Sue the bastards!

[Fast Orange]

Originally Posted by tungsten

This is why the jongs need the bike lane in the first place, homey. They ain't gots the rad flickable track-standin' 360deg traffic awareness

Which is why they have no business being on the road on bikes to begin with. Even with bike lanes they'll still find a way to kill themselves.

[enduramil]

Originally Posted by Fast Orange

Which is why they have no business being on the road on bikes to begin with. Even with bike lanes they'll still find a way to kill themselves.

Bingo.

Just for our reality impaired Mr Tungsten. Listen up, it is no body else's job on this planet to keep you safe. That is yours alone. And part of that is being aware of risks and hazards on the road as in life. Because there sure as fuck no fictional being appearing to protect you from others and the decisions they make. No fucking bike lane, seperated lane, or "Share the Road" dogma will save your ass. When Larry the sleep deprived student hopped up on Latte's busy texting while driving daddies Benz decides to mow you down to get to class faster while on Kieth Rd. Only you cane protect your life and that means if you get nervous on Kieth Rd then take a differnt route.

Oh, and what the fuck you whining about? Vancouver drivers are polite as hell. Doesn't seem to be many dead cyclists being scrapped of Vancouver roads.

[lycra_wearer]

Originally Posted by Fast Orange

I'm not signing it. Too many people are attempting to be urban cyclists when they don't have the skills or required situational awareness to do so.

If you feel you need a bike lane then just stick to driving cars or taking the bus.

I live in a place that has huge bike lanes everywhere and it sucks. Every day idiots on bikes are t-boning cars turning right as they feel so safe and secure in their bike lanes they stop paying attention to what is happening around them.

right on! let's just make sure that commuting by bike is for the elite! maybe they should license everyone just to have a trials examination on any bike that might be ridden on the roads! It is a better idea than expecting drivers to pay attention to anyone in a vehicle smaller than their own

[tacklebox]

Originally Posted by lycra_wearer

right on! let's just make sure that commuting by bike is for the elite! maybe they should license everyone just to have a trials examination on any bike that might be ridden on the roads! It is a better idea than expecting drivers to pay attention to anyone in a vehicle smaller than their own

Operators of motorized vehicles have to demonstrate at least some level of competence and understanding of the rules of the road.

/thread.

[Lady Gravity]

Originally Posted by lycra_wearer

maybe they should license everyone just to have a trials examination on any bike that might be ridden on the roads!

actually that's not a bad idea, given that the MVA treats cyclists as "motor vehicles". perhaps if more cycling commuters were aware of this they might take better precautions.

[lycra_wearer]

Originally Posted by Lady Gravity

actually that's not a bad idea, given that the MVA treats cyclists as "motor vehicles". perhaps if more cycling commuters were aware of this they might take better precautions.

better precautions than riding to the right side of the lane, with traffic, and getting mowed down by a driver? in this case on a road that was designated int he cycling plan to have a bike lane until drivers complained that they needed two lanes so they could accelerate up the hill faster before merging to one lane.

just to be argumentative, should mountain biking also be licensed with regards to skill progression? How many riders are hurt on the north shore trails? Whistler trails?

[thansen]

Mowed down is a bit strong, from what I've read it was an accident, not a premeditated attack. When riding on the same streets as motor vehicles, one has to assume there is a chance you will be involved in an accident. Unfortunately, those chances increase when you are on a motorcycle or bike because you are less visible. I think this was just an unfortunate accident, and not in any way the districts fault.

I don't think it would hurt to require bikers to take a course, it could be as simple as the online pleasure craft boat course. For the most part bikers tend to follow the rules, but we've all seen bikers weave in and out of traffic, run stop signs and red lights, move on and off the sidewalk as they please. I'll also mention we see lots of automobile drivers doing these things as well. The more educated people are, the less likely accidents are going to occur.

[walleater]

After some twat riding a white Brodie with predictable hi-viz best was hell bent on just riding into me despite the fact I got the the 4-way first this morning, I just want my own lane. Fuck everyone!

