Matthew Yglesias » Bicycle Safety Enhancement Act

Nov 12th, 2008 at 5:41 pm

Bicycle Safety Enhancement Act

All decent residents of Washington, DC will be joining me in supporting Jim Graham’s Bicycle Safety Enhancement Act of 2008. Click here to send some email to your City Council representative. The council doesn’t get all that much contact from constituents outside a relatively narrow group of usual suspects, so this sort of thing can make a big difference.

Comments
85

Filed under: Bicycles, DC, transportation

85 Responses to “Bicycle Safety Enhancement Act”

huge truck Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
I’m not sure about #3. Three feet of space sounds like a lot, especially when the biker doesn’t do a good job getting over to the side of the lane.
Tom Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
@1: I realize this may sound hostile, but I mean it in the most polite way possible: fuck off. That’s my immediate reaction, anyway — not anger, just exhaustion at dealing with another motorist who’s all for bicycles until they inconvenience him in any way whatsoever.

Three feet is perfectly reasonable, and will be a minor inconvenience. Within the District, bikes move at the pace of traffic on most streets. As a result, there’s no particular reason why cars *should* be able to pass cyclists, except for the ingrained perception among motorists that they deserve to. But cyclists have just as much right to the street — given their relatively few negative externalities, they arguably should have more of a right.
Fed Up With Bike Nazis Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
“@1: I realize this may sound hostile, but I mean it in the most polite way possible: fuck off.”

And I mean this in a loving, tender way: Fuck off yourself, asshole.
dcBob Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
Tom

Can you put a little flag or something on the back of your bike so that I can identify you and make sure I give you your three feet of space?

Thanks!
Vehicular Homicide Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
“given their relatively few negative externalities, they arguably should have more of a right.”

Being an insufferable douche is a negative externality.
TJ Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Being an insufferable douche is a negative externality.
Yes, and how is that working out for you?
JimboSlice Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
I’m all for that bill, but I would want two more pieces added to the list:

1) Mandatory helmets and padding for all bikers.

2) If I patiently bide my time to pass you safely you don’t get to go through the next red light/stop sign and undo all my hard work. I know starting from a cold stop is annoying for bikers, but this one would do us all some good.
pseudonymous in nc Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
1) Mandatory helmets and padding for all bikers.

1a) Mandatory airbags on the outside of all vehicles.

Helmet use by cyclists can encourages unsafe driving practices.
Mixner Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
I propose a Bicyclist Responsibility Enhancement Act:

1. $10,000 fine for riding through an intersection against a red light.

2. $10,000 fine for riding in the wrong direction on a one-way street or against traffic on any street.

3. $10,000 fine for riding without lights at night.

4. $10,000 fine for dangerous or aggressive bike-riding.
adolphus Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
I agree with this act (as well as Mixner’s addenda, though not the fine amounts) but I would also like to suggest a Pedestrain Safety Enhancement Act which might include the following:

1) New pedestrian awareness training for DC bicycle operators
2) A new law requiring that bicyclists give three feet of space when passing a pedestrian
3) A fine for the use of sidewalks and pedestrian pathways by unauthorized vehicles
4) Fines for any vehicle who encroaches on a crosswalk when stopping for a red light.
5) All bicyclists must stop when approaching a bus from any direction that has stopped to take on or discharge passengers.
6 Actual enforcement of the law that states:Cycling on the Sidewalk is prohibited in the central business district (bounded by Massachusetts Ave. NW, 2nd St NE-SE, D St SE/SW, 14th St NW, Constitution Ave and 23rd St NW). Allowed where posted in this area, and prohibited where posted outside this area.

See map here:

Just once I’d like to see that law enforced.

Just once.
Mike Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 10:07 pm
Tom is absolutely right. Bicyclists have precisely the same right to the road as any other road user.

@1: That’s funny I was thinking that 5 feet would be more reasonable. Also there are a number of reasons why it would be legal and appropriate for cyclists to NOT get over to the side of the lane. The law in most states says something to the effect that cyclists must stay as far right as practicable. That’s pretty vague but it must at least mean as far as is safe. And there are a number of reasons it is unsafe to ride too far to the right. In my state of Colorado, the bicycle manual put out by the DOT lists some reasons that a cyclist should take the whole lane.

I know motorists think it’s extremely inconvenient to share the road with cyclists. But what I’ve learned in about 10 years of bicycle commuting is that it’s inconvenient to share the road with other road users no matter what kind of vehicle they’re driving. Every day on my bike motorists inconvenience me. You know what I do? The same thing I do when I’m in my car and I have to wait for another road user: I act like a grownup and wait my damn turn.
NattyB Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
aren’t the bike and bike/bus only lanes supposed to enforced?

They don’t enforce the bike lanes on 7th and 9th street below Mass for shit.
Mixner Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
Tom is absolutely right. Bicyclists have precisely the same right to the road as any other road user.

No they don’t. Drivers fund road construction and maintenance through vehicle registration fees and gas taxes. Cyclists don’t. Start paying your share of the costs, then you’ll be in a position to assert that you have equal rights.
Adolphus Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
Tom is absolutely right. Bicyclists have precisely the same right to the road as any other road user.

Yes, and they also have the same responsibility to follow the laws as a vehicle on said roads, not just the laws they like and not just when it is convenient to them.

