to reach the Hospital for my Wife’s knee replacement operation is difficult to accomplish in safety.
Please be extraordinarily careful using the pedestrian walkway at the SunnyBrook Hospital-Holland Orthopedic-Hospital. Standing and waiting with a Seventy-year old Lady using a cane, will require waiting for any bicyclist within a hundred feet before stepping off the curb when the timed light begins. You will have to cross bike lanes on both sides of Wellesley Street. The Automobiles respond to the stop lights. The Bicyclists travelling at full speed do not and drive right through both walkway regardless of the lights against them. This is also true even if there are pedestrians in the walkway.
Just a suggestion to you bicycle bullies abusing the right to travel on public roads. If you knock my Wife or me off our feet like has almost happened twice, you should be sure that your insurance will cover your liabilities. I also recommend the Toronto Police Services reinforce the Toronto Policies regarding protection for pedestrians.
“We do you idiot…these are all included in our car insurance, licences, property taxes, etc. And if you have CAA coverage it includes your bike.”
And what cheap leftard kool-aid are you on? You can come off the sidewalk,or out an alley,and when you hit me,I cannot get any compensation,BECAUSE you have no coverage. And I speak from personel experience. The damage to my vehicle was paid for by me,and not the jerk that figured he owned the road.Another clown thought he was a Tour-de-France rider,and was off the training wheels way to soon.
You may not care that I have insurance, but I was replying to another comment where “cyclists shouldn’t be on the road because they don’t have insurance”.
I think it’s profoundly selfish of car drivers to consider the road to be “theirs” considering that the road was originally constructed for horses and is now designated for vehicles. For your reference, despite what you may think, a bicycle is a vehicle. If you have a problem with this, call the people at the Oxford Dictionary.
For Black Mamba:
It’s illegal in Canada to ride on the sidewalks.
Justthinkin:
I wasn’t interested in a theoretical example. Show me when an uninsured cyclists has caused that much damage. Link just 1. Put up or shut up. I’m certain based on diction that I earn more than you, so I’d be willing to say that I probably pay for your healthcare, and not the other way around.
Occam:
Cyclists pay income tax in Canada. Roads in Canada are paid by Transport ministries which are paid for out of general revenue. So, like I said earlier, are you interested to know how wrong you are?
Like I said earlier: “…it’s funny seeing a rabid pack of law and order conservatives disregarding the law because it’s not convenient for them.” A bicycle is the ultimate freedom, since you don’t have to buy petroleum to propel it. I don’t have to pay Putin, Saddam, Obama or any other dictator for my freedom.
Further: Stop pretending that only cyclists have ever broken traffic laws in a city. That’s the most comforting lie that drivers tell themselves and it’s pretty childish.
In general I’ve found wannabe Tour de France riders to be much better people than wannabe NASCAR drivers.
Our greenish/purple mayor is high on the idea of bike lanes in Calgary on the main drag into downtown.
Closing one lane to accommodate theses ego-driven pedalphiles will result in much higher carbon emissions and other pollution, along with frustration from the automobiles that do pay for the road use.
Jon, cyclists do not require insurance, you know it, so why did you bother with that lie ?
If you want a bike lane, get your fellow travelers to chip in and build one wherever you want. Otherwise respect those who have already paid and are always paying for the asphalt that you use.
I researched your question about insurance a bit more because I was interested.
You have a terrible lawyer, or were too stuborn to call one after your accident, or were at fault for the accident.
In Canada:
Any person or vehicle using a roadway is responsible for the damage they cause when they are at fault.
I personally have .75M in coverage from my auto policy and 1.5M in coverage from my home insurance policy, for accidents for which I am “at fault” caused walking, on roller skates or a bicycle (among others).
So, in conclusion: I pay (based on diction) at least as much tax as you do, therefore I pay for the roads. I have double coverage on my insurance for bicycle accidents whereas you only have 1 level of coverage (which I’d be willing to bet is less than either of my coverage). To quote some loudmouth on this site: “You want the same rights as me,then pay the same cost,from YOUR pocket,”
Luke 6:22
“Blessed are you when men hate you, and when they exclude you and revile you, and cast out your name as evil”
I never said that all cyclists need insurance. I said why have insurance where there’s never been an actionable offence which would be unaffordable.
I then did research and found that I have 1.5 million dollars more for incidents I cause on my bike than I do for incidents I cause in my truck, or car, or van.
I earn a lot as a mining engineer, and I pay income tax, which then pays for roads. For you interest, try looking up where money comes from to build and pave roads. Shedding light on this might help you feel more informed on debates about transport.
