5 ms·

Yes and I’m saying the cyclists bear some of the decision and outcomes. Even when everyone tries following the rules, accidents happen between cars and “x”. W

Yes and I’m saying the cyclists bear some of the decision and outcomes. Even when everyone tries following the rules, accidents happen between cars and “x”. When cyclists deliberately break the rules designed for their own safety then what? The law is small comfort to someone maimed or dead. It’s why I tell people to assume the other driver/cyclist are unaware and will choose to make the “wrong” choice, until proven otherwise.

wpietri 5y ago
How are you not getting that cyclists using a full lane on a narrow street are not breaking the rules, at least here in CA? And that even they were breaking a rule somewhere, it may be the right choice for their own safety, because the rules are mainly made with car traffic in mind? I get that you as a driver may not like it because it's inconvenient for you. But that's no reason to just ignore the actual rules and preemptively blame cyclists for the outcome of being maimed or dead.
- nobodyandproud 5y ago
  I’m not based in California. Cyclists going side-by-side in a single-lane (per-direction) is violating the rules. See https://nybc.net/education/bike-law/2-uncategorised/68-a-summary-of-ny-state-bike-laws#safepassing https://nybc.net/education/bike-law/2-uncategorised/68-a-sum...
  - Dylan16807 5y ago
    > Persons riding bicycles or skating or gliding on in-line skates upon a roadway shall not ride more than two abreast. You linked this to support your argument? It does say to switch to single file while being overtaken. But in the scenario you described, nobody was overtaking them when they set up side by side.
    - nobodyandproud 5y ago
      > if a usable bicycle or in-line skate lane has not been provided, near the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway or upon a usable right-hand shoulder in such a manner as to prevent undue interference with the flow of traffic except when preparing for a left turn or when reasonably necessary to avoid conditions that would make it unsafe to continue along near the right-hand curb or edge. Cyclists do not have an unlimited right of way in NY and are not allowed to just take-up a lane arbitrarily.
      - Dylan16807 5y ago
        But that doesn't say anything about side by side. It sounds like, when there is a usable edge, that rule both allows side by side on the edge and disallows single file in a lane.
        nobodyandproud 5y ago
        You must have missed this quoted section: “as to prevent undue interference with the flow of traffic” Nevermind that the road signs also say single file.
        Dylan16807 5y ago
        No, I definitely didn't miss that part. If there's a wide bikeable shoulder, you could go side by side and still not interfere with traffic. If there's a narrow bikeable shoulder, you're forced into single file in it, in most cases. If there's no bikeable shoulder, then you're taking up the lane no matter what, and then those rules say nothing against being side by side except while being passed. The rule is not "go single file". The rule is "stay out of the lane when you can".
        nobodyandproud 5y ago
        I’m afraid not. > https://www.bicycling.com/rides/a20026266/bicycle-safety-do-you-legally-have-to-ride-single-file/ https://www.bicycling.com/rides/a20026266/bicycle-safety-do-... > https://www.zifflaw.com/ny-bike-accident/bike-accident-attorney-addresses-rules-for-cycling-side-by-side-in-ny-state/ https://www.zifflaw.com/ny-bike-accident/bike-accident-attor... And this is assuming, again, that the municipality is silent on the matter. That is, some areas and roads can and do insist on single file. Or for that matter, that cyclists in twos aren’t forcing drivers to cross into the opposing traffic lane.
  - wpietri 5y ago
    Ok, recognizing it is legal in some places and not in others is a good step forward. Now try recognizing that the reason it's legal here is safety. And that whether or not it's legal there, it may be safer for cyclists everywhere to use the whole lane in some circumstances.
    - nobodyandproud 5y ago
      That’s your interpretation. Try recognizing that the rules are written to accommodate both the safety of the cyclist while preventing traffic congestion. It’s a compromise and requires cyclists to do their part as well. Really, if asking to stay single file is too difficult then cyclists really need to get licensed for their own safety. I’d hate it but the comments make it more and more convincing that there’s no other way.
      - wpietri 5y ago
        You can't just claim that your rules are the perfectly balanced ones, while the California rules are foolishly wrong and dangerous. Especially given the article we're all commenting on, which shows that even very reasonable bike-friendly rules changes can take decades of effort. Yes, sharing the road is important. But as somebody who uses multiple modes of transport on the regular, I'm confident in my judgement that the existing standards overly favor cars. If sharing the road is truly what's important, the work ahead of is is much more about improving access for bikes than it is for cars. Should cyclists in a peloton make it easier for cars to pass? Sometimes! And sometimes they shouldn't, because that would put them more at risk of dying at the hands of some irate dick.. If you can't see that, it's probably because you're not a regular distance cyclist.

