Cars VS Bikes VS People

We cyclists cannot deny that there are some of us, and not a few, who do not follow the rules of the road. How often do you see a cyclist running a stop sign, rolling up the right side of a line of traffic at a stop light, or in groups riding three or four abreast when traffic is trying to pass? Of course none of that excuses any sort of aggressive behaviour on the part of motorists (I'm thinking throwing things, spitting, deliberately spinning one's tires in the gravel in front of cyclists). Obviously, making the roadways more bike friendly would be extremely beneficial but that's not at all inexpensive.(A worthwhile endeavour none the less). I think part of the problem is that we, as a society, have long treated bicycles as toys, and that probably contributes to our not being taken seriously on the road. Surely a little consideration, and common courtesy on both sides of the issue would go a long way toward increasing the acceptance of bicycles on the roads; that includes cyclists following the rules of the road, and motorists giving cyclists just a little bit of room. There's a couple of interesting stories (well...kind of scary actually) here. As for pedestrians, that's another thing altogether. It has been my experience that many pedestrians, especially those who are simply out for a stroll are in a state of, shall we say, "low alertness". Not infrequently, I have tried to indicate to a pedestrian that I was about to pass on the left, for example, only to have them turn around and step right out in front of me. Riding the waterfront trail can be very dangerous for this reason, and in my opinion, bikes should simply never be on a city sidewalk. Anyway, whether you're a motorist or a cyclist or a pedestrian, always keep your head up, watch out for the other guy, cut him (or her) a little slack, and be safe.

Some drivers will simply never be happy to see a cyclist on the road. There is little that can be done about that, except to ride safely by claiming your space on the road (as is your right) and ignoring the honks. The chances that you'll actually be harmed by an aggressive motorist are pretty low.

As for cyclists not obeying the rules of the road, I think the gravity of the cyclist offence needs to be considered. Rolling through a stop sign when there are no cars around is roughly like driving at 115 km/h on the 401... yes, it's illegal, but everyone does it and it's not really all that dangerous. As for rolling past a line of stopped cars on the right, I am not aware of anything in the highway traffic act that states that cyclists are not allowed to take advantage of their smaller and more maneuverable vehicles. And yes, cyclists should never be on the sidewalk, and if they are, they should be riding no faster than walking speed (and they should NEVER expect pedestrians to give way for them.... sidewalks are for pedestrians, they aren't for us.... if we are riding on one out of convenience we should be mindful of that).

Interesting thread.

I've just returned from cycling in Quebec for the first time. In six days - four of which were on shared roadways - nobody blasted a horn at me. Nobody yelled at me. Nobody tried to force me off the road. Even on narrow rural Quebec roads, nobody had any trouble passing me without either clipping my elbow with their mirror or swinging dangerously wide into the opposing lane.

The obvious conclusion is that far too many Ontario drivers are aggressive incompetent morons.

For what it's worth, at least some of Quebec's off-road routes are multi-use trails. Along the Bas Saint-Laurent, I saw cyclists sharing a rail trail with pedestrians and dogs and picnickers. No conflict. I found other off-road routes that are shared by bicycles and snowmobiles. No conflict, and costs of construction and maintenance are shared by governments and both user groups.

And I did not see any cyclists endangering pedestrians by riding on sidewalks. It's not just Quebec drivers that are more courteous and more competent.

Needless to say, I'm already thinking about next year.

the more courteous driver behaviour you note in Quebec is apparently the norm in Europe as well (I recently visited relatives in France who said "drivers are not very respectful of each other here, but they are very respectful of cyclists").
People are more courteous and civilized in Europe in general, in my opinion, but that's another thread :)

There are quite a few drivers in Ontario who really and truly think that cyclists don't belong on "their" roads, and so I suppose that is a good argument for cyclists to be scrupulously law-abiding..... every time a cyclist demonstrates that they are a responsible and courteous road user, they may change a driver's mind.....

... but I wouldn't count on it.

Things in Toronto are worse than I thought. I was really out of touch when I was in Quebec last week. When I posted previously, I was not aware that a prominent provincial politician had recently smashed a cyclist to death on a Toronto street.

It's a shocking contrast with a recent experience of my own. Last month, I was knocked off my bike by a dump truck pulling a trailer. No booze on either part, no road rage on either part, just an unfortunate accident. To the best of my knowledge, the driver of the truck didn't even know that his trailer had hit me. But when another driver caught him and told him, he came right back, phoned the OPP, and when the OPP officer arrived we were standing by the side of the road talking politely to each other. That's how it should be.

Unfortunately that's not how it is when some arrogant self-centered bastard decides he has the right to bump a cyclist out of his way, and then bash him against a mailbox on the other side of the street when the cyclist tries to keep the driver from leaving the scene by grabbing his steering wheel.