Your arguments are all the typical straw men arguments that are typically dismissed in real debate.
And the difference from a bicycle user is? As was said previously. Don’t need specialized bike lanes. Cyclists need to follow the rules of the road – to the letter. If they aren’t then they should be ticketed like anyone else. We never see a blitz of police ticketing cyclists ever. The only waste their time on seatbelt spot checks etc. Meantime, where I live we have cyclists driving the wrong way on sidewalks amidst pedestrians and blowing through virtually every red light or stop sign they encounter.
Since there is no license required for a cyclist they don’t need insurance.
Jon….put up? It cost the fool his life! I spend time every day wondering what I could have done different. And the only thing I come with up is nothing.He came barrelling out of an alley and smacked straight into me.Did he have a Death wish? No. Stupid? Yes.
Jon…well said.
You can also add that since bicycles are so easy to steal or destroy in an accident you have to pay an extra premium for replacement insurance.
I tend to buy old road bikes and fix-em up. Replacement cost for me is another few hours of doing mechanics work which I enjoy anyways.
Incidentally though, my home insurance covered up to $65,000 in mysterious disappearance from my house or yard, so there’s that.
If I lived in Vancouver still, I’d never ride anything that I hoped to see again, but same with cars. So many hit and runs in that city with so few insured that it’s hardly worth visiting.
I totally agree with you about it being stupid to just barrel out of an alleyway into a car. Just last weekend I had a driver of a Chevy Malibu almost cut me off (I was driving an SUV) on the TCH in Banff because they were texting.
Both are stupid. Stupidity is an incurable human disease, but if he was at fault, his estate should have paid your damages. Cyclists are not immune from liability in Canada.
well I’ll tell you what, I think it’s “profoundly selfish” for you to think that the vast, and I mean vast, majority of people who commute would think that restricting traffic to accommodate a few entitled bike riders with a dedicated lane is acceptable. As I said earlier, the holier than though and entitled attitude is pathetic. You didn’t bother to address that issue. Tell me why you think that my access to the road should be restricted to accommodate a small minority of bike riders who think they should have a dedicated lane 12 months a year.
Here’s a good example of 100 stories about police cracking down on cyclists in NYC. http://gothamist.com/tags/cyclistcrackdown
You’re making a typical and foolish mistake while talking about transportation policy. No one in their right mind can state that drivers always follow the rules of the road, so pointing out that cyclists shouldn’t be on the road because they break rules is almost like asking not to be able to drive because you habitually speed, drink coffee and/or text while driving.
For every time I’ve broken a law on a bicycle I’ve broken it 100 times in a truck and 1000 times on foot.
You are also wrong about insurance. It’s not legally mandated to have insurance but you’d be pretty foolish to not cover your liability. As shown above my bicycle liability is about 3x what you likely have on your car.
This was easy to find: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/21/us-usa-cyclist-sanfrancisco-idUSBRE85K04H20120621
If cyclists ride in the road, and obey the rules of the road, and make a good faith effort to allow faster traffic to pass, I have no problem with them. If they make a habit of hogging the road, and blow stop signs and red lights, then they run the risk of becoming Suburbanized.
Where did I say restricted?
You’re making up arguments.
Cyclists have just as much right to the road as drivers. This is fact in Canada. If you want to change this, try getting elected to parliament on the platform of “Cyclists is bad!” and see how far you go.
Why do you think that cars deserve dedicated lanes 12 months a year? That’s your argument not mine. I’ve never asked for a separated lane once, because I think it gives ammunition to selfish mouthbreathers to tell cyclists to get off the roads that we’ve already paid for.
Your comment shows a profound lack of insight. You keep talking about a holier than thou attitude that others have, meanwhile you’re saying that only your type of transport deserves the road. You are selfish and I hope that you recogise that asking for something all to yourself is not reasonable in a just and fair society.
Gord:
He was sentenced and forced to pay restitution. http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Bicyclist-sentenced-for-fatal-S-F-crash-4736312.php
I agree with you about using the road fairly for everyone.
Just a note, often cyclists will “take the lane” when there’s a blind corner and we’re terrified of idiots trying to pass on a double yellow, only to cut back into us when traffic comes up in the passing lane. Many cyclists die every year because of impatient and selfish drivers. We’re just trying to make it so that if you hit us, you meant to hit us.
I ride with a forward and rear facing camera. I’ve had 3 drivers charged with reckless endangerment based on my footage. I’d suggest treating a bicycle like any other vehicle, be patient and pass when it’s safe for everyone.