And bicyclists do not have precisely the same right to the sidewalk as pedestrians. Even when they are allowed on the sidewalks at all, see my post above, they are required to yield to pedestrians.
ibc Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
In a perfect world, I’d support the three-foot rule. This being an imperfect world, I carry a u-lock for entitled d-bags like Mixner.

When riding in a city like DC the cost of taking off the side-view window of a car stuck at a red light is effectively zero.

So three feet, please. Thx.
Jimble Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
Why do some cyclists persist in claiming things that just aren’t true? Tom (#2) says, “Within the District, bikes move at the pace of traffic on most streets.” That’s patently, ridiculously false as a generalization. For most of the day on most DC streets, auto traffic moves at or over the 25 mph speed limit, and most cyclists ride significantly slower than that. Even when I was a young, fast bike messenger I couldn’t outrun cars consistently except in heavy traffic. The fact is that bikes do frequently delay motorists driving behind them. Whether that’s a particularly bad thing or not is open to debate, of course, but it’s just silly to deny that it does happen a lot.
Mixner Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
When riding in a city like DC the cost of taking off the side-view window of a car stuck at a red light is effectively zero.

Until you get arrested and imprisoned for vandalism, that is.
Mike Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
@13: I don’t have time to educate you but get your facts straight. It’s motorists who don’t pay their fair share.

@14: Hi, I’m Mike. I’m not some vaguely imagined cyclist who doesn’t follow traffic laws and does ride on the sidewalk. So fuck off and share the damn road.
Mike Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
Thinking more about this I’ve got to ask ‘huge truck’: Is that a joke? I’m really asking because now I’m not sure. Do you really think that 3 feet is too much space to allow a cyclist. How much space do you think is appropriate? As an every day bike commuter I think 3 feet is a bare minimum and as I said above I think 5 is really not the least bit unreasonable.

Look, I don’t want to inconvenience anybody but I do have a right to go to work and then home to see my kids just like you. And as I also said above I think the bottom line is that it’s inconvenient to share the road with other people regardless of what kind of vehicle they’re driving. But we all have to do so.
Mixner Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
I don’t have time to educate you but get your facts straight. It’s motorists who don’t pay their fair share.

You obviously don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.
Mike Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
I’m pretty sure that gas taxes (which I pay) generally fund highway construction and maintenance. Local road construction and maintenance is usually funded primarily from property, sales, and income taxes (which I pay). Furthermore, bicycles cause far less wear and tear on the roadways than motor vehicles.

I’ve seen better analyses but can’t find them now so here’s this one: http://stlbikefed.org/Advocacy/Cyclistspaytaxestoo/tabid/150/Default.aspx
Mike Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 11:39 pm
This one’s better (pdf, sorry):
http://www.biketexas.org/component/option,com_docman/task,doc_download/gid,19/Itemid,770/

It really is simply wrong to say, “Drivers fund road construction and maintenance through vehicle registration fees and gas taxes. Cyclists don’t.” That’s simply not true. It really looks to me like it’s you who doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
NattyB Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 11:52 pm
@16 Jimble,

Hahahaha,

what a lying sack of shit. Maybe in your former life you were a bike messenger, but not this one.

For most of the day on most DC streets, auto traffic moves at or over the 25 mph speed limit,

Hmm, that’s definitely not true.

no one is saying out run cars, but we’re able to keep up with traffic. This is the problem though in DC. There are sooo many fucking lights. So these drivers will accelerate up to 40, then jam on their brakes, to go 400m. meanwhile I’m maintaining my 25mph and passing everyone. Especially from along Mass from Dupont to Union Station.

Although I did once see some dumbass biking ON the rock creek parkway.

@ the debate of who pay’s their fare share:
- Cars wear out roads much more so than bikes. A bike weighs 10lbs, a car weights about 3,000lbs. Are you guys really that fucking stupid?

And yes, I do wish American society stressed biking like they do in Holland. Everyone in this country is so fucking fat. I look into the cars of the drivers I pass, and, when it’s a fat person (which is about 60%) of the time, I’m thinking, you should be on a bike or walking, you fat ass.
Mixner Says:
November 12th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
I’m pretty sure that gas taxes (which I pay) generally fund highway construction and maintenance. Local road construction and maintenance is usually funded primarily from property, sales, and income taxes (which I pay).

You’re wrong. Federal gas taxes are used for all types of roads and highways and related infrastructure like bridges. And you pay no gas taxes as a bicycle rider. You’re getting the use of the roads for free. That’s why you don’t have equal rights to them.

Furthermore, bicycles cause far less wear and tear on the roadways than motor vehicles.

And you should therefore pay proportionately less in usage taxes and fees for the construction and maintenance of roadways. You should not get to use them for free. As long as you are using them for free, your claim to have equal rights on them cannot be taken seriously.
pseudonymous in nc Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 12:18 am
You’re getting the use of the roads for free. That’s why you don’t have equal rights to them.

Really, Mixie No-Friends? Hummer owners may act like they own the road at 8MPG, but I don’t think that gives them additional claim. Non sequitur FAIL.