[Dave K]

Originally Posted by Hard Tack

Operators of motorized vehicles have to demonstrate at least some level of competence and understanding of the rules of the road.

/thread.

Um, how many threads have there been about how lousy BC drivers are??? And that is after everyone is supposedly gone through some sort of testing??

Bad drivers will always be out there. And to think that there are going to be better cycle commuters??!? There are going to be good cycle commuters (who people barely remember) and the stupid ones (who we bitch and moan constantly about on-line). Kind of like there are drivers who blow through red lights (really officer it was amber, not red), turn without signaling and tailgate. Same sort of people.

And as for adding cycling specific infrastructure, I say go for it. Anything to make some riders feel more comfortable about riding around is good. The more people out riding, the more drivers will learn (and yes the vast majority of us do adapt without running people over) to deal with cyclists.

I regularily commute to UBC from N Bby on my bike (and by car on other days). I choose to ride down Broadway vs the Off-broadway bike route because I find Broadway faster. Much less stop signs and lights, the road way is much wider and the sightlines are better. And I find that cars and buses are much more predictable. That being said just the sheer volume of traffic means that I have to be pretty alert of what is going on around me. So I totally understand if someone is very uncomfortable with riding along Broadway. So I think it is great that there is the option of a more relaxed route for them.

As for the Keith Rd situation? I do not remember a time that I have ridden up that road so I can't have too much to offer. But if asked, I think that due to the narrowness of the shoulder lane I think I would prefer to find something off the beaten path. Since you're climbing a hill, side streets are just as fast as a main road. It's like riding along W. 12th in Van. Sure you are legally allowed to do it, but it absolutely sucks. In the curb lane cars are forced to drive slow behind you or try to make some dodgy pass. There are better options out there.

[tacklebox]

But DaveK,

Would you sue the city if they removed an invincible barrier of 4 inches of white paint from a test area for a bike lane?

One could only suggest that if the plaintiff here was familiar and aware of traffic rules and regulations,he would have recognised that he was in fact not within the protective confines of a bike lane,but in the regular flow of traffic,where sometimes shit just happens.

For him to claim that he was injured because of the removal of temporary bike lane markings and signage is ridiculous. Lines and signs don't prevent drivers from making stupid errors.

[Fast Orange]

At the end of the day why he can't just make a normal claim with icbc is beyond me.

He doesn't have to sue for removal of the bike lane to get covered for this incident.

[tungsten]

Originally Posted by Fast Orange

At the end of the day why he can't just make a normal claim with icbc is beyond me.

He doesn't have to sue for removal of the bike lane to get covered for this incident.

How do we know he's not? Maybe he's going through the hassle of legal action for purely altruistic motives.

And HardTack, the white lines stake out cyclists turf. Yes there are asshole, texting speeding pin-heads who will ignore them but they are in the minority, and if nothing else the lines represent, at the very least, to all motorists, a sort of psychological barrier.

Better than fuckin' nothin', man.

[lycra_wearer]

Originally Posted by tungsten

How do we know he's not? Maybe he's going through the hassle of legal action for purely altruistic motives.

And HardTack, the white lines stake out cyclists turf. Yes there are asshole, texting speeding pin-heads who will ignore them but they are in the minority, and if nothing else the lines represent, at the very least, to all motorists, a sort of psychological barrier.

Better than fuckin' nothin', man.

The lines on 3rd street give me a lot more room climbing the hill than I had before the bike lanes were installed.

[patrolskid]

'tack , first word second paragraph in the news story . . . " lawyer " sam lupton . . .

/end thread right there .

[tungsten]

"Spencer Chandra Herbert is urging Vancouver police to launch a public education and enforcement campaign about the risks of cycling on sidewalks.

VPD spokesperson Sgt. Randy Fincham indicated police are considering both public education and enforcement as options to address the issue. "

http://www.straight.com/article-7710...dewalk-cycling

So watch out!