As one of the “idiot cyclists” (in my vernacular “cyclists” are bicyclists, motorcyclists are “bikers” – I’m one of those, too), if I’m coming over your hood towards your windshield, most likely the one at fault is the driver of the car. I know there is a possible scenario in which the cyclist is at fault, but it seems to me that bicycles are invisible to most cagers (borrowed from my biker vocabulary) and more likely to be the victim.
(BTW, in case you’re interested, I was compelled to make a correction to your comment on Backlash, not realizing that nobody was looking at that thread anymore): http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/backlash.html#comment-922140
There are more than 31 million motor vehicles registered in Canada. Approximately 15 million people commute to work daily. Of these 1.8 million use public transportation, 880,000 walk but only 200,000 ride a bike. Everybody else uses some form of motorized transportation. Sorry cyclists you are noisy but really, really in the minority. Only 1.3% of the total commute. Even if every cyclist had 2 bikes, you make up less than 2% of motor vehicles. That’s how much attention I am going to pay to you.
From the link: “three years of probation and 1,000 hours of community service.”
Hot damn! Now there’s a major deterrent to reckless cycling, eh? They must have determined the poor old Chinese gent he recklessly killed was one of the last remaining Republicans in Frisco, or something.
Pay restitution? How do you give somebody their life back? Make a heart transplant donor out of him. Problem solved.
Brian,
“That’s how much attention I am going to pay to you.”
Unfortunately, I actually perceive and understand this point of view, which seems to be shared by the vast majority of cagers.
This is why I have a tendency to ride on pathways wherever it’s not actually against the law – it’s usually a lot less painful to have a pedestrian PO’d at you than a cager. That doesn’t prevent me from being as polite as possible to pedestrians, i.e. slowing down and using my bell at an adequate distance when approaching from behind, etc. It’s disappointing to see how many rude cyclists there are whether it’s on streets or on pathways.
So it goes.
“I think it’s profoundly selfish of car drivers to consider the road to be “theirs” considering that the road was originally constructed for horses and is now designated for vehicles.”
WRONG WRONG WRONG The roads built by the empire were for the MILITARY. The crown would allow access to commercial transport.
Learn a little history.
“What happens when bike fanatics push limited mobility on a mobile populace?”
FIFY
A cane or walking stick ‘accidentally’ stuck into the spokes of an agressive bike leaves a lasting lesson for harassing seniors.
Bikes should be sharing sidewalks and pathways with pedestrians, not sharing the road with vehicles. This ‘bike lane’ silliness is another one of those greenwashed sustainability programs to make driving more inconvenient.
Built for the military?? Hogwash!!
Everyone knows the roads were built for the logging trucks.
BCer
Rocky view Redneck….Thanks for the correction. I have searched and some say 33AD,some say 1AD.I was just using the general time.Hummmmm…maybe I need a be bit more search.
Something missing on this thread. Agenda21, is the main reason for these cockamaimey ideas. Micro apartments are another part of this stunt.
Email your MP and ask if they support exposing Agenda21. Cheryl Gallant, MP in Ontario is looking to help rural citizens retain their way of life.
I have come to the following conclusions after going through the comments.
1)cyclists, according to themselves, never or rarely commit a traffic offense
2)cyclists never litter
3)Jon has a really high opinion of himself
There are a few things that I’ve seen or like to mention.
1) Most,if not all,bicycles cannot keep up with traffic which is irritating and unsafe.
2) Whenever I’m driving in the city and stopped at a light, I always see a cyclist who wants to be a cyclist and pedestrian at the same time. It seems to me that one is one or the other, not both.
3) In the same situation as # 2 and on a 4 lane street, more times than not, a cyclist will travel between lanes of cars, which must be a no-no. Either way I would love to see someone open their door in front of them.
4) As most cyclists are in urban areas, it would be safe to say that a lot of cyclists are apartment dwellers who pay no municipal taxes.
5) I’ve almost ran over, with my vehicle, quite a few cyclists who were riding at night with no lights
6) I have never seen a cyclist give a turn signal, ever
..And I want to find the guy who came up with the idea of bikes driving on the left side of the road against oncoming traffic, and bitchslap him senseless…
…And I will help you in that pursuit of pounding some reason into him/her. What utter garbage.
Bicycles are “vehicles” as defined by pretty much any Motor Vehicle Act in the country. As such they belong on the right side of the road..NOT the left facing oncoming traffic.
Until Public Transportation is accessible to ALL citizens without having to walk a mile and across town … not like a spider web we have in Calgary that all busses go downtown and then out again….and not just for some elite SNOBS that live in upper Glamorgan (Calgary) or west of Sarcee with their copper plated C-Train Stations.
