[SUX VR40 Rider]

This will be very one sided, prejudicial and harsh toward certain law makers and others. If you do not like it, do not read it or stop reading it.

I wonder if this can be sent through the Judicial Branch of state government?

Discuss if you wish.

[Industry_Hack]

Yawn.

Legislation is not going to make the roads any safer.

[CTD50]

Nor is that how the system works.

Just because you're aggressively supporting this doesn't mean it's necessarily right, worthy, or possible. It doesn't mean that you can ramrod this thing through the grinding gears of government, either.

[SUX VR40 Rider]

It may not be how the system works but it is how it has been done in the past. There have been times when because of some ******* politician purposley stalling a bill from being debated or even voted on it was put before the Judicial Branch and made law. There have also been other times when the bill was not even brought before the House or Senate and put before the Judicial Branch and made law.

I think if this bill is not debated and voted in this should be one of those times where it happens again.

If it is thought that legislation can not make the roadways safer then I would love to see an explaination as to how it happened that Illinois roadways became safer after their Bicycle Safety Bill was passed into law. Legislation may not have been the only factor, but please explain how is it prior there were several deaths an injuries among syslists after being hit by motorists. When it was passed into law that number dropped significantly.

[rola643]

I hear ya Freemason and feel your passion. I don't think personally that legislation will make the roads any safer. Only individuals can do that Legislation won't make better or more attentive drivers. Laws on the books might help protect us if you can get local law enforcement to do there part and from what I have seen that can be tough on a good day. I am very fortunate in my local riding area that "most" respect us when we are out riding and generally give us plenty of room. Va. just lost out on a 3ft passing bill and some of the comments made by legislators are just plain scary- such as

"Bicyclists are often law breakers, unworthy of any added protection under the law.”

“Bicyclists are inconsiderate when they delay drivers from getting to their destinations, especially in narrow lanes or roads.”

“Bicyclists should police themselves before coming in asking for added legal protections.” - Really ? Do we ask motorist to do this ????

“A 3 ft. passing rule would inconvenience and hazard motorists by requiring them to move into the adjacent or oncoming travel lanes.”


HB1048 defeated now it's time to get on board and support SB566 which includes Stop for Pedestrians in Crosswalks, seems to be courtesy to me, why do we need bills and laws for this ?

2010 Legislative Summary | Virginia Bicycling Federation

Three Feet to Pass — Why Such Resistance? | Virginia Bicycling Federation

Sorry, just my .02 worth

[funetical]

Why we are so inflexible in our positions when ultimately our lives are at risk is beyond me. Move to the right. Dismount if you have to. What gives them the right? Nothing, but you can't fight them if you're dead. As a community we need to be more reasonable in our demands and the world might stop hating us. Plus I hate to point it out but legislation exist if they hit us. It's assault with a motor vehicle, or vehicular man slaughter depending on whether or not they kill you. If scary names like that doesn't dissuade motorist from being jerks then what chance does any thing else have?

[Industry_Hack]

Being dead but legally in the right is a very small consolation.

[funetical]

Originally Posted by Industry_Hack

Being dead but legally in the right is a very small consolation.

For your survivors. For you it's none.

[hophead]

Originally Posted by funetical

Why we are so inflexible in our positions when ultimately our lives are at risk is beyond me. Move to the right. Dismount if you have to. What gives them the right? Nothing, but you can't fight them if you're dead. As a community we need to be more reasonable in our demands and the world might stop hating us. Plus I hate to point it out but legislation exist if they hit us. It's assault with a motor vehicle, or vehicular man slaughter depending on whether or not they kill you. If scary names like that doesn't dissuade motorist from being jerks then what chance does any thing else have?

One of the reasons that moving to the right won't work is because it's not always possible. Suppose that you are already riding in the right 1/3 of your lane and you are passed by a car. To move any further right might put you into the gutter or through debris that often litters the roadside.

The passing vehicle whether it's a bike, car, truck, or whatever is responsible for passing in a safe manner at a safe time. To put equal responsibility on both the motorist and cyclist is ridiculous. How then would it even be possible to figure out fault in the event of a passing collision? You may as well not pass a law at all.

Of course, courtesy dictates that the cyclist should position themself on the road in such a way as to allow a motorist to pass and move right when it's safe to do so. Often times only the cyclist will be able to see broken glass or a dangerous tire swallowing grate, so only the cyclist can decide when it's safe.

That being said, like motorists, not all cyclists are courteous. There are some that feel that their right to ride on the road is absolute and screw everyone else who chooses to drive a car. That attitude really doesn't help our cause. It just makes motorists hate us more.

I think that laws providing for safe passing distances are a good thing, but we need to do our part too.

[funetical]

So then Cyclist have a right to the road? I feel it's the responsibility of the person whose life is in danger to yield. Passing should not be done if not being able to be done safely we agree there, but if road is not in a condition that facilitates safe cycling common sense dictates you shouldn't be on it, in consideration to known road hazards not tires and other things that accumulate. It says you yield as far right as possible. But it should also read if you can't yield successfully you suffer the consequences of knowingly taking a risk. I'm not some sort of anti-bike biker I just think responsibility is shifted to much. I decide what paths I take with consideration to safety. My own. If that means I can't successfully navigate a road without putting myself or others in harms way due to what ever reason it may be even if that reason is the inconsideration of drivers on that particular road then I stay off that road. It's my responsibility to maintain my safety. Not the jerks in cars.