Comments on: The Case for a Vulnerable Road User Law http://www.vabike.org/the-case-for-a-vulnerable-road-user-law/ Advocacy, Safety, & Education Mon, 08 Mar 2010 04:23:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: admin http://www.vabike.org/the-case-for-a-vulnerable-road-user-law/comment-page-1/#comment-4815 admin Tue, 03 Nov 2009 04:53:44 +0000 http://www.vabike.org/?p=1362#comment-4815 Ed, Thanks for the correction. This was still new when I posted the article, and obviously didn't get the story straight. It's been corrected. Ed,

Thanks for the correction. This was still new when I posted the article, and obviously didn’t get the story straight. It’s been corrected.

]]> By: Vulnerable Legislation @ Arizona Bike Law Blog http://www.vabike.org/the-case-for-a-vulnerable-road-user-law/comment-page-1/#comment-4641 Vulnerable Legislation @ Arizona Bike Law Blog Mon, 19 Oct 2009 03:52:44 +0000 http://www.vabike.org/?p=1362#comment-4641 [...] describes it pretty well. The idea of making it a legislative priority is pretty popular. Others: Virgina Bicycling Federation. Some talk about the LA County bike coalition [...] [...] describes it pretty well. The idea of making it a legislative priority is pretty popular. Others: Virgina Bicycling Federation. Some talk about the LA County bike coalition [...]

]]> By: Ed http://www.vabike.org/the-case-for-a-vulnerable-road-user-law/comment-page-1/#comment-4640 Ed Mon, 19 Oct 2009 03:12:10 +0000 http://www.vabike.org/?p=1362#comment-4640 "VBF note — the Texas law has been passed, and signed into law" The Gov. vetoed it, see e.g. http://velociped.kempiweb.net/ntvc/2009/06/safe-passing/ “VBF note — the Texas law has been passed, and signed into law”
The Gov. vetoed it, see e.g. http://velociped.kempiweb.net/ntvc/2009/06/safe-passing/

]]> By: Nate http://www.vabike.org/the-case-for-a-vulnerable-road-user-law/comment-page-1/#comment-4597 Nate Mon, 05 Oct 2009 18:24:26 +0000 http://www.vabike.org/?p=1362#comment-4597 The ignorance of some motorists astounds me. They think because they are granted a driver's license by DMV that they have a RIGHT to the road. Think again. That priviledge can be revoked at any time. As a responsible cyclist who was struck almost a year ago by an irresponsible motorist (elderly 87 year old man with advanced glaucoma and very, VERY poor vision) and almost killed, it truly angers me when some motorists spout their nonsense about running me over like a bug, squirrel, etc because I cost them a few seconds on their drive home. Isn't a human life worth more than a few seconds??? Well... as a police officer, I will be glad to help DMV revoke as many drivers' licenses as possible, that have been erroneously granted to irresponsible, aggressive, impatient, immature motorists who feel that they are more important because they are driving a car at the present moment and I am not. The ignorance of some motorists astounds me. They think because they are granted a driver’s license by DMV that they have a RIGHT to the road. Think again. That priviledge can be revoked at any time. As a responsible cyclist who was struck almost a year ago by an irresponsible motorist (elderly 87 year old man with advanced glaucoma and very, VERY poor vision) and almost killed, it truly angers me when some motorists spout their nonsense about running me over like a bug, squirrel, etc because I cost them a few seconds on their drive home. Isn’t a human life worth more than a few seconds???

Well… as a police officer, I will be glad to help DMV revoke as many drivers’ licenses as possible, that have been erroneously granted to irresponsible, aggressive, impatient, immature motorists who feel that they are more important because they are driving a car at the present moment and I am not.

