paulhutch
Master Poster
In most US States the camera's also catch small light weight motorcycles so they may be able to catch bicycles too.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Bike tax in Oregon
- Thread starter applecorped
- Start date
In most US States the camera's also catch small light weight motorcycles so they may be able to catch bicycles too.
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2001
- Messages
- 16,490
You payin' for that?
I really don't like cameras like this at all to begin with. Just saying it can be done.
Someone else can drive my car and get a red light infraction and the ticket goes to me, the owner of the car. So bikes could work the same way. I don't like it, but the system is in place.
Cameras can be modified to read bike plates, if they need modification at all. I got a ticket recently and my truck license plate was clearly readable in the photo.
If I can get a ticket on my motorcycle then a bike would work the same. Oh, I just got a new transponder for FastTrak. $25 deposit. I got a ticket so paid for that and they waived the ticket.
Someone mentioned backing into driveways. Problem is you need to pass the driveway, then back up into traffic as you turn in. Not always possible on a busy road.
When you back out rather than in, you can decide when it is clear enough for you to do so as there are no cars behind you. Some people back in, and I've done it, but it's a lot more difficult and dangerous on a busy road, in my opinion.
So how do we get bicyclists to follow the rules of the road? Should we try at all? Honestly, I don't see many bikes where I live so I'm gonna leave the discussion as it really isn't an issue for me. Just more of an annoyance.
Someone else can drive my car and get a red light infraction and the ticket goes to me, the owner of the car. So bikes could work the same way. I don't like it, but the system is in place.
Cameras can be modified to read bike plates, if they need modification at all. I got a ticket recently and my truck license plate was clearly readable in the photo.
If I can get a ticket on my motorcycle then a bike would work the same. Oh, I just got a new transponder for FastTrak. $25 deposit. I got a ticket so paid for that and they waived the ticket.
Someone mentioned backing into driveways. Problem is you need to pass the driveway, then back up into traffic as you turn in. Not always possible on a busy road.
When you back out rather than in, you can decide when it is clear enough for you to do so as there are no cars behind you. Some people back in, and I've done it, but it's a lot more difficult and dangerous on a busy road, in my opinion.
So how do we get bicyclists to follow the rules of the road? Should we try at all? Honestly, I don't see many bikes where I live so I'm gonna leave the discussion as it really isn't an issue for me. Just more of an annoyance.
Ron Swanson
Illuminator
When I commuted I found almost with no exception when i came HOME and DROVE INTO my spot there was a LOT of busy traffic, but as I left early in the morning and BACKED out .. there was almost never any traffic.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
This. As a both a cyclist and a driver, I welcome cyclists who obey the spirit of the law, and not necessarily the letter.
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2001
- Messages
- 16,490
The shortlist?
1) Start by re-writing the bikes laws so that they are not backwards.
(Seriously, would you write a law says 'You cannot do "X" then write a bunch of amendments that say "Except that you can do "X' under conditions "Y" and "Z" which cover 90% of situations you will encounter? It would make more sense to write that when "Y" and "Z" do not apply then you cannot do "X".)
Its incredible how often I have bike laws misquoted to me by smug drivers and even policemen. Having the laws be clear would go miles.
2) Better bike facilities: Now this may apply only in urban situations but the simple fact is having roads that are not designed to be hostile the bikes and making bike lanes that are more than some sloppily dropped paint has been shown to lead to very reduced bike misbehavior. Its almost as if treating the red-headed stepchild as a member of the family leads to them behaving better.
3) Stop the default assumption that the cyclist is automatically to blame: The default setting for a cyclist by a driver, insurance company or policeman is that whatever situation happened, they must have caused it or it must be their fault because all cyclists are scofflaws. This has been slowly changing, not because of any enlightenment ont he part of drivers,policemen, etc, but because more and more cyclists are wearing cameras showing the incredible BS antics cars pull on them, and showing that they are rarely actually at fault for most incidents.
Why is this important? Because when you treat cyclists as actual members of the road, they tend to act like responsible members of the road.
4) Enforcement on cyclists that isn't just a police rage-fest. EVery now and then cities start on enforcement programs to 'crack down' on scofflaw cyclists. These invariably turn into borderline oprression efforts as police seem to think they have free reign to ticket any cyclist for almost anything. I've seen cyclists ticketed for slowing down to make a turn, and of course the is the famous video where the NYC police ticketed a cyclist for going out of the bike lane. NYC also had it where police set up at intersections where they could give out inflated numbers of tickets for minor violations while intersections where scofflaw cyclists were a potential hazard were ignored.
It would also help if policemen actually knew the laws with regards to cyclists, I've seen far too many who just don't.