Bike paths must be separate from the roads that automobiles use. PERIOD. And to be truthful, in Calgary that is mostly the case…except for downtown with the Bike couriers and those that commute just across the river…now there is a bunch that need to be squared away on the rules of the road.
As noted earlier: Either you are a VEHICLE in the middle of the lane…or you are a pedestrian pushing your two wheeler on the sidewalk. Scooting by me between a lane of parked cars and my moving Duramax…you may find yourself in an accident…OF YOUR OWN STUPID FAULT….not mine because I will be damned if I am going to manoeuvre into the the lane left of me to avoid you.
Keep that in mind…other wise take the friggin Bus or walk.
Stk
Now in response to Jon.
1) One of the definitions of mobile, from the Merriam-Webster dictionary, “able to move with the use of vehicles”. I don’t really care if you consider a car mobile or not, it is. It seems to me that a cyclist is also stationary and just sitting on his ass.
2) I really don’t see how your diction is any better than “Just Thinkin'” You have many spelling errors. Plus where do you get off on saying that quality of diction is based on one’s income. There are many people who are vocabulary and grammatically challenged who make very good money.
3) “In general I’ve found wannabe Tour de France riders to be much better people than wannabe NASCAR drivers” Why, because they agree with you? Better yet define “much better people” In general sounds very judgmental to me.
I just about killed a cyclist the other day who was cycling on McKnight Blvd and blatantly ran the red light at Aviation Blvd while the left green turn signal was on.
Jon….reorting to ad hominem now? I think I hear your Mommey calling.
No they aren’t. You must belong to one of those wacko bicycle fanatic groups. You are assuming that all bike riders carry some insurance of some kind. They don’t. That is simply a lie. But that is typical of radicals. They have to bend reality to have it fit their hallucinations. To essentially expropriate a roadway that was built to carry the weight of cars and trucks for the exclusive use of a handful of self important clowns is the height of stupidity. It is among the most uneconomical things a municipality can do.
You guys really do yourself a disservice with your considerable mouth and your outright fabrications.
Time to push back on these self important twirps.
Accidents happen. In this case, people “accidentally” drove over all the plastic poles. Repeatedly.
I must say though, it takes a really special kind of genius to reduce the car lanes so much that two cars can’t pass each other. Strong evidence that the Greenies hit bottom a while ago and have been busy digging.
When the 2 wheeled,human powered “vehicles” pay the same insurance and liability rates as me,THEN they can be on the road.
As someone who has been a bicycle commuter for most of my adult life (year round in both Edmonton and Calgary… guess what? axle grease freezes at -37C), bike lanes are a horrible idea. It is much better to have to follow the rules of the road like every other vehicle, and to PAY ATTENTION to all those vehicles weighing 50 times what you do. And I want to find the guy who came up with the idea of bikes driving on the left side of the road against oncoming traffic, and bitchslap him senseless.
I wouldn’t consider those of you who don’t cycle to be mobile. The whole time you’re stationary, sitting on your ass and the vehicle is the mobile one.
Justthinkin. What insurance do you want a cyclist to hold? Can you give a single example of a cyclist causing more than a few hundred dollars in damage? Why hold $500,000 liability when it’s not an actionable amount? Most cycling commuters (95% +) also own cars and are insured as a vehicle operator at the same liability as my auto insurance. Do you want to know more about why you’re wrong?
The plastic bollards were likely taken out one or two at a time, when someone had to drive into the bike lane to avoid hitting a passing vehicle. From the looks of it, if there was a breakdown or a car pulled over, there would be barely enough room for a car to pass it. It either was a box truck or delivery van, there would not be enough room, and a few pylons/bollards get sacrificed. Fortunately the bike lane was under-utilized, otherwise the biker would lose.
There is a lot of room between the sidewalks to install a separate bike lane in the right of way. Why wasn’t that done?
I’d also like to note that it’s funny seeing a rabid pack of law and order conservatives disregarding the law because it’s not convenient for them.
Those bollards got Michael Bryanted.
Bicycles are contemporaries of the horse and buggy. They are a step backwards. They should have been banned from roads at the same time that horses were.
“I wouldn’t consider those of you who don’t cycle to be mobile. The whole time you’re stationary, sitting on your ass and the vehicle is the mobile one.”
…and that is part of the problem with you cyclists, you have this irritating holier than though attitude. I could give a $hit if you have insurance, cycle by the rules of the road and we’ll be fine.
