great but when will the city actually open the bridge??
How is passing stopped cars at red lights absolutely illegal? The SC code of laws, title 56, chapter 5 provides that:
1) Bicycles "...must be granted all of the rights and is subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver..." (sect. 56-5-3420)
2) Riders of bicycles "...shall ride as near to the right side of the roadway as practicable. A bicyclist may, but is not required to, ride on the shoulder of the roadway in order to comply..." (sect. 56-5-3430)
3) "The driver of a vehicle may overtake and pass upon the right of another vehicle... Upon a roadway with unobstructed pavement of sufficient width for two or more lines of vehicles moving lawfully in the direction being travelled by the overtaking vehicle." (sect 56-5-1850)
View for yourself at: [http://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t56c005.p…]
I'm armchair lawyering here, but it would appear to me that if the simple rule is that a bike is a vehicle, and the cyclist feels it's safe to pass a line of stopped cars on the right and there is ample pavement to do so, than he/she has every right.
Share the road, people. It's that simple. The SDOT puts the signs everywhere but surprise surprise the message hasn't yet sunk in. You may not like the rules and especially you may resent a cyclist when you're stuck in rush hour traffic chugging expensive gasoline while they breeze past you. I understand that frustration--traffic sucks. You should get on a bike and give it a try! But you really shouldn't hold the cyclist in contempt.
Sounds like the community could afford some sort of an education/awareness campaign about the rights/responsibilities associated with cyclists and cars sharing the same road space. Predictably this would improve the behavior and attitudes of drivers and cyclists alike.
Pimpfish, the city code ALLOWS, but does not REQUIRE cyclists to ride on the sidewalk on 35+mph roads. Undoubtedly this is because many cyclists feel uncomfortable in speedy traffic. But many (most I bet), like myself, agree with patador in that the road is still the safest place. The State Law prevails in that a) the cyclist is granted all of the rights granted to the driver, b) the cyclist is required to ride as far to the right as practicable, and c) drivers must at all times maintain a safe operating distance.
Of course, the cyclist has a responsibility to not operate hazardously or unpredictably, and it's unfortunate that the reckless behavior of a minority can perpetuate such discontent towards cyclists. I agree there needs to be more enforcement of traffic laws on disobeying cyclists. That being said though, again, you own a car, not the road. Try not to be so narrow minded in thinking that the cyclist should get out of the car's way.
Fish Pimp, an annual bicycle registration fee is a fine idea I think most cyclists would support. But within reason. The hundreds of $$$ in fees and registrations paid for cars are proportional to the associated costs that are borne by the public. Honestly, a biker's registration fee shouldn't be more than $10-20 per year, and further should be used in support of cyclists needs on the roads.
And by the way, the sidewalks are NOT for cyclists. Bikes are legally required to ride on the road. You make yourself sound awfully authoritative but unfortunately you're not so knowledgeable. Cyclists do have rights to safety. It appears to me you have a sense of entitlement of your own. You own a car, not the road.
In the end we're talking about a human being that lost their life. It's a tragedy, and should be treated like one. Drunk driving, aggressive driving, distracted driving... it's all a shame. This isn't like swimming with sharks, or skydiving, for example where you could say, "oh it's the victim's own fault, he/she knew the risks."
Alas, not everyone has compassion for their neighbors.
Keep up the good work Tom!
All Comments »
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2013,
Charleston City Paper