We Need To Do More To Become "Bicycle-Friendly"

A blue minivan abruptly cuts in front of my bike and nearly knocks me to the curb as I pedal along Farmington Avenue near Whitney Street.

[CJn]

The problem with a law like this is that I just don't see it ever being enforced, like so many other things that fall under what I like to call "common sense" legislation.(Think of the cell phone law.) If you don't already have the "common sense" and decency to give a biker safe passage, no amount of legislation is going to make you change your habits. The only people who are going to pay attention to the law are people that are already being courteous to bikers anyway. I do think a much better solution is designated bike paths.

And as far as people crossing the yellow line. It will happen. It happens every day. I swear no one takes driver's ed anymore and knows the rules of the road. If there is an obstruction in your lane of traffic, YOU have to wait until it is clear in the other lane before you pass.(Like it said in the article...you might have to ride parallel to the biker before you can safely pass them.) You can't just automatically cross over into my lane, forcing me off the road, but it happens daily.

[Kathleen M Dickson]

http://www.drugstore.com/products/prod.asp...

Electric buggy, honey.
Corrupticut could build them.

I know.
Throw me in jail and charge me with terrorism for all this bad, bad, very "dangerously intelligent" "chemist" thinking thoughts almost out loud again.

Kathleen M. Dickson
http://www.actionlyme.org

[WH Res]

Kathleen M Dickson wrote:

http://www.drugstore.com/products/prod.asp...
Electric buggy, honey.
Corrupticut could build them.
I know.
Throw me in jail and charge me with terrorism for all this bad, bad, very "dangerously intelligent" "chemist" thinking thoughts almost out loud again.
Kathleen M. Dickson
http://www.actionlyme.org

You know, you really need some medical attention.....

[FatSean]

The USA doesn't enforce it's traffic laws for the same reason it doesn't enforce the immigration laws.

Bike lanes are the only thing I think will make a differences. Laws are not deterrents, we learned that with the death penalty experience.

Spend real money, give them their own lane, and most drivers should be able to figure out they don't belong in that lane.

[Jeff H]

FatSean wrote:

The USA doesn't enforce it's traffic laws for the same reason it doesn't enforce the immigration laws.
Bike lanes are the only thing I think will make a differences. Laws are not deterrents, we learned that with the death penalty experience.
Spend real money, give them their own lane, and most drivers should be able to figure out they don't belong in that lane.

Gas taxes pay for roads, how would you fund bike paths?

[Ken Krayeske]

Jeff H - We create a parallel bicycle infrastructure based on savings derived from lesser highway maintenance. One reason our roads are so expensive to maintain is the overuse. I-95 runs at 150 percent capacity. If less cars drive on the roads, we have to spend less to maintain them. And building bicycle infrastructure is inexpensive, often times only requiring paint.

And CJn, understanding that such a law may be difficult to enforce, when a cyclist does get hit by a car, as happens, then it provides an additional tool for the officer at the scene, and perhaps a tort in the future.

More importantly, it gives peace of mind for cyclists not just on the road, but that the state is actually taking steps to support alternate means of transit. Baby steps, but steps.

Let's pass this law to show cyclists that they are not second class citizens, and the cycling community can use it as an organizing victory to build confidence and move on to bigger, better things.

[JJP]

Jeff H wrote:

<quoted text>
Gas taxes pay for roads, how would you fund bike paths?

If you go by that logic then no pedestrian should be allowed to walk on the edge of a road that has no sidewalks and there are plenty of them in CT.

[JJP]

Just like cellphone laws, I don't think the 3 foot rule would be enforced.

The real issues are that many motorists are just too impatient, cyclists cannot always stay way to the right because there are often potholes and debris on the sides of the road and, just as there are some irresponsible motorists, the same holds true for some cyclists who are careless.

Common sense, patience and a "share the road" attitude on both side will go a long way.

[Murbike]

We need to educate the ignorant boobs who insist that the road is for cars, and who believe that bikes belong on sidewalks.

[Missy]

WH Res wrote:

<quoted text>
You know, you really need some medical attention.....

I completely agree.

[I B Nutz]

Murbike wrote:

We need to educate the ignorant boobs who insist that the road is for cars, and who believe that bikes belong on sidewalks.

How about educating the ignorant boobs that think that because they are on a bike they can do what ever they want, i.e. red lights, two/three abreast and lack of signals.

[FatSean]

I B Nutz wrote:

<quoted text>
How about educating the ignorant boobs that think that because they are on a bike they can do what ever they want, i.e. red lights, two/three abreast and lack of signals.

There are plenty of horrible drivers on cars and plenty of horrible riders on bikes. Personally, I think our police force is too focused on speed, they should spend more time ticketing lane blockers, people who don't yield when merging onto the highway, stop-sign runners (oh the bikers in New Haven were the worst!) and lack of signals.

The problem is speeding tickets get the most revenue. Make it $300 for running a stop sign or failure to signal and see how things end up.

[Kathleen M Dickson]

WH Res wrote:

<quoted text>
You know, you really need some medical attention.....

http://www.courant.com/entertainment/movies/h...