As far as Saskatoon is concerned , I hope we can avoid the current stupidity calling for dedicated lanes (at the expense of vehicle commuters) and the removal of parking spots. There is little in this city that has been proposed that rivals that for idiocy. 7 months a year where the only cyclists that venture on the streets are a dozen or so hardcore riders. Yet the lobby wants to reduce 4th avenue to 2 lane traffic. The root of this is not only that they want to allow for more room for cyclists, they want to punish those of us who drive. That is the goal of their efforts. They want the point of a policy gun used to meet their goal.
Urban Pedal-pusher purists are just an extension of the self centered zombie left –
The “me first, it’s my right to travel on your dime” and the “you don’t count because you ain’t me” attitude is in full bloom in the the urban bike lane whiner genre. First they want paved lanes but don’t want to pay the taxes/licence fees needed to make and maintain them, then when they do get bike lanes they won’t share them by ban other slow moving vehicles like e-bikes or wheel chairs from using them. yeah, show me a bike rights activist and I’ll show you another narcissistic bratty diaper-wetting leftard – like the soggy diapers trying to “Ban” e-bikes in the metro areas
When an idiot cyclist(bike,not motorcycle) goes over my hood,and through my windshield,s/he has caused way more damage then a few hundred.Not to mention,who pays for the funeral/hospital of said idiot and my costs? You want the same rights as me,then pay the same cost,from YOUR pocket,
We do you idiot…these are all included in our car insurance, licences, property taxes, etc. And if you have CAA coverage it includes your bike.
When you start paying for the damage done to the roads and picking up your garbage, you can talk.
“I’d also like to note that it’s funny seeing a rabid pack of law and order conservatives disregarding the law because it’s not convenient for them.”
Don’t make too many assumptions. Supine compliance with petty bureaucratic ordinance is not something I admire, and I doubt many self-described conservatives do.
In my experience bikes have no place on the road. They’re a nuisance at best and a hazard at worst. Ride on the sidewalk, even though you’ll look nerdy.
FYI an e-bike weighs around 200lbs (not including the lard ass rider) and can easily go 40-kph (if you hack the software even faster). The rider doesn’t need any license or training. And you wonder why cyclists don’t want them on bike paths/lanes.
Trying to cross a Toronto street from the Subway exit to reach the Hospital for my Wife’s knee replacement operation is difficult to accomplish in safety.
Please be extraordinarily careful using the pedestrian walkway at the SunnyBrook Hospital-Holland Orthopedic-Hospital. Standing and waiting with a Seventy-year old Lady using a cane, will require waiting for any bicyclist within a hundred feet before stepping off the curb when the timed light begins. You will have to cross bike lanes on both sides of Wellesley Street. The Automobiles respond to the stop lights. The Bicyclists travelling at full speed do not and drive right through both walkway regardless of the lights against them. This is also true even if there are pedestrians in the walkway.
Just a suggestion to you bicycle bullies abusing the right to travel on public roads. If you knock my Wife or me off our feet like has almost happened twice, you should be sure that your insurance will cover your liabilities. I also recommend the Toronto Police Services reinforce the Toronto Policies regarding protection for pedestrians.
“We do you idiot…these are all included in our car insurance, licences, property taxes, etc. And if you have CAA coverage it includes your bike.”
And what cheap leftard kool-aid are you on? You can come off the sidewalk,or out an alley,and when you hit me,I cannot get any compensation,BECAUSE you have no coverage. And I speak from personel experience. The damage to my vehicle was paid for by me,and not the jerk that figured he owned the road.Another clown thought he was a Tour-de-France rider,and was off the training wheels way to soon.
You may not care that I have insurance, but I was replying to another comment where “cyclists shouldn’t be on the road because they don’t have insurance”.
I think it’s profoundly selfish of car drivers to consider the road to be “theirs” considering that the road was originally constructed for horses and is now designated for vehicles. For your reference, despite what you may think, a bicycle is a vehicle. If you have a problem with this, call the people at the Oxford Dictionary.
For Black Mamba:
It’s illegal in Canada to ride on the sidewalks.
Justthinkin:
I wasn’t interested in a theoretical example. Show me when an uninsured cyclists has caused that much damage. Link just 1. Put up or shut up. I’m certain based on diction that I earn more than you, so I’d be willing to say that I probably pay for your healthcare, and not the other way around.
Occam:
Cyclists pay income tax in Canada. Roads in Canada are paid by Transport ministries which are paid for out of general revenue. So, like I said earlier, are you interested to know how wrong you are?