There's a few others, but like these four they do not involve massive restrictions on cycling like so many folks seem to want. Sorry, these would be what we call 'real solutions'.
Last edited:
Ron Swanson
Illuminator
Last week (on my bike) I was making a left turn into a stores driveway .. I was near to the centre line, stopped, signalling with my hand (pointing left) waiting for oncoming traffic ......
... a middle aged car driver yelled at me (with road rage in his eyes) traveling at twice the speed limit ... FROM the outside lane, a full lane away (plus my lane away) ...
... "GET OFF THE STREET ....YOU ARE NOOOOooot A CAAAAAAAARRRRrrrrr"
(Special thanks to the Doppler effect)
In my opinion someone like that, making that statement, should have to re-take their drivers licence.
... a middle aged car driver yelled at me (with road rage in his eyes) traveling at twice the speed limit ... FROM the outside lane, a full lane away (plus my lane away) ...
... "GET OFF THE STREET ....YOU ARE NOOOOooot A CAAAAAAAARRRRrrrrr"
(Special thanks to the Doppler effect)
In my opinion someone like that, making that statement, should have to re-take their drivers licence.
Last edited:
P.J. Denyer
Penultimate Amazing
I wasn't at school when I took my car test, my motorcycle test (two parts), did accountancy or IT qualifications, took a helicopter lesson, a three part archery and range safety course, a glider lesson, a pet care course, an 4x4 off road lesson or a canine first aid course. I get that you don't like this option and think there are better ones, fair enough, but pretending people couldn't attend a cycling assessment is just silly. People do similar things for less potential benefit all the time.
P.J. Denyer
Penultimate Amazing
I completely agree with you. Standards for all road users need to be effectively enforced.
applecorped
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2008
- Messages
- 20,145
All bike owner should also be forced to buy insurance and bike locks. Helmet laws should also be enforced and be a ticketable offense for non-compliance.
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through
Not unreasonable, I suppose, as compulsory insurance is there to protect third parties from being unable to recover damages. Given the rarity of high cost incidents it should be dirt cheap.
...but that doesn't make sense, because there's no third party to protect; a cyclist without a lock simply risks having his/her bike stolen.
This is the case with motorbikes in the UK, but again the value of this is highly dubious for pedal cycles as the helmet doesn't protect third parties.
Dave
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2001
- Messages
- 16,490
All of which you took when your schedule allowed you the time and the location was convenient for you. If these classes weren't at a convenient time or place you didn't take them.
OK, I just had a quick look at my regional map for where the DL centers are for Philadelphia. There are 4 in the city limits, only 2 of which are actual driving test centers (most people in the city drive to the suburban locations when getting tested - not a very good option for cyclists). If I had to take the test today I would need to schedule a test (driver's tests are on a 3 month wait in most locations, BTW) and have a nice 4 mile walk or bus ride (with a bike). People in North Philly would have a 7 mile walk/ride.
All of this, and a host of other inconveniences and for what? All a bike test is is a hoop to jump through just because the hoop holders hope there will be fewer people on the other side of the hoop. Just because you were able to use your free time to take some silly courses doesn't mean it is easy for others.
This is a lot like how people of a certain political persuasion are hoping the the 'Voter ID' laws will work. But a lot of barriers up in the name of fighting a non-existent problem and hope people just won't bother.
Bike testing for all cyclists is intrusive, massively inconvenient, unneeded, and expensive for both cyclist and the government. I've already listed several ways we could make cycling safer for all but nobody wanted to comment on them. Instead we get the most authoritarian solutions. I wonder how many posters who think bike tests are a great idea also complain about 'big government' on a regular basis. No surprise, I've seen libertarians turn into rabid authoritarians when bike licensing comes up.
Modified
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2006
- Messages
- 6,985
For liability coverage the money would go almost entirely to overhead though, with very little going to paying claims.
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through
Yeah, good point. I wonder why the insurance companies aren't trying to get a law on the books already, as it would appear to be the ideal insurance market; everyone required by law to pay premiums without the accompanying inconvenience of actually having any claims to pay.
Dave
Does the US have a large problem of uninsured cyclists causing billions of dollars of damage to third parties annually ? 
If not the various suggestions regarding cyclists sound like solutions in search of a problem.
Is there evidence that cyclists are more dangerous to third parties than pedestrians ? Should everyone have to show that they have sufficient third party cover for themselves and their family or risk house arrest ?
When I golfed I used to have golf-specific insurance in case I hit someone with a golf ball. When I ski I ensure that I have adequate insurance (important given how regularly I seem to end up in hospital
). Wyld Bird Seed have several million pounds worth of public liability insurance for our public performances but I admit that I walk and run around without having specific pedestrian or jogger insurance.