You really do need to develop relationships beyond that provided by your right hand.
Annie Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 12:38 am
I’m going to testify at the hearing for the law, as someone who commutes by bike (and has been doored by a taxi), has biked 300 mile trips, and who three months ago lost a beloved uncle to a bike-car accident. Anything that local government can do to increase the rights and safety of bikers is, in my mind, a damn good thing. Yeah, bikers can be jackasses–but comparatively, there are fewer of us, we weigh less in terms of mass of vehicle, and most car-users are oblivious to our existence. We’re trying to get place to place, too. We shouldn’t have to be afraid for our lives because of car-culture’s superiority complex.
Jimble Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 1:14 am
@23 NattyB,

Calling people liars is a great way to win an argument — my messenger days were long ago but they were most definitely in this lifetime. And generalizing from your particular experience on a single street doesn’t prove anything. You’ve got a point about cars constantly accelerating/decelerating because of all the lights, but if you’re maintaining a constant 25 mph on city streets you’re an unusually fast cyclist and hardly the norm. Maybe it’s that fictitious 10 pound bike you’re riding.
Mixner Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 1:54 am
We’re trying to get place to place, too. We shouldn’t have to be afraid for our lives because of car-culture’s superiority complex.

The alleged superiority complex is a product of your imagination. I have little doubt that most drivers find bicycles annoying. They tend to slow and disrupt motor vehicle traffic flow, and they often behave erratically and in violation of the rules of the road. If you want to promote greater awareness and respect for bicycles among drivers, you might try encouraging more responsible and respectful behavior among the cycling community. Such as not telling drivers to “fuck off,” not threatening to vandalize cars, and not treating stop lights and traffic signals as optional guidelines.
TJ Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 2:00 am
All the bad behaviors you complain about are engaged in by motorists consistently. There’s a reason that red-light cameras and speeding tickets are stressed as money-makers for munis.

Moreover, except in the case there’s a direct fee for use, anyone who can use the road has a right to the road in proportion to their legal rights. In most localities, bikes are entitled to the use of lanes when shouldering is impracticable.

So, fuck off is the correct response to you and yours.
Mixner Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 2:17 am
All the bad behaviors you complain about are engaged in by motorists consistently.

Drivers aren’t the ones bitching here about not getting any respect. If cyclists want to be treated as responsible road users, they should act like responsible road users. Only rarely do I see drivers run red lights, or drive the wrong way down a one-way street, or drive at night without any lights. But I see that kind of behavior by people on bikes all the time.

So, fuck off is the correct response to you and yours.

Since that is your attitude, you may expect to be treated with the respect you deserve. That is, none.
Jer Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 2:26 am
Mixner: “You’re wrong.”

Ah, it wouldn’t be a transportation thread without Mixner making unsubstantiated claims in the face of prevailing evidence.
pseudonymous in nc Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 2:27 am
Only rarely do I see drivers run red lights, or drive the wrong way down a one-way street, or drive at night without any lights.

Well, duh. That’s because you don’t go outside unless you run out of Cheetos, So stop fucking projecting about a lifestyle that is clearly not yours, Mixie No-Friends.
JonF Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 6:09 am
Re: Within the District, bikes move at the pace of traffic on most streets.

In a congested area that’s likekly to be true. I can get home by bike across downtown/Inner Harbor Baltimore faster than I can by car.

Re: And you pay no gas taxes as a bicycle rider.

Most bicyclists (albeit not all) are also drivers, and as such they are are also funding the highways via gas taxes and other auto fees.
Jacob Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 6:53 am
u r blog Is very nice
Glaivester Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 8:36 am
I don’t have a problem with the three-foot, or even the five-foot rule, provided that the rule does not effectively make passing a bicyclist illegal. If it does, then bicyclists either have to live with less of a safety magin, or else they should not be able to use the road. Some people on this thread seem to basically be saying, no, I can’t go over to the far side of the road (I don;t say that peopel should in general, but if a car is trying to pass you it seems you should), I shouold have a large buffer zone, and ifthat makes it impossible to actually pass me, well traffic should slow down to the speed of the bicyclist.

That does not seem reasonable.
Mike Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 9:16 am
Mixner: Really? I get the use of the roads for free? Really? I don’t pay a dime for them? Ok, news to me.

Also, motorists tend to slow and disrupt bicycle traffic flow, and they often behave aggressively and in violation of the rules of the road. If you want to promote greater awareness and respect for bicycles among drivers, you might try encouraging more responsible and respectful behavior among the cycling community. Such as not telling cyclists that they have no right to the road, not running cyclists off the road, and not treating mandated minimum passing distances as optional guidelines. Okay?

Glaivester: That’s exactly what I’m saying and I think it’s perfectly reasonable. I keep as far to the right as practical at all times. That’s often not as far to the right as motorists would like me to be but it is unreasonable of you to expect me to endanger myself for your convenience. I’m not even sure I should inconvenience myself for your convenience. If you think I should, please explain on what legal basis. You seem to think your convenience is more important than my safety. You also seem to think that you have some right to go a certain minimum speed. You further seem to think that motorists somehow have a greater right to the road than cyclists. None of these assumptions are true. Roads not for cars, they are for people.

As I said before, it is inconvenient to share the road with other people no matter what kind of vehicle they are driving. Motorists need to grow up and wait their turn.
ibc Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 9:31 am
Until you get arrested and imprisoned for vandalism, that is.