Like I said earlier: “…it’s funny seeing a rabid pack of law and order conservatives disregarding the law because it’s not convenient for them.” A bicycle is the ultimate freedom, since you don’t have to buy petroleum to propel it. I don’t have to pay Putin, Saddam, Obama or any other dictator for my freedom.
Further: Stop pretending that only cyclists have ever broken traffic laws in a city. That’s the most comforting lie that drivers tell themselves and it’s pretty childish.
In general I’ve found wannabe Tour de France riders to be much better people than wannabe NASCAR drivers.
Our greenish/purple mayor is high on the idea of bike lanes in Calgary on the main drag into downtown.
Closing one lane to accommodate theses ego-driven pedalphiles will result in much higher carbon emissions and other pollution, along with frustration from the automobiles that do pay for the road use.
Jon, cyclists do not require insurance, you know it, so why did you bother with that lie ?
If you want a bike lane, get your fellow travelers to chip in and build one wherever you want. Otherwise respect those who have already paid and are always paying for the asphalt that you use.
I researched your question about insurance a bit more because I was interested.
You have a terrible lawyer, or were too stuborn to call one after your accident, or were at fault for the accident.
In Canada:
Any person or vehicle using a roadway is responsible for the damage they cause when they are at fault.
I personally have .75M in coverage from my auto policy and 1.5M in coverage from my home insurance policy, for accidents for which I am “at fault” caused walking, on roller skates or a bicycle (among others).
So, in conclusion: I pay (based on diction) at least as much tax as you do, therefore I pay for the roads. I have double coverage on my insurance for bicycle accidents whereas you only have 1 level of coverage (which I’d be willing to bet is less than either of my coverage). To quote some loudmouth on this site: “You want the same rights as me,then pay the same cost,from YOUR pocket,”
Luke 6:22
“Blessed are you when men hate you, and when they exclude you and revile you, and cast out your name as evil”
I never said that all cyclists need insurance. I said why have insurance where there’s never been an actionable offence which would be unaffordable.
I then did research and found that I have 1.5 million dollars more for incidents I cause on my bike than I do for incidents I cause in my truck, or car, or van.
I earn a lot as a mining engineer, and I pay income tax, which then pays for roads. For you interest, try looking up where money comes from to build and pave roads. Shedding light on this might help you feel more informed on debates about transport.
Your arguments are all the typical straw men arguments that are typically dismissed in real debate.
And the difference from a bicycle user is? As was said previously. Don’t need specialized bike lanes. Cyclists need to follow the rules of the road – to the letter. If they aren’t then they should be ticketed like anyone else. We never see a blitz of police ticketing cyclists ever. The only waste their time on seatbelt spot checks etc. Meantime, where I live we have cyclists driving the wrong way on sidewalks amidst pedestrians and blowing through virtually every red light or stop sign they encounter.
Since there is no license required for a cyclist they don’t need insurance.
Jon….put up? It cost the fool his life! I spend time every day wondering what I could have done different. And the only thing I come with up is nothing.He came barrelling out of an alley and smacked straight into me.Did he have a Death wish? No. Stupid? Yes.
Jon…well said.
You can also add that since bicycles are so easy to steal or destroy in an accident you have to pay an extra premium for replacement insurance.
I tend to buy old road bikes and fix-em up. Replacement cost for me is another few hours of doing mechanics work which I enjoy anyways.
Incidentally though, my home insurance covered up to $65,000 in mysterious disappearance from my house or yard, so there’s that.
If I lived in Vancouver still, I’d never ride anything that I hoped to see again, but same with cars. So many hit and runs in that city with so few insured that it’s hardly worth visiting.
I totally agree with you about it being stupid to just barrel out of an alleyway into a car. Just last weekend I had a driver of a Chevy Malibu almost cut me off (I was driving an SUV) on the TCH in Banff because they were texting.
Both are stupid. Stupidity is an incurable human disease, but if he was at fault, his estate should have paid your damages. Cyclists are not immune from liability in Canada.
well I’ll tell you what, I think it’s “profoundly selfish” for you to think that the vast, and I mean vast, majority of people who commute would think that restricting traffic to accommodate a few entitled bike riders with a dedicated lane is acceptable. As I said earlier, the holier than though and entitled attitude is pathetic. You didn’t bother to address that issue. Tell me why you think that my access to the road should be restricted to accommodate a small minority of bike riders who think they should have a dedicated lane 12 months a year.
Here’s a good example of 100 stories about police cracking down on cyclists in NYC.
http://gothamist.com/tags/cyclistcrackdown
You’re making a typical and foolish mistake while talking about transportation policy. No one in their right mind can state that drivers always follow the rules of the road, so pointing out that cyclists shouldn’t be on the road because they break rules is almost like asking not to be able to drive because you habitually speed, drink coffee and/or text while driving.