]]> By: Thomas Bowden http://www.vabike.org/the-case-for-a-vulnerable-road-user-law/comment-page-1/#comment-4227 Thomas Bowden Wed, 15 Jul 2009 20:06:34 +0000 http://www.vabike.org/?p=1362#comment-4227 My comments were actually directed to both Driver and Jason My comments were actually directed to both Driver and Jason

]]> By: Thomas Bowden http://www.vabike.org/the-case-for-a-vulnerable-road-user-law/comment-page-1/#comment-4224 Thomas Bowden Wed, 15 Jul 2009 17:38:19 +0000 http://www.vabike.org/?p=1362#comment-4224 Jason - PS - The first paved roads were lobbied for by cyclists - whose use of roads predates the invention of the automobile. Cyclists requested paving with macadam, because roads in those days were usually just crushed stone aggregate, and growing use by automobiles, long before there was a road tax or a highway trust fund, by the way, were tearing up the roads leaving deep ruts, potholes and generally endangering both cyclists, and horseback riders, horses, and those who rode in carriages. The automobile is a great invention - but it is not a higher form of life entitled to infinite deference and privilege. And don't forget about the walnut brained cyclists who invented another great transporation tool - the airplane. Jason – PS – The first paved roads were lobbied for by cyclists – whose use of roads predates the invention of the automobile. Cyclists requested paving with macadam, because roads in those days were usually just crushed stone aggregate, and growing use by automobiles, long before there was a road tax or a highway trust fund, by the way, were tearing up the roads leaving deep ruts, potholes and generally endangering both cyclists, and horseback riders, horses, and those who rode in carriages. The automobile is a great invention – but it is not a higher form of life entitled to infinite deference and privilege. And don’t forget about the walnut brained cyclists who invented another great transporation tool – the airplane.

]]> By: Thomas Bowden http://www.vabike.org/the-case-for-a-vulnerable-road-user-law/comment-page-1/#comment-4223 Thomas Bowden Wed, 15 Jul 2009 17:32:21 +0000 http://www.vabike.org/?p=1362#comment-4223 Jason - Please do your research before making such inflammatory and hostile comments - and I wouldn't openly admit to "love bumping" cyclists or excessive use of the horn either. That is road rage, and physical assault, and it could get you locked up. Respectfully, you need to read the Code of Virginia. For your convenience two significant sections are provided below. I am a cyclist who obeys traffic laws at least as rigorously as most motorists (most of whom routinely exceed the speed limit, talk on cell phones, put on makeup, eat, read, text when they should be focusing on the road). I am respectful of cars, and I consciously ride in a way that poses the least inconvenience to my fellow road users And, yes, I pay lots of road taxes - because I own three cars. Now I do not mean to suggest that cyclists should ride on any road without restraint - many roads are already banned to cyclists. More importantly, there are some roads where it would be insanity to do so, no matter how legal. But to suggest that cyclists have no right to be on any road that you use, or far worse, that you have the right to harass and even physically assault them because they annoy you is not only technically wrong, it's morally bankrupt and it's absurd. How would you feel if an 18 wheeler on I-81 "tapped" you because he wanted your lane, or bumped yofrom behind because he wanted to exceed the speed limit - by more than you did? Should we ban cars from interstates because trucks use them, and they are bigger? Think it through. By the way - driving a vehicle on Virignia roads is a REVOCABLE PRIVILEGE - not an inalienable right. Right to ride a bike? Irrevocable short of incarceration - it's an exercise of the constitutional right of freedom of movement. Please respect the rights of others and think before you act. Also bear in mind that if more people rode biles for short trips, commuting etc., there would be MORE not less room on the road for you and your car. Ideally, we would have more bike lanes, or even dedicated bikeways - not just recreational paths through parks - real througoughfares to get from A to B. It works all over the world - it can work here. Until then - please be safe and speak from an informed perspective - you will be much more persuasive. On the chance you were just trying to be provocative and don't really you think cyclists should be run over like squirrels - Please forgive my lecturing. § 46.2-800. Riding bicycles, electric personal assistive mobility devices, electric power-assisted bicycles, or mopeds; riding or driving animals. Every person riding a bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility device, electric power-assisted bicycle, moped, or an animal or driving an animal on a highway shall be subject to the provisions of this chapter and shall have all of the rights and duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle, unless the context of the provision clearly indicates otherwise. The provisions of subsections A and C of § 46.2-920 applicable to operation of emergency vehicles under emergency conditions shall also apply, mutatis mutandis, to bicycles, electric personal assistive mobility devices, electric power-assisted bicycles, and mopeds operated under similar emergency conditions by law-enforcement officers. (Code 1950, § 46-183; 1958, c. 541, § 46.1-171; 1980, c. 456; 1981, c. 585; 1989, c. 727; 1994, c. 176; 2001, c. 834; 2002, c. 254.) § 46.2-839. Passing bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility device, electric power-assisted bicycle, moped, animal, or animal-drawn vehicle. Any driver of any vehicle overtaking a bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility device, electric power-assisted bicycle, moped, animal, or animal-drawn vehicle proceeding in the same direction shall pass at a reasonable speed at least two feet to the left of the overtaken bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility device, electric power-assisted bicycle, moped, animal, or animal-drawn vehicle and shall not again proceed to the right side of the highway until safely clear of such overtaken bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility device, electric power-assisted bicycle, moped, animal, or animal-drawn vehicle. (1981, c. 585, § 46.1-208.1; 1989, c. 727; 1999, c. 999; 2001, c. 834; 2002, c. 254; 2004, cc. 947, 973.) Jason – Please do your research before making such inflammatory and hostile comments – and I wouldn’t openly admit to “love bumping” cyclists or excessive use of the horn either. That is road rage, and physical assault, and it could get you locked up. Respectfully, you need to read the Code of Virginia. For your convenience two significant sections are provided below. I am a cyclist who obeys traffic laws at least as rigorously as most motorists (most of whom routinely exceed the speed limit, talk on cell phones, put on makeup, eat, read, text when they should be focusing on the road). I am respectful of cars, and I consciously ride in a way that poses the least inconvenience to my fellow road users And, yes, I pay lots of road taxes – because I own three cars. Now I do not mean to suggest that cyclists should ride on any road without restraint – many roads are already banned to cyclists. More importantly, there are some roads where it would be insanity to do so, no matter how legal. But to suggest that cyclists have no right to be on any road that you use, or far worse, that you have the right to harass and even physically assault them because they annoy you is not only technically wrong, it’s morally bankrupt and it’s absurd. How would you feel if an 18 wheeler on I-81 “tapped” you because he wanted your lane, or bumped yofrom behind because he wanted to exceed the speed limit – by more than you did? Should we ban cars from interstates because trucks use them, and they are bigger? Think it through.