I'm not sure where this is going. I haven't had time to think it through. But I would agree with DarrenM about not counting on responsible riding helping deal with the attitude of certain Ontario drivers.

I don't know if it's simply driver attitude towards cyclists, I think it's far more complex then that. The real problem is that people feel that the time they spend driving is wasted time, so they try to reduce the time they waste driving. They fill it with other things, like telephones, text messages, email, and have drawn the conclusion that if the sign says 60km/h that they must drive at least 60km/h. This is re-enforced by the fact that you would need to be going well over 70km/h to get a ticket. A bicycle on the road going 20km/h extends the time they waste driving by the few seconds it would take to safely pass that bicycle, This means that their time is being wasted by that bicycle rider, this is what enrages many drivers.

The logical conclusion is that if you can't give your fellow being a few seconds of your time, you must ask the question when did you stop being human? Of course in that same vein, should you really be driving. If I am not on my bicycle or walking, I take transit. Transit time may be longer, but you can talk on your phone, text your friends, check your email, all without endangering others.

My personal opinion, 100 years from now, old people will look fondly back on the automobile, which went out of production, when the only sensible fuel for them got too expensive to burn, they will then get on their bicycle, and ride home. 1000 years from now, people will look back at this time, and wonder what the heck we were thinking, even inventing the automobile. Then get back on their bicycle, and ride home...

I don't think it's terribly complex. Driving into a cyclist (regardless of whether the cyclist is sober, drunk, or deranged) is totally unacceptable. It's even worse to try to leave the scene of the incident with the cyclist hanging onto the vehicle, wiping him off against trees and mailboxes, then driving over him and dragging him under the vehicle.

Otherwise, I agree with you. I'm appalled by what I see drivers doing when they should be paying attention to traffic. And I say that as a driver as well as a cyclist.

The Toronto Police Service certainly bear a great deal of responsibility for the current state of affairs.

The laws of the road are largely unenforced and the bikes and cars and walkers are left to their own devices.

Well, I've wasted a bit of time looking at media reports and comments, and there's nothing for me to say. Too many buttons being pushed, and too much damage could be done by ill-considered comments.

On one side, people are saying it's the cyclist's fault. He was a courier, all couriers are aggressive and shouldn't be allowed on the roads, he was drunk, he was an aboriginal who had a fight with his girlfriend, etc etc etc. All I can say to such people is "have you tried that defense in a rape case recently? Blame it on the woman because she was drunk and wearing a push-up bra?" Give me a break.

On the other side, some people (too few, but that's just my personal opinion) have commented adversely on the motorist. I would like to join them, but I won't. This is a public website, I think TBN has some credibility, and I'm don't want to screw us up. Too bad, but that's how it goes. Maybe I can find some other website where I can say what I'm thinking without self-censorship.

lost_patrol said: "Unfortunately that's not how it is when some arrogant self-centered bastard decides he has the right to bump a cyclist out of his way, and then bash him against a mailbox on the other side of the street when the cyclist tries to keep the driver from leaving the scene by grabbing his steering wheel."

Where are you getting this version of events? Unless you were present at the time, I don't know how you would obtain such certainty, especially when it flies in the face of all the facts which are known about the evening. The cyclist was so drunk that his own GIRLFRIEND thought the police should drive him home, in fact her neighbors saw him fall off his bicycle while peddling away, while the driver was cold sober.... I'll go WAAAY out on a limb here and suggest, for starters, that if the car bumped the cyclist, it may not have been entirely the drivers fault, and I'll further suggest that maybe, just maybe, the cyclist may have become violent towards the driver. (maybe the cyclist was in a bad mood because he'd already been inside a police car about 45 minutes before). If you're holding on to a steering wheel of a car and the driver starts to drive away, a sane person would let go. (in fact, how could the cyclist even have hung on to the steering wheel like that? More likely the cyclist was half inside the car.)

There are plenty of incidents that indicate that things are not well between drivers and cyclists in Ontario... this isn't one of them.

I'll leave it at that.

If you click through to youtube, you will find other video to further muddy the waters.

Yes, I saw that video after I wrote my earlier comments. This is pretty troubling.

Of course, we don't know what led up to this. Sheppard stops in front of Bryant... to keep him from driving away? Why? Was there an earlier collision? Who was at fault? Was Sheppard behaving in a threatening manner when he stopped his bicycle in front of Bryant? He's big, drunk... a little beligerent perhaps? Bryant is sitting in a stopped convertable at that point, and is completely defenseless if Sheppard decides to start pummeling him. Perhaps Bryant was simply trying to drive away from a confrontation which seemed to pose danger to him, which would be his right (or you could call it "leaving the scene of the previous accident", but again, we don't know anything about that), when Sheppard decided to latch on to the car.

It's amazing to me how this case seems to be viewed through the lens of class.... it's our own "Bonfire of the Vanities".

Anyways, I