Pfft…

You’re clearly unfamiliar with the District of Columbia’s law enforcement record. Which–now that I think of it–is probably why such vigilantism is necessary.

I find your faith in MPD touching, though.
Mike Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 9:32 am
The more I think about it, the more I realize this whole discussion is predicated on the assumption that roads are for cars and we’ll allow other road users on them as long as they stay out of the way of the important traffic.

This is wrong. Roads are for people. The fact that we build them to accommodate the largest, fastest vehicles likely to use them in no way implies that the drivers of other vehicles have less right to them.
ibc Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 9:39 am
Oh, and I don’t hear a lot of bitching from cyclists: basically I hear folks on our side telling you that cyclists have all the rights as other vehicles, and that you should respect those rights, and behave like a well-adjusted adult, or we reserve the right to fuck up your precious chariot.

That’s not really bitching. More just, you know, “sayin’.”
huge truck Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 9:41 am
Mike, I was thinking so long as drivers don’t hit cyclists then everyone should be fine. Bicyclists certainly don’t leave three feet of space when they pass cars between lanes and run red lights. If the rule passes, then it should apply to cyclists as well as cars and huge trucks. I’m not sure how this rule would be practically enforced anyway.

I agree with the other posters about the lack of concern for pedestrians that many bikers exhibit.
ibc Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 10:10 am
Mike, I was thinking so long as drivers don’t hit cyclists then everyone should be fine.

Right, but the whole point is that folks don’t intend to hit cyclists, they just “misjudge”. Like the taxi driver who brushed my left handlebar with his side-view mirror while passing (a few years ago, before I started taking up most of the lane). Ooops!

The idea that there is in any way an equivalence between that and cyclists splitting lanes of stopped cars is laughable.

Was that just sophistry, or were you being serious?
Mike Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 10:17 am
Re: so long as drivers don’t hit cyclists then everyone should be fine. The problem with that is that there’s not much margin for error or the unexpected. What if you or I have a blowout? What if I don’t know you’re there and swerve to avoid a road hazard? What if you’ve misjudged the distance. Also, what often happens is that a truck towing a trailer will pass me with what he surely thinks is a reasonable amount of space (and I often agree). Then he starts to move over and by the time his trailer passes me, it’s 12-18 inches from me. That’s really an unsafe distance. This (minimum 3 feet when passing) already is law in many, I think probably most states. And I’ve always assumed (though I’m not sure) that it applied to all vehicles. However as you suggest, I don’t see it enforced.

I wait my turn at red lights. I absolutely respect pedestrians by not riding on sidewalks and by slowing and ringing my bell to warn them of my approach so as not to surprise them.

On the other hand, with some of the attitudes expressed in this thread and some of the motorist behavior I see on the streets, it really is unsurprising that lots of bicyclists choose to ride on the sidewalks. N\I’m not defending them, I’m just saying it surely is understandable.
Adolphus Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 10:24 am
@38: Absolutely true. And it isn’t just cars and bikes, although reading this thread you’d think that’s all that used our roads in DC.

@18: Hi, I’m Adolphus, a carless commuter who uses public transportation, his bike, and his own feet to get about town. I am not some vaguely imagined vehicle driver who breaks laws and endangers cyclists. So fuck off and share the damn sidewalk and cross walks.

As for wear and tear on roads, most of you are mostly wrong. It’s not cars or bikes that cause the most damage to roads. Most roads, when built well (not always a given), are built to withstand the punishment of the heaviest user and in most cases that is heavy trucks. Were you to remove all trucks from DC streets most wear and tear would go with them. Wear and tear related to weather and shoddy construction would remain of course, but that is a small percentage of the whole and the trucks exacerbate that problem as well.

It doesn’t surprise me that none of you brought that up. Someone from out of town lurking on this thread might legitimately believe there are only cars and bikes on DC streets. There are dozens of other modes of transportation who use the roads or need to cross them. Everyone should share the road with everyone else. Not just for your own safety (which is important) and not just for the safety of the person you might hit or come close, but for the safe and efficient flow of ALL traffic and pedestrians.

Allow me to sum up this thread so far:

I ride a bike it is all about me me me me me me me

Cyclists are rude, I drive a car, it is all about me me me me me

As I said above, this looks like a great bill, and I would support the three feet rule. I just want to see an equal law designed for the safety of pedestrians.
Botswana Meat Commission FC Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 10:25 am
Mixner says…
Drivers aren’t the ones bitching here about not getting any respect. If cyclists want to be treated as responsible road users, they should act like responsible road users. Only rarely do I see drivers run red lights, or drive the wrong way down a one-way street, or drive at night without any lights. But I see that kind of behavior by people on bikes all the time.

Are really that fucking stupid? I ride a motorcycle and see how truly clueless most car drivers are. The overwhelming majority of deaths on the road are caused by car drivers. How many innocent people have bicycle riders ever killed? Sorry, but gross vehicular negligence is purely the domain of the average fatass, impatient, no-skills-having, non-stick shift using, cell phone-yapping car zombie.

Bike riders hate you. Motorcyclists hate you. Truckers REALLY hate you. Go read “Traffic” by Tom Vanderbilt and eat a big old piece of STFU.
Adolphus Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 10:29 am
Mike:There seems to be a contradiction in your posts vis a viz sidewalk usage.