By the way – driving a vehicle on Virignia roads is a REVOCABLE PRIVILEGE – not an inalienable right. Right to ride a bike? Irrevocable short of incarceration – it’s an exercise of the constitutional right of freedom of movement. Please respect the rights of others and think before you act. Also bear in mind that if more people rode biles for short trips, commuting etc., there would be MORE not less room on the road for you and your car. Ideally, we would have more bike lanes, or even dedicated bikeways – not just recreational paths through parks – real througoughfares to get from A to B. It works all over the world – it can work here. Until then – please be safe and speak from an informed perspective – you will be much more persuasive.

On the chance you were just trying to be provocative and don’t really you think cyclists should be run over like squirrels – Please forgive my lecturing.

§ 46.2-800. Riding bicycles, electric personal assistive mobility devices, electric power-assisted bicycles, or mopeds; riding or driving animals.

Every person riding a bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility device, electric power-assisted bicycle, moped, or an animal or driving an animal on a highway shall be subject to the provisions of this chapter and shall have all of the rights and duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle, unless the context of the provision clearly indicates otherwise.

The provisions of subsections A and C of § 46.2-920 applicable to operation of emergency vehicles under emergency conditions shall also apply, mutatis mutandis, to bicycles, electric personal assistive mobility devices, electric power-assisted bicycles, and mopeds operated under similar emergency conditions by law-enforcement officers.

(Code 1950, § 46-183; 1958, c. 541, § 46.1-171; 1980, c. 456; 1981, c. 585; 1989, c. 727; 1994, c. 176; 2001, c. 834; 2002, c. 254.)

§ 46.2-839. Passing bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility device, electric power-assisted bicycle, moped, animal, or animal-drawn vehicle.

