73
74

Bike Lanes are just that. (self.Columbus)

mayowarlordClintonville が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]gameldClintonville 2ポイント3ポイント  (13子コメント)

Huh, so a vehicle is moving at speed and has to slow down and/or dodge a slower-moving means of transportation because the slower one won't get over into a space designated for it/ a space more appropriate to it.

Drivers have dealing with this bullshit with bikes for years, dude. Deal with it like most drivers did or do like a handful of angry/stupid drivers did and start running them over. Or, you know, start requesting that the police start paying attention to who is in the bike lane.

Also, stop at red lights and acknowledge that cars are going to go faster than you always and thus should be given the right of way on all roads (which was the design of the roads), not just those that happen to have brand new bike lanes. If you have to stop to get over to allow a car/cars to get past then deal with it. You can't be both a car and a pedestrian as the mood/convenience strikes you. Then again, maybe asking the police to pay attention to who is in the bike lane would backfire and cyclists would start getting pulled over for running red lights and generally acting entitled, too.

[–]mayowarlordClintonville[S] 2ポイント3ポイント  (12子コメント)

The road is not a designated space for only cars. We pay taxes just like you, and make it easier for you to park etc. go get a less outdated argument.

Cars break the law just as much as bike do.

You are right, bikes do need different laws. We probably shouldn't be required to stop at most stop signs when a yield would suffice, but until the law changes, most of us will follow the law like we have been.

P.S. when cyclists do break the law, it isn't in a 2000 pound killing box. That is NOT an excuse but it certainly matters when we are discussing the seriousness of all this.

[–]boomfarmer 6ポイント7ポイント  (6子コメント)

We probably shouldn't be required to stop at most stop signs when a yield would suffice

That's also true for cars, Ron Paul argues.

But I digress.

[–]Ohm_My_GodYe Olde Towne East 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

The laws are commonly referred to as "Idaho Bike Stop Laws" as it was the first state to implement them.

  • A bicycle at a stop sign can treat it as a yield sign.

  • A bicycle at a red light can treat it as a stop sign.

This mimics how most bicyclists actually rides and represents the lower speed, higher maneuverability and different acceleration of a bicycle over a motor powered vehicle.

[–]ArugulaTits 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Yeah, that's the law in Idaho because nobody fucking lives in Idaho. It makes sense in a rural, underpopulated area.

[–]Ohm_My_GodYe Olde Towne East 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Idaho was the first state but not the only state to implement them. Eventually I expect all states will implement them.

[–]sruckusVictorian Village 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

That sounds amazing and echos what I have thought about. Bicycles are inherently less dangerous and so the rules should be a little different from the cars. Would be nice to see some progression on that front in Columbus.

[–]mayowarlordClintonville[S] -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

Agreed. There are all kinds of stats on how dangerous 4 way stops are.

[–]boomfarmer 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

TRAFFIC LIGHTS FOR THE TRAFFIC GOD.

[–]gameldClintonville 2ポイント3ポイント  (4子コメント)

P.S. when cyclists do break the law, it isn't in a 2000 pound killing box. That is NOT an excuse but it certainly matters when we are discussing the seriousness of all this.

What does matter about that statement is that bicycles are are actively putting themselves in the way of 2000-pound kill boxes when they run stop signs and red lights, and drivers are terrified of doing so.

And yes, cars also break the law. However, I have not heard of one time that a cyclist got pulled over for failing to signal, running a light, or in any other way making it unsafe for others on the road.

I'll concede a yield vs. a stop depending on the intersection. Summit? 4th? High? Absolutely always stop when entering these major streets and for every lighted/signed street, too. Side streets? Less so.

And the taxes paid? Yes, everyone pays those taxes. Does that give joggers or other pedestrians the right to use it? No. The cyclists are an exception because they aren't the same as pedestrians, but then they also aren't the same as cars and so need to respect the fact that roads were designed with cars in mind, not bikes.

[–]mayowarlordClintonville[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

It matters because we have the same right to the road and are safer for everyone else then cars are. The idea that drivers don't do all of those things is hilarious. Of course cyclists get pulled over.

[–]ArugulaTits 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

You are not 'safer for everyone else' than cars are. As a pedestrian, all of my dangerous encounters have been from bikes on sidewalks. I know you already addressed that earlier and claimed to be against it, but the suggestion that bikes are 'safer for everyone' ignores those of us who are using our hooves instead of a vehicle.

[–]mayowarlordClintonville[S] -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm sorry you have had those encounters. There is no excuse for riding a bike on the sidewalk. Consider however, that even if you had been hit the damage would have been next to nothing compared with a car.

[–]Ohm_My_GodYe Olde Towne East -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

I have not heard of one time that a cyclist got pulled over for failing to signal, running a light, or in any other way making it unsafe for others on the road.

It is less common but it does indeed happen.