If not the various suggestions regarding cyclists sound like solutions in search of a problem.
Is there evidence that cyclists are more dangerous to third parties than pedestrians ? Should everyone have to show that they have sufficient third party cover for themselves and their family or risk house arrest ?
When I golfed I used to have golf-specific insurance in case I hit someone with a golf ball. When I ski I ensure that I have adequate insurance (important given how regularly I seem to end up in hospital
). Wyld Bird Seed have several million pounds worth of public liability insurance for our public performances but I admit that I walk and run around without having specific pedestrian or jogger insurance.Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
It does not seem to protect the cyclist either. There does not seem to be a much lower instance of death, because mostly cars seeing a protected helmet cyclist, go quicker and take more risk on average than when they see someone unprotected.
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through
Maybe so in collisions between cars and cyclists, but when I fall off my bike cycling through the woods and it's my own bloody stupid fault, I've found that my head hurts less afterwards if I was wearing a helmet at the time. It's also handy for low-hanging branches, particularly the prickly ones.
Dave
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
In many country biking is covered under the normal insurance you have. For example in germany it is under "haftpflichtversicherungen".
The problem is that you cannot set an insurance for bike only, which would cheap enough to be acceptable, but high enough to cover actual actuaries risk. My sis work in insurance so I asked.
What do you expect people which bike to pay monthly ? Keep in mind a lot of people which bikes do it because they don't have the money for something better. People which do it for fun to go to work winter/summer/rain/snow/sunny like me , are rarer. also keep in mind an insurance which would cost as much in 1 year as the price of a bike or a significant percentage amount for a new one would not be acceptable.
And yes I have added a clause in my insurance to be covered for theft, and for invalidity/loss of job.
Last edited:
P.J. Denyer
Penultimate Amazing
Why does it have to be at DL centres? The cycling proficiency test I took wasn't, neither was the (old) part 1 motorcycle test in the UK. I get that you don't like the idea, yes it is a hoop to jump through, but there are also of activities where you have to jump through a hoop or two to participate for your own safety or other people's
Cyclists injuring other people is less common than being injured themselves but it does happen-:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...r-12ft-along-the-pavement-video-10267739.html
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/p...-hit-by-bike-in-st-kilda-20170419-gvo4ra.html
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/bicycle-crash-kills-another-pedestrian-central-park
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/pedestrian-emily-greenwood-run-down-by-cyclist-20150105-12iii9.html
Government figures in the UK indicated 19 deaths and 431 cases of injury caused by cyclists to pedestrians in the the years 2010-2014.
Cyclists are far more likely to be injured or killed themselves than to injure or kill someone else. As a motorcyclist I am well aware that one of the strategies to reduce motorcycles was to increase training and licensing requirements and recommend further training (institute of advanced motorcyclists, defensive riding etc), this doesn't mean that other measures aimed at other road users can't also be actioned in parallel.
Other road users have to demonstrate a minimum level of competence and knowledge before being allowed on public roads, for their own safety and that of others. I don't believe anyone is saying that this is a complete solution or that it should be the exclusive approach taken, but neither do I see any reason why cyclists are so different to other road users (or participants in many other risk baring activities which do mandate some kind of training and assesment) that the idea shouldn't even be considered.
Again, I ride a push bike and motorbike and drive a car. I've seen plenty of idiots on each.
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
I am not sure about that, and given the dire consequences of a head injury being even a bit worse in one case than another, I think it's at least debatable. That said, I'm not sure whether laws are called for. I do have a pretty good notion that a helmet saved my life or at least a good part of it. Here in Vermont there is a helmet law for children, at least, and that's a start, though as is often the case, it ends up implying, unfortunately, that helmets are for children not adults.
As for liability insurance it seems an unlikely benefit unless a state's insurance system is also no-fault. Most accidents with any significant liability will involve injury to the cyclist. As it stands now, liability is disputed at great cost, and not always to the benefit of the injured, even when the circumstances are pretty clear. The automatic litigation process messes up the procedure even when motorists are clearly in the wrong. Yes, I was drunk and speeding, but you can't prove it was my fault! The threat and uncertainty of juries makes settlement a game.
One could, I suppose, mandate personal injury insurance, but again unless the system is also no fault it will just result much of the time in the cyclist's insurance company suing the motorist's to avoid paying out, and the motorist's company cajoling, stonewalling and threatening to minimize the payout. I'll give you a quarter of your medical bill, or leave you hanging with nothing for the next three years.
The idea of insurance is not a bad one, but it needs to work to the benefit of the insured and not just the insurer.