In comment 18 you said:

@14: Hi, I’m Mike. I’m not some vaguely imagined cyclist who doesn’t follow traffic laws and does ride on the sidewalk. So fuck off and share the damn road.

In comment 42 you said:

I wait my turn at red lights. I absolutely respect pedestrians by not riding on sidewalks and by slowing and ringing my bell to warn them of my approach so as not to surprise them.

If 42 is correct, I rescind my snarky reply to comment 18. If 18 is correct, then I don’t.
Botswana Meat Commission FC Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 10:31 am
Adolphus…

Honestly, every road user other than car drivers HATES car drivers. This is not a coincidence. We give people a few weeks of driver training when they’re shitty little teenagers and then never even ask them to take another road test for the rest of their lives. The skills needed to negotiate complex traffic situations is WAY over the aptitude of the typical car driver.

Conversely… bike riders, moto riders, truck drivers, taxi drivers, scooter riders, etc. have to ACTIVELY improve their traffic skills and think about various techniques. Most car drivers never ever ever think about driving in that way.

I honestly think every car driver should have to ride a little 125 cc scooter for a couple years before they can get behind the wheel of thousands of pounds of steel and glass. (it’s not that crazy. Most euro nations have lower age requirements for low-cc scooters, so teens all ride them.)
huge truck Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 10:41 am
One annoying thing that can happen when driving is when you’re driving behind a car with a driver who is too scared to pass a cyclist. I fear the three foot rule might just compound that problem. Really I think 18″ or 2 feet is plenty of gap.
Mike Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 10:53 am
Adolphus: @18 was poorly worded. Read it this way: I’m not some vaguely imagined cyclist who rides on the sidewalk.
Adolphus Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 10:59 am
Botswana:

I’m with you on the car hating. As a pedestrian and a marathon runner I have developed “Get off the goddamn phone and drive” into a Marine Corps-like cadence. But me, and a lot of other pedestrians, have the same dislike for cyclists. Unfortunately, both negative sentiments are based on the frequent infractions by a few repeat offenders. Most cyclists and car drivers drive well most of the time. But all you need is one near death experience with some chuckle head trying to talk on their cell phone and drive/ride at the same time for you to develop a bad attitude. And I have had near collision experiences with cell phone talkers using cars, bikes, scooters, and motorcycles. Yes, there are assholes on two wheeled vehicles who drive with one hand and cradle a phone in the other. I have also seen cyclists dangle groceries off one handlebar and weave their way between pedestrians.

I think everyone needs to clean their own yard. (Including pedestrians. I’ve been known to yell at group runners running more than two abreast to get off the trail) The sense of entitlement that comes from both cars and cyclists in these threads is appalling and unwarranted.

One bottom line elephant in the room is the shear number of car drivers relative to other modes of transportation. Change is much needed to make our cities more bike, pedestrian, and public transportation friendly.

Hating, yelling, cursing, shaming, accusing, and otherwise pushing car drivers, and those that identify with America’s car culture, won’t help. It just won’t. There are just too many of them. A different tack is needed.
Adolphus Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Mike: Snark removed with apologies. For you.

To every other cyclist out there: If you don’t like the way I walk, get off the sidewalk.
Mixner Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 11:03 am
commission,

Are really that fucking stupid?

Are you really as big a moron as you seem?

I ride a motorcycle and see how truly clueless most car drivers are.

I drive a car and see that motorcycle riders, like bicycle riders, frequently engage in all sorts of dangerous and illegal behavior on the road.

Bike riders hate you. Motorcyclists hate you. Truckers REALLY hate you. Go read “Traffic” by Tom Vanderbilt and eat a big old piece of STFU.

I doubt that. In any case, since there are overwhelmingly more cars on the road than bicycles and motorbikes, and car vs. bike is a no-brainer, we drivers are the ones who effectively own the roads. If you don’t like that, stay off them, and STFU.
ibc Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 11:10 am
If you don’t like the way I walk, get off the sidewalk.

At least if a guy on a bike is being a douchenozzle, you have the option of giving him a straight-arm, or putting your umbrella in his front spokes.

What gives a small minority of drivers such a massive feeling of entitlement is the belief that they’re untouchable.

“Cyclists” as a group, is too broad to have any meaning. (Riding along with groceries on sidewalks, slowing down traffic in Rock Creek Park, etc…)

A few years ago, my roommate was punched from behind by a guy who then stole his phone and wallet. Since he was on foot, I’ve come to hate all “pedestrians”. They clearly have nothing but contempt for the law, and I feel entitled to ignore their safety.
Mixner Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 11:13 am
You’re clearly unfamiliar with the District of Columbia’s law enforcement record. Which–now that I think of it–is probably why such vigilantism is necessary. I find your faith in MPD touching, though.

You clearly seem to be unaware that the United States consists of rather more than the District of Columbia.

Your defense of vigiliantism gives car drivers just one more reason to despise you. If you behave like scum, you’ll be treated like scum. As for enforcement, in an age of traffic cameras and ubiquitous cell phone cameras, your chances of getting away with your criminal activity diminish every day. I’ll there in court, urging the judge to punish you to the full extent of the law. Then I’ll file a civil lawsuit against you, and take everything you’ve got. Then I’ll make you watch as I crush your precious bicycle into scrap metal.
ibc Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 11:15 am
And car vs. bike is a no-brainer, we drivers are the ones who effectively own the roads.