For every time I’ve broken a law on a bicycle I’ve broken it 100 times in a truck and 1000 times on foot.
You are also wrong about insurance. It’s not legally mandated to have insurance but you’d be pretty foolish to not cover your liability. As shown above my bicycle liability is about 3x what you likely have on your car.
This was easy to find: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/21/us-usa-cyclist-sanfrancisco-idUSBRE85K04H20120621
If cyclists ride in the road, and obey the rules of the road, and make a good faith effort to allow faster traffic to pass, I have no problem with them. If they make a habit of hogging the road, and blow stop signs and red lights, then they run the risk of becoming Suburbanized.
Where did I say restricted?
You’re making up arguments.
Cyclists have just as much right to the road as drivers. This is fact in Canada. If you want to change this, try getting elected to parliament on the platform of “Cyclists is bad!” and see how far you go.
Why do you think that cars deserve dedicated lanes 12 months a year? That’s your argument not mine. I’ve never asked for a separated lane once, because I think it gives ammunition to selfish mouthbreathers to tell cyclists to get off the roads that we’ve already paid for.
Your comment shows a profound lack of insight. You keep talking about a holier than thou attitude that others have, meanwhile you’re saying that only your type of transport deserves the road. You are selfish and I hope that you recogise that asking for something all to yourself is not reasonable in a just and fair society.
Gord:
He was sentenced and forced to pay restitution. http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Bicyclist-sentenced-for-fatal-S-F-crash-4736312.php
I agree with you about using the road fairly for everyone.
Just a note, often cyclists will “take the lane” when there’s a blind corner and we’re terrified of idiots trying to pass on a double yellow, only to cut back into us when traffic comes up in the passing lane. Many cyclists die every year because of impatient and selfish drivers. We’re just trying to make it so that if you hit us, you meant to hit us.
I ride with a forward and rear facing camera. I’ve had 3 drivers charged with reckless endangerment based on my footage. I’d suggest treating a bicycle like any other vehicle, be patient and pass when it’s safe for everyone.
As one of the “idiot cyclists” (in my vernacular “cyclists” are bicyclists, motorcyclists are “bikers” – I’m one of those, too), if I’m coming over your hood towards your windshield, most likely the one at fault is the driver of the car. I know there is a possible scenario in which the cyclist is at fault, but it seems to me that bicycles are invisible to most cagers (borrowed from my biker vocabulary) and more likely to be the victim.
(BTW, in case you’re interested, I was compelled to make a correction to your comment on Backlash, not realizing that nobody was looking at that thread anymore):
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/backlash.html#comment-922140
There are more than 31 million motor vehicles registered in Canada. Approximately 15 million people commute to work daily. Of these 1.8 million use public transportation, 880,000 walk but only 200,000 ride a bike. Everybody else uses some form of motorized transportation. Sorry cyclists you are noisy but really, really in the minority. Only 1.3% of the total commute. Even if every cyclist had 2 bikes, you make up less than 2% of motor vehicles. That’s how much attention I am going to pay to you.
From the link: “three years of probation and 1,000 hours of community service.”
Hot damn! Now there’s a major deterrent to reckless cycling, eh? They must have determined the poor old Chinese gent he recklessly killed was one of the last remaining Republicans in Frisco, or something.
Pay restitution? How do you give somebody their life back? Make a heart transplant donor out of him. Problem solved.
Brian,
“That’s how much attention I am going to pay to you.”
Unfortunately, I actually perceive and understand this point of view, which seems to be shared by the vast majority of cagers.
This is why I have a tendency to ride on pathways wherever it’s not actually against the law – it’s usually a lot less painful to have a pedestrian PO’d at you than a cager. That doesn’t prevent me from being as polite as possible to pedestrians, i.e. slowing down and using my bell at an adequate distance when approaching from behind, etc. It’s disappointing to see how many rude cyclists there are whether it’s on streets or on pathways.
So it goes.
“The bicycle is a parody of a wheeled vehicle—a donkey cart without the cart, where you do the work of the donkey.” — P.J. O’Rourke
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748704050204576218600999993800
“I think it’s profoundly selfish of car drivers to consider the road to be “theirs” considering that the road was originally constructed for horses and is now designated for vehicles.”
WRONG WRONG WRONG The roads built by the empire were for the MILITARY. The crown would allow access to commercial transport.
Learn a little history.
“What happens when bike fanatics push limited mobility on a mobile populace?”
