This is a problem in SF, as well. Particularly with messenger bike types. About a month ago I was driving downtown at rush hour. One way street going down hill. This messenger comes by on a fixie, no helmet, weaving through traffic, skidding a little about every forty feet. Another idiot vying for a Darwin Award.
So, nobody thinks the police have got better things to be doing than arresting people for riding in a responsible manner on a sidewalk? Fair enough!
Yes the hybrids get better gas mileage but the Smart is cheaper.
No more than they have for arresting people driving cars in a responsible manner on bike paths, or people in cars responsibly running stop lights, or people driving cars responsibly on sidewalks.
The last one is impossible, and the other 2 are both potentially far more dangerous to others, than riding a bicycle sensibly and responsibly on a sidewalk.
The only sensible, responsible way to ride a bike on a sidewalk is to keep to a walking pace, which is pretty damn hard on most bicycles, and next to impossible if there’s any sort of a hill. It also negates the whole point of being on a bicycle - you want to go faster than a walk in most cases.
Sidewalks are not meant for adult bicyclists. I’ll give a pass to kids, because a 5-year-old on a bike is more or less going a walking pace, and is not hell-bent on commuting somewhere.
Most people I know who have cycles are not using them because they are “hell-bent on commuting somewhere”. They have them to get from A to B without having to walk. Maybe you might have to pedal at walking pace at times, but in the area I live we don’t have pedestrians packing the pavements like New York, or somewhere.
As for the risk of getting hit by someone leaving the driveway of their home, I’d rather that than be hit by some wanker doing 40 in a 30 zone and using a mobile phone.
As opposed to people who drive, who are not trying to get from A to B without walking?
Sidewalks are for people (note the walk in the name) and streets are for cars and bicycles. Even if you ride on sidewalks you have to deal with just as many intersections which may have cars turning. If you are on the sidewalk cars don’t expect you to all of a sudden appear when they turn right. I have almost hit a couple of people that way.
It’s illegal, juvenile, dangerous, and not respectful of pedestrians.
The difference being, people who drive tend to want to get from A to B as fast as they can, and are driving vehicles that weigh upwards of a quarter of a ton.
Well actually, “sidewalks” are “pavements” where I live. As for the business about intersections, all vehicle drivers - that includes cyclists - should try to expect the unexpected while driving.
illegal - Only because the law is an ass in this case.
juvenile - Says you! Ner!
dangerous - Based on what evidence, since the practice has never been carried out, as far as I am aware?
not respectful of pedestrians - And pedestrians are more of a special interest group than cyclists, why exactly?
Because they don’t want to get from A to B as second fast as they can and drag around 35 lbs of metal with them.
The bike commuters in Chicago can keep up with street traffic just fine. Pedestrians would just slow them down.
And those confident enough to jump in the deep end can do so all they want, but it shouldn’t be a law that everyone has to do so.
For example, should adults cycling with children have to stick to the main roads, while the children cycle on the pavement?
I agree, horrible idea. But 4-6 miles an hour is dangerous? Really? I jog faster than that. Should I be on the road?
I used to ride without lights and never had particularly bright clothing and every time I’d be riding in the dark I’d have to pay strict attention to the cars around me to avoid getting hit. Then I got some lights on both the front and back of my bike and, well, nothing changed. I still have drivers cutting me off.
Lights on a bike are a really, really good idea. But for my money, prevention is worth 100x any light. Just ask any motorcycle rider about being seen.
There were some girls doing a bucket drop at the major intersection near my house today. Wearing black pants and black T-shirts.
At 6:30 pm, when it’s dark in February, even here in Florida. I nearly collected two of them as hood ornaments.
I’m more for riding on the shoulders myself. Do the places that have sidewalks not have them? What do they do if the car has problems and needs to pull over?
But we can still kill a pedestrian very easily as we generally move a lot faster. Don’t think it really makes sense to put us in close proximity.
Plus, as a cyclist you would need to treat each and every driveway as a potential intersection. I think I mentioned this in the other thread about riding on the footpath, but even as a pedestrian I can surprise cars backing out of driveways and have a near miss or two. That would be even worse on a bike.
And as for getting from A-B fast, I generally commute at around 30km/h (18-20mi/h) - I can beat cars and public transport door to door. I don’t think you’d want me riding that speed on footpaths, and why should I need to? Provided I am well lit, obey all traffic rules and use bike lanes/paths where available it’s a safe way to travel (apart from when a driver isn’t paying attention…).
There’s more to earth-friendly than mpg. Things like use of resources and usage of space count. The amount of urban (and suburban) space used to accommodate automobiles is a drag on the quality of life.
I am fully aware that the Smart car is designed to be much safer than its size would indicate. That is not my point. Accident avoidance is much more important than accident survival. As traffic exists in the USA it is very important to be seen and noticed. The average driver is not accustomed to the Smart car. Therefore, it is wise for the Smart car owner to make the vehicle visible. A black or charcoal gray Smart car is not very smart. This is not about what should be, it is about what is. It does no good to be right and dead. Always figure the idiots and incompetents into the equation
But it’s more expensive than the Fit.
Out here there are a number of cyclists that refuse to wear lights or reflective clothing.
ANY road user must be aware that there are a considerable amount of incompetent, if not downright reckless, drivers of automobiles, and that the only person you can trust on the road is yourself.
Vehicles manage to collide with big red buses (over here in the UK.), shiny 4x4’s and dayglo bright sports cars - in broad daylight - so what is making some of you think that a couple of little lights and some reflective clothing is going to ensure a person’s safety, is beyond me.
missed the edit window
Now, one might say it is not the job of the road and transport authorities to “ensure a person’s safety”, but they are supposed to make it as safe as possible, and currently they are failing at their job in respect of cyclists. If I’m being treated like a 2nd class citizen, why shouldn’t I make up my own rules?
The point is, if “shit happens” between a motor vehicle and a person on a bicycle, it is far more likely to result in death for the cyclist, than if the same happened between a cyclist and a pedestrian…however fast the cyclist was going. True, or false?