wpietri 5y ago

How are you not getting that cyclists using a full lane on a narrow street are not breaking the rules, at least here in CA? And that even they were breaking a rule somewhere, it may be the right choice for their own safety, because the rules are mainly made with car traffic in mind? I get that you as a driver may not like it because it's inconvenient for you. But that's no reason to just ignore the actual rules and preemptively blame cyclists for the outcome of being maimed or dead.

nobodyandproud 5y ago
I’m not based in California. Cyclists going side-by-side in a single-lane (per-direction) is violating the rules. See https://nybc.net/education/bike-law/2-uncategorised/68-a-summary-of-ny-state-bike-laws#safepassing https://nybc.net/education/bike-law/2-uncategorised/68-a-sum...
- Dylan16807 5y ago
  > Persons riding bicycles or skating or gliding on in-line skates upon a roadway shall not ride more than two abreast. You linked this to support your argument? It does say to switch to single file while being overtaken. But in the scenario you described, nobody was overtaking them when they set up side by side.
  - nobodyandproud 5y ago
    > if a usable bicycle or in-line skate lane has not been provided, near the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway or upon a usable right-hand shoulder in such a manner as to prevent undue interference with the flow of traffic except when preparing for a left turn or when reasonably necessary to avoid conditions that would make it unsafe to continue along near the right-hand curb or edge. Cyclists do not have an unlimited right of way in NY and are not allowed to just take-up a lane arbitrarily.
    - Dylan16807 5y ago
      But that doesn't say anything about side by side. It sounds like, when there is a usable edge, that rule both allows side by side on the edge and disallows single file in a lane.
      - nobodyandproud 5y ago
        You must have missed this quoted section: “as to prevent undue interference with the flow of traffic” Nevermind that the road signs also say single file.
        Dylan16807 5y ago
        No, I definitely didn't miss that part. If there's a wide bikeable shoulder, you could go side by side and still not interfere with traffic. If there's a narrow bikeable shoulder, you're forced into single file in it, in most cases. If there's no bikeable shoulder, then you're taking up the lane no matter what, and then those rules say nothing against being side by side except while being passed. The rule is not "go single file". The rule is "stay out of the lane when you can".
        nobodyandproud 5y ago
        I’m afraid not. > https://www.bicycling.com/rides/a20026266/bicycle-safety-do-you-legally-have-to-ride-single-file/ https://www.bicycling.com/rides/a20026266/bicycle-safety-do-... > https://www.zifflaw.com/ny-bike-accident/bike-accident-attorney-addresses-rules-for-cycling-side-by-side-in-ny-state/ https://www.zifflaw.com/ny-bike-accident/bike-accident-attor... And this is assuming, again, that the municipality is silent on the matter. That is, some areas and roads can and do insist on single file. Or for that matter, that cyclists in twos aren’t forcing drivers to cross into the opposing traffic lane.
- wpietri 5y ago
  Ok, recognizing it is legal in some places and not in others is a good step forward. Now try recognizing that the reason it's legal here is safety. And that whether or not it's legal there, it may be safer for cyclists everywhere to use the whole lane in some circumstances.
  - nobodyandproud 5y ago
    That’s your interpretation. Try recognizing that the rules are written to accommodate both the safety of the cyclist while preventing traffic congestion. It’s a compromise and requires cyclists to do their part as well. Really, if asking to stay single file is too difficult then cyclists really need to get licensed for their own safety. I’d hate it but the comments make it more and more convincing that there’s no other way.
    - wpietri 5y ago
      You can't just claim that your rules are the perfectly balanced ones, while the California rules are foolishly wrong and dangerous. Especially given the article we're all commenting on, which shows that even very reasonable bike-friendly rules changes can take decades of effort. Yes, sharing the road is important. But as somebody who uses multiple modes of transport on the regular, I'm confident in my judgement that the existing standards overly favor cars. If sharing the road is truly what's important, the work ahead of is is much more about improving access for bikes than it is for cars. Should cyclists in a peloton make it easier for cars to pass? Sometimes! And sometimes they shouldn't, because that would put them more at risk of dying at the hands of some irate dick.. If you can't see that, it's probably because you're not a regular distance cyclist.