Go ahead and say the same thing to Richard Blumenthal.
http://www.actionlyme.org/USDOJ_COMPLAINT_RIC...
http://www.actionlyme.org/BLUMENTHAL_ANTITRUS...
http://www.actionlyme.org/CRYME_DISEASE.htm
And his hoes duh DCF:
http://www.actionlyme.org/Schoen.htm
and duh Corrupt Medical Board.

KMDickson

[Marklar]

We really need to slow down car drivers in this state. I suggest tripling the gas tax and tripling fines. Watch how we will progress. Right now, Connecticut and its highway culture make us look as backward as Alabama compared to our neighbors.

[You must be kidding]

Enough already with the "highway culture" comments. The fact of the matter is that most folks want to utilize automobiles, and for obvious reasons. Cars are still the most convenient form of travel for most people in the state. The numbers are overwhelming. A miniscule .2 percent of all working commuters get to work by bicycle (yes, that's 2/10's of a percent). By way of comparison, 89 percent get to work in a car. 4 percent use public transportation. Less than 3 percent walk and about 3 percent work at home. For those using trains, guess what, they get to the station with their car. There is nothing wrong with roads or cars, or people that drive cars, despite the best attempts by the Courant and other special interests to demonize anyone who drives a car, or God-forbid, an evil SUV. There are scarce state and federal funds for transportation improvements, so when it comes down to spending 10 million dollars for a bike path that is utilized by an infinitesimally small group, versus repairing roads and bridges that serve the overwhelming majority of the travelling public, guess where the money is going to go? In terms of this ridiculous three-foot law - it's unnecessary. Maybe Law enforcement should focus on CGS 14-286a, because in my town, cyclists ignore it.Additionally, some of the very planning agencies (COG's) that claim to want improved bicycle access are the first to start whining when you talk about increasing the footprint of a road to allow for improved bicycle use and access.

[FatSean]

The only thing wrong with cars is that they run on oil, and we have to start wars to secure oil supplies.

That's all.

[Marklar]

FatSean wrote:

The only thing wrong with cars is that they run on oil, and we have to start wars to secure oil supplies.
That's all.

How about causing pollution, causing sprawl, causing accidents and deaths, causing the cities in Connecticut to look more like parking lots than real cities anymore.

[You must be kidding]

Marklar wrote:

<quoted text>
How about causing pollution, causing sprawl, causing accidents and deaths, causing the cities in Connecticut to look more like parking lots than real cities anymore.

I suppose automobiles haven't been the backbone of our economic prosperity either right? Or they haven't been the single major force that allows for the American way of life?

Bikes are going to take care of all of our needs? Mass Transit? Telecommuting? I don't think so. Furthermore, if the enviro zealots allowed us to obtain more of our resources from inside the US, we'd be in better shape.

Pollution? There are plenty of sources of pollution...fireplaces, forest-fires, power plants (that are used to power mass transit systems I might add), volcanoes, diesel busses etc. Cars are cleaner and cleaner every day and again, are the most convenient, economical means of getting about for the overwhelming majority of Americans.

We should have options, but the automobile will always be the workhorse, and their is nothing wrong or evil about that, contrary to the Courant's belief.

[Marklar]

You must be kidding wrote:

<quoted text>
I suppose automobiles haven't been the backbone of our economic prosperity either right? Or they haven't been the single major force that allows for the American way of life?
Bikes are going to take care of all of our needs? Mass Transit? Telecommuting? I don't think so. Furthermore, if the enviro zealots allowed us to obtain more of our resources from inside the US, we'd be in better shape.
Pollution? There are plenty of sources of pollution...fireplaces, forest-fires, power plants (that are used to power mass transit systems I might add), volcanoes, diesel busses etc. Cars are cleaner and cleaner every day and again, are the most convenient, economical means of getting about for the overwhelming majority of Americans.
We should have options, but the automobile will always be the workhorse, and their is nothing wrong or evil about that, contrary to the Courant's belief.

Until we run out of fuel. But don't let that stop your ignorance. In the future they will lament our wastefulness. This state is still subsidizing sprawl, I will push for all highways to be toll and pay for themselves. Gas taxes should go to repair the environment from all the asphalt covering it.

[You must be kidding]

Marklar wrote:

<quoted text>
Until we run out of fuel. But don't let that stop your ignorance. In the future they will lament our wastefulness. This state is still subsidizing sprawl, I will push for all highways to be toll and pay for themselves. Gas taxes should go to repair the environment from all the asphalt covering it.

By the time we run out of fuel, we'll be utilizing another energy source. Ignorance is believing bikes or trains or walking will take care of the state's transportation needs. CT for the most part is already a state of sprawl. Why? Because most people want to live in the suburbs, as you apparently do. If you want to live in a transit oriented development, that's great, but most people will continue to head out to the suburbs. Despite what the new generation of enviro's would have us believe, living in the burbs is not a bad thing and it does not make you anti-Earth to have a home in the suburbs.