Well, no, as we discussed up-thread, cyclists *rarely* come out on the short end of the stick, per vehicle mile traveled. I’ve keyed, punched, and u-locked *many* cars in my years riding on the streets of DC, and have *never* been only been tapped once.

That’s the nice thing about riding in the urban environment: with the rare exception, cars come out on the losing end. Maybe that’s why folks like yourself get your panties in such a bunch over such issues.
pseudonymous in nc Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 11:25 am
Mixie No-Friends, who shoehorns his cetaceous bulk into a SUV for that half-mile Cheeto run in western-state sprawlburbia, is now in full-on Overentitled Spewing mode.

He should really just fuck off. Perpetual virginity is treating him ever so badly.
Mixner Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 11:40 am
Well, no, as we discussed up-thread, cyclists *rarely* come out on the short end of the stick, per vehicle mile traveled.

Since bikes are so slow, per vehicle mile travelled isn’t a useful measure of risk comparison. And your claim is a nonsequitur anyway. Regardless of how likely a bicycle is to be involved in a collision with a car, when such a collision does occur the bike rider is much more likely to be seriously injured than the car driver.

I’ve keyed, punched, and u-locked *many* cars in my years riding on the streets of DC,

Thank you for confirming that bike riders are irresponsible criminals and deserve to be treated accordingly. The irony of you demanding to be treated with respect even as you defend your own criminal behavior seems utterly lost on you.
Medium Dave Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 11:41 am
I would say that I’m surprised that this common-sense safety measure has provoked such an uproar, but frankly… it’s like I’ve said before: Once a given group of people become accustomed to having the bulk of law and custom favor them, it seems intolerable when the pendulum swings even a tiny bit the other way.
ibc Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 11:45 am
The irony of you demanding to be treated with respect even as you defend your own criminal behavior seems utterly lost on you.

Well, for the vast majority of drivers who treat other road users with respect, respect. For overgrown children who can’t behave themselves…free auto detailing!
Mixner Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 11:54 am
Well, for the vast majority of drivers who treat other road users with respect, respect.

So you agree that the vast majority of drivers treat cyclists with respect. Great. Now try getting that message through the thick skulls of your more, er, excitable comrades.

overgrown children who can’t behave themselves…free auto detailing!

For bike-riding vandals….a trip to court, prison and the poor house.
Botswana Meat Commission FC Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
I drive a car and see that motorcycle riders, like bicycle riders, frequently engage in all sorts of dangerous and illegal behavior on the road.

Stop trying to play hall monitor.

There’s a huge difference between that and what car drivers do, which is KILL PEOPLE with their negligence. Bikers who speed, cyclists who ride on the sidewalk, pedestrians who jay-walk… yeah, it’s all illegal but it very rarely kills other people.

Car drivers…. not so. Their negligence DIRECTLY RESULTS in deaths. They kill pedestrians, they kill bicyclist, they kill motorcyclists, they cause the majority of tractor-trailer accidents. And when they do, are they ever really brough to justice? “Ma’am, I know you just killed two people by not looking before you turned left, here’s a little $250 fine for reckless driving that you can mail in.”

Because everyone knows DRIVING MY CAR IS A GOD-GIVEN RIGHT. And yet they STILL bristle when bicyclists try to protect themselves!
Mixner Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
commission,

Stop trying to play hall monitor.

Stop being an idiot.

There’s a huge difference between that and what car drivers do, which is KILL PEOPLE with their negligence.

No there isn’t. Negligent and willful violation of traffic laws can kill people (I mean, KILL PEOPLE) whether it’s done by a bike rider, a motorcyclist or a car driver. I wonder how many people bike riders have killed and injured as cars have swerved to avoid hitting them as they run red lights, cut across lanes of traffic, and ride the wrong way down a one-way street.
Adolphus Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
ibc @ 52:

At least if a guy on a bike is being a douchenozzle, you have the option of giving him a straight-arm, or putting your umbrella in his front spokes.

I guess I’m in the minority here in that I don’t view retaliatory violence as a useful or ethical option. First of all it’s wrong and doesn’t prove anything. Second, I’d likely get my ass kicked, unless I killed the cyclist or knocked him/her out in which case I’d likely, and rightly get arrested, since I am a small guy and not particularly good at fighting. Me getting my ass kicked does not make the douchenozzle right.

Unless of course we are all ascribing to a might makes right ethic on the road. As a pedestrian that scares me. As an occasional car driver, sure, bring it on. By your logic I can hit some douchenozzle cyclist and crush his bike under my tires and you would support that decision, yes?

That last sentence is sarcasm. I don’t support retaliatory violence on the road by anyone. I am always to hear it ascribed to by cyclist. Aside from some petty vandalism, you do know you would lose that battle with 90% of the time, right?