FIFY
A cane or walking stick ‘accidentally’ stuck into the spokes of an agressive bike leaves a lasting lesson for harassing seniors.
Bikes should be sharing sidewalks and pathways with pedestrians, not sharing the road with vehicles. This ‘bike lane’ silliness is another one of those greenwashed sustainability programs to make driving more inconvenient.
Built for the military?? Hogwash!!
Everyone knows the roads were built for the logging trucks.
BCer
Rocky view Redneck….Thanks for the correction. I have searched and some say 33AD,some say 1AD.I was just using the general time.Hummmmm…maybe I need a be bit more search.
Something missing on this thread. Agenda21, is the main reason for these cockamaimey ideas. Micro apartments are another part of this stunt.
Email your MP and ask if they support exposing Agenda21. Cheryl Gallant, MP in Ontario is looking to help rural citizens retain their way of life.
P.J. O’Rourke had some comments on the bicycle….
http://www.bikereader.com/contributors/misc/menace.html
I have come to the following conclusions after going through the comments.
1)cyclists, according to themselves, never or rarely commit a traffic offense
2)cyclists never litter
3)Jon has a really high opinion of himself
There are a few things that I’ve seen or like to mention.
1) Most,if not all,bicycles cannot keep up with traffic which is irritating and unsafe.
2) Whenever I’m driving in the city and stopped at a light, I always see a cyclist who wants to be a cyclist and pedestrian at the same time. It seems to me that one is one or the other, not both.
3) In the same situation as # 2 and on a 4 lane street, more times than not, a cyclist will travel between lanes of cars, which must be a no-no. Either way I would love to see someone open their door in front of them.
4) As most cyclists are in urban areas, it would be safe to say that a lot of cyclists are apartment dwellers who pay no municipal taxes.
5) I’ve almost ran over, with my vehicle, quite a few cyclists who were riding at night with no lights
6) I have never seen a cyclist give a turn signal, ever
..And I want to find the guy who came up with the idea of bikes driving on the left side of the road against oncoming traffic, and bitchslap him senseless…
…And I will help you in that pursuit of pounding some reason into him/her. What utter garbage.
Bicycles are “vehicles” as defined by pretty much any Motor Vehicle Act in the country. As such they belong on the right side of the road..NOT the left facing oncoming traffic.
Until Public Transportation is accessible to ALL citizens without having to walk a mile and across town … not like a spider web we have in Calgary that all busses go downtown and then out again….and not just for some elite SNOBS that live in upper Glamorgan (Calgary) or west of Sarcee with their copper plated C-Train Stations.
Bike paths must be separate from the roads that automobiles use. PERIOD. And to be truthful, in Calgary that is mostly the case…except for downtown with the Bike couriers and those that commute just across the river…now there is a bunch that need to be squared away on the rules of the road.
As noted earlier: Either you are a VEHICLE in the middle of the lane…or you are a pedestrian pushing your two wheeler on the sidewalk. Scooting by me between a lane of parked cars and my moving Duramax…you may find yourself in an accident…OF YOUR OWN STUPID FAULT….not mine because I will be damned if I am going to manoeuvre into the the lane left of me to avoid you.
Keep that in mind…other wise take the friggin Bus or walk.
Stk
Now in response to Jon.
1) One of the definitions of mobile, from the Merriam-Webster dictionary, “able to move with the use of vehicles”. I don’t really care if you consider a car mobile or not, it is. It seems to me that a cyclist is also stationary and just sitting on his ass.
2) I really don’t see how your diction is any better than “Just Thinkin'” You have many spelling errors. Plus where do you get off on saying that quality of diction is based on one’s income. There are many people who are vocabulary and grammatically challenged who make very good money.
3) “In general I’ve found wannabe Tour de France riders to be much better people than wannabe NASCAR drivers” Why, because they agree with you? Better yet define “much better people” In general sounds very judgmental to me.
I just about killed a cyclist the other day who was cycling on McKnight Blvd and blatantly ran the red light at Aviation Blvd while the left green turn signal was on.
Jon….reorting to ad hominem now? I think I hear your Mommey calling.
No they aren’t. You must belong to one of those wacko bicycle fanatic groups. You are assuming that all bike riders carry some insurance of some kind. They don’t. That is simply a lie. But that is typical of radicals. They have to bend reality to have it fit their hallucinations. To essentially expropriate a roadway that was built to carry the weight of cars and trucks for the exclusive use of a handful of self important clowns is the height of stupidity. It is among the most uneconomical things a municipality can do.
You guys really do yourself a disservice with your considerable mouth and your outright fabrications.
Time to push back on these self important twirps.