Any driver of any vehicle overtaking a bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility device, electric power-assisted bicycle, moped, animal, or animal-drawn vehicle proceeding in the same direction shall pass at a reasonable speed at least two feet to the left of the overtaken bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility device, electric power-assisted bicycle, moped, animal, or animal-drawn vehicle and shall not again proceed to the right side of the highway until safely clear of such overtaken bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility device, electric power-assisted bicycle, moped, animal, or animal-drawn vehicle.

(1981, c. 585, § 46.1-208.1; 1989, c. 727; 1999, c. 999; 2001, c. 834; 2002, c. 254; 2004, cc. 947, 973.)

]]> By: BC Wilson http://www.vabike.org/the-case-for-a-vulnerable-road-user-law/comment-page-1/#comment-4210 BC Wilson Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:34:40 +0000 http://www.vabike.org/?p=1362#comment-4210 Copy of my comment posted on PilotOnline: I will be joining the ride on Saturday to show my support. I'd like to see a dedicated bike path on Shore Drive. The tone of this discussion is a little surprising to me. There are a few voices that seem to be suggesting, more or less, that "might makes right," or that "because I'm in a car and it's fast and heavy, you should get out of my way." It seems to me that the exact opposite is true. Because a car is heavy, fast and dangerous to smaller lighter vehicles, it is the responsibility of the driver to handle it carefully, avoid obstacles, and prevent injury to others. "With great power comes great responsibility," after all. Copy of my comment posted on PilotOnline:

I will be joining the ride on Saturday to show my support. I’d like to see a dedicated bike path on Shore Drive.

The tone of this discussion is a little surprising to me. There are a few voices that seem to be suggesting, more or less, that “might makes right,” or that “because I’m in a car and it’s fast and heavy, you should get out of my way.” It seems to me that the exact opposite is true. Because a car is heavy, fast and dangerous to smaller lighter vehicles, it is the responsibility of the driver to handle it carefully, avoid obstacles, and prevent injury to others. “With great power comes great responsibility,” after all.

]]> By: Jason http://www.vabike.org/the-case-for-a-vulnerable-road-user-law/comment-page-1/#comment-4194 Jason Sun, 05 Jul 2009 15:39:31 +0000 http://www.vabike.org/?p=1362#comment-4194 Passing this law would be insanity, where's the common sense? Why do bicyclists think they have the right to share space with vehicles??? Riding a bike on road is not an individual right. Roads were designed to be used by multi-ton steel vehicles that travel at high speed. Vehicles don't travel on sidewalks, they are for pedestrians. Conversely, if you're not a car, stay off the road...end of any needless bicyclists deaths or injuries. Put your energy into getting bike paths funded and built instead of trying to put someone in jail that accidentally hits a biker that shouldn't be riding on a road. I'd like to climb telephone poles and touch the wires but I know it would kill me. The same thought process should apply to idiot bicyclists that want to peddle on the road. Passing this law would be insanity, where’s the common sense? Why do bicyclists think they have the right to share space with vehicles??? Riding a bike on road is not an individual right. Roads were designed to be used by multi-ton steel vehicles that travel at high speed.

Vehicles don’t travel on sidewalks, they are for pedestrians. Conversely, if you’re not a car, stay off the road…end of any needless bicyclists deaths or injuries.

Put your energy into getting bike paths funded and built instead of trying to put someone in jail that accidentally hits a biker that shouldn’t be riding on a road.

I’d like to climb telephone poles and touch the wires but I know it would kill me. The same thought process should apply to idiot bicyclists that want to peddle on the road.

]]> By: S. Lasky http://www.vabike.org/the-case-for-a-vulnerable-road-user-law/comment-page-1/#comment-4184 S. Lasky Fri, 03 Jul 2009 16:28:55 +0000 http://www.vabike.org/?p=1362#comment-4184 A vulnerable road user law definitely SHOULD be passed to reinforce that all vehicle operators are responsible for safely sharing the road. A vulnerable road user law definitely SHOULD be passed to reinforce that all vehicle operators are responsible for safely sharing the road.

]]>