“Cyclists” as a group, is too broad to have any meaning. (Riding along with groceries on sidewalks, slowing down traffic in Rock Creek Park, etc…)

I disagree. It is the worst behaviors by each population’s worst offenders that engenders the acrimony and controls the debate. If you as a cyclist can disown the worst cyclist behaviors, than car drivers can do the same. If “cyclist” is too broad a term, then so is “driver,” “motorcyclist,” and “pedestrian.” While we all need to mind the road/sidewalk/path for those differently mobile than us, we also need to hold those with the same types of conveyance as ourselves accountable for their infractions. If you as a cyclist can point to a cycling scofflaw and say, “He is not one of us,” than a driver can point to the garbage truck driver that killed the cyclist this past summer and say the same thing. As a frequent pedestrian I know some of the animosity at walkers and runners comes from the jay walkers and other scofflaws and hold them accountable when I can. Not because I am some sphinctered-up rule follower, but because that pedestrian will likely anger a motorist or cyclist that may likely bounce back to me. To paraphrase the bawdy Shel Silverstein song on VD, the dose that they give you will come back to me.

A few years ago, my roommate was punched from behind by a guy who then stole his phone and wallet. Since he was on foot, I’ve come to hate all “pedestrians”. They clearly have nothing but contempt for the law, and I feel entitled to ignore their safety.

Not the same thing. In your example the act of walking and mugging were two separate acts. The mugging was not a function of the walking. That is, the mugger did not cause violence to your friend as a consequence of walking badly or breaking pedestrian laws or rules of the road. By your logic, the murders committed by the Beltway Snipers, John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo, in 2002 should be held against all motorists because they shot from the trunk of their car. Or all cyclists should be held accountable for crimes in which bikes are used in the commission of a crime. You would have been better served if used an example of someone getting hurt or damaging property by a pedestrian breaking the law, jay walking say. I am sure it happens all the time. In which case you would be justified to say something like, “If you don’t like the way I drive or cycle than stay on the sidewalk.” and I would agree with you. People who don’t know how to cross a road safely should stay on the sidewalk or be held accountable for the consequences of their actions.

What I would not agree with is the assumption that so many of you seem to operate under, that because members of one transportation group break the law or operate unsafely that gives users of other modes of transportation carte blanche to break the law or respond with fatal and near fatal violence.
Adolphus Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
There’s a huge difference between that and what car drivers do, which is KILL PEOPLE with their negligence. Bikers who speed, cyclists who ride on the sidewalk, pedestrians who jay-walk… yeah, it’s all illegal but it very rarely kills other people.

Just to muddy the water a bit, there were some cyclist deaths on the WO&D trail near DC a couple of years ago. Judging from the signs posted looking for witnesses they were from Bike on Bike collisions.

We are all out there together folks, the accidents and near misses are not just between types of transportation but among them as well.

Stay safe and look out for the next person. They aren’t the same person that pissed you off five miles ago even if they are using the same type of transportation.
S.P. Gass Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Obviously there are bad drivers who need to pay more attention to cyclists. I certainly support bike lanes, but as others have pointed out there are also bad cyclists. This article covers a hit-and-run accident on the Capital Crescent Trail:

http://www.gazette.net/stories/031908/potonew203118_32365.shtml

One problem is that some people don’t just use the bike trails to commute or joyride, but instead use them to work out like crazy. These nuts race the trail believing in the far-fetched idea that they might win the Tour de France one day. It’s fine if they want to ride as fast as possible, but they shouldn’t be doing it on a trail with people walking their dogs, pushing baby strollers, etc.
Botswana Meat Commission FC Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Mixner:
No there isn’t. Negligent and willful violation of traffic laws can kill people (I mean, KILL PEOPLE) whether it’s done by a bike rider, a motorcyclist or a car driver. I wonder how many people bike riders have killed and injured as cars have swerved to avoid hitting them as they run red lights, cut across lanes of traffic, and ride the wrong way down a one-way street.

I can’t tell if you’re being serious. You think car drivers are really more likely to be killed by dangerous bike riders than the other way around? Are you really that oblivious?

Of course there are reckless bicyclists/motorcyclists/pedestrians. They mostly risk injuring themselves. Meanwhilet car drivers are never asked to take even the slightest measures to protect the safety of other road users, and which only naturally leads to car drivers being the most oblivious users on the road.
Mixner Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
commission,

You think car drivers are really more likely to be killed by dangerous bike riders than the other way around?

No, I don’t believe that and I didn’t say that. I meant what I wrote. Perhaps you should read it again, more carefully this time.

Of course there are reckless bicyclists/motorcyclists/pedestrians. They mostly risk injuring themselves.

Yes, bicyclists are at much greater risk of harm from cars than drivers are from bikes. Which makes the determination of the bike-riders here to antagonize drivers all the more bizarre. Maybe they have a death wish…

Meanwhilet car drivers are never asked to take even the slightest measures to protect the safety of other road users,

Your claims just become more and more ridiculous.
ibc Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Yes, bicyclists are at much greater risk of harm from cars than drivers are from bikes. Which makes the determination of the bike-riders here to antagonize drivers all the more bizarre. Maybe they have a death wish…

U-Lock! U-Lock! U-Lock!

This is a variation on the argument you often hear in the comments section of various blogs in the lead-up to elections: “You better behave! You need the votes of people like me to win! If you don’t kiss my ass, your candidate won’t get my vote.” It’s a sign of an almost inconceivable narcissism.

Having said that, what you say is true. I have no wish to antagonize drivers in general. Having said that, antagonizing you personally is both entertaining, and carries no risk of “harm from cars” whatsoever. So fuck yourself.

On a related note, I liked you better when you were flecking spittle all over you monitor, threatening to have my bicycle crushed down for scrap. That was powerful stuff.

“I crush your precious bicycle into scrap metal…”

CRUSH I TELL YOU!! CRRUUUSHHH!1!

Decaffinated.
Mixner Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
U-Lock! U-Lock! U-Lock!

Prosecution! Prosecution! Prosecution! Imprisonment! Imprisonment! Imprisonment! Criminal record! Criminal record!
Criminal record!

This is a variation on the argument you often hear in the comments section of various blogs in the lead-up to elections: “You better behave! You need the votes of people like me to win! If you don’t kiss my ass, your candidate won’t get my vote.” It’s a sign of an almost inconceivable narcissism.

No, it’s a sign that you need to be confronted with a few cold, hard truths.

I have no wish to antagonize drivers in general.

Yes, I can see that. Proudly announcing your record of vandalizing cars and your intent to contine vandalizing cars is obviously a great way of endearing yourself to drivers.
Glaivester Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
I’m not even sure I should inconvenience myself for your convenience. If you think I should, please explain on what legal basis.

I believe that the primary purpose of roads is to allow people to get to their destinations as quickly as is safely possible. I think therefore that it is the responsibility of each person using the road not to unduly slow traffic. That applies to cars that are going way below the speed limit, and also applies to bicycles. It applies moreso to bicycles to the extent that bicycles are slower than cars.

You further seem to think that motorists somehow have a greater right to the road than cyclists. None of these assumptions are true. Roads not for cars, they are for people.

I assume that roads are built to get people to their destinations quickly and that people ought not to unduly delay other travelers.

This is wrong. Roads are for people. The fact that we build them to accommodate the largest, fastest vehicles likely to use them in no way implies that the drivers of other vehicles have less right to them.

Roads are for people to get where they are going. In general, roads are designed to allow people to get where they are going in as short a time as is possible. Therefore, it is imperative not to unduly slow down other traffic.
dcBob Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
Cased Closed - DC and environs has the most dickheads, assholes and self righteous douchebags than any other metro area in the US – bikers, drivers, pedestrians, they all suck and everyone hates everyone else. Least friendly place imaginable – makes it so I hate to go anywhere else – I dont know how to act.
Glaivester Says:
November 13th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
btw-

I live in Maine, so this is all an academic exercise for me.
Mike Says:
November 14th, 2008 at 9:16 am
Glaivester: It seems to me that you are saying motorists should be considered to have a greater right to the road than bicyclists because they are faster. I don’t think that speed is the only value that we as a society should be considering.

I think that bicyclists should be considered to have an equal right to the road (as I believe they are in most states) because they pollute less, consume fewer natural resources, are far less of a threat to the safety of other road users, require less lane space per passenger, and produce less wear on the road.
Mike Says:
November 14th, 2008 at 9:53 am
To be clear: I’m not asking for special treatment or deference or whatever. And I don’t insist that you ride a bike too. I just want to be allowed safe passage on our public roads without being harassed, yelled at, having things thrown at me or run off the road. And I would like a minimum safe passing distance according to the law (I’m not from DC).

I’ve been using my bike for transportation for nearly 10 years. I know it seems like bicyclists cost you tons of time waiting to pass them. But I’d be really surprised if I’ve ever cost a motorist more than 15-20 seconds. And as I said, I think there are other considerations that should be given equal value to speed.
ibc Says:
November 14th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Bah. Look just ride your bike. Why even engage with some asshole who thinks your legal use of the public roads is a provocation because you’re traveling at three miles an hour under the speed limit, thus preventing him from going his desired 10 miles an our over the speed limit?

I mean seriously…who gives a fuck what some testy infant like that thinks? I’m out having a pleasant jaunt on my bicycle!
viagra Says:
March 1st, 2009 at 5:07 am
viagra
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
viagra Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 4:19 am
I want to say – thank you for this!
tramadol Says:
March 17th, 2009 at 2:20 am
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
tramadol
wholesale jewelry Says:
March 19th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Good site,it is very useful!
wholesale jewelry
tramadol Says:
March 22nd, 2009 at 5:56 am
tramadol
It is the coolest site,keep so!
buy viagra online Says:
March 22nd, 2009 at 10:20 am
buy viagra online
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
brand viagra Says:
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:01 am
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
buy cheap viagra
viagra brand Says:
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:02 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
cheap viagra Says:
April 9th, 2009 at 4:57 am
I rarely comment on blogs but yours I had to stop and say Great Blog!! viagra
Garwood Says:
April 16th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
Good design, who make it?.
I am from Lanka and also now teach English, give please true I wrote the following sentence: “Printeris; bralik versioon saada brale.”

Thank you so much for your future answers . Garwood.
ltcoqn Says:
April 19th, 2009 at 10:45 pm
ECAzvH aeaidzqjxmsa, [url=http://dnmkkxxgtgxc.com/]dnmkkxxgtgxc[/url], [link=http://lbkhqzijwfqr.com/]lbkhqzijwfqr[/link], http://kkeqyhhnmbxt.com/

Matt Yglesias

Bicycle Safety Enhancement Act

85 Responses to “Bicycle Safety Enhancement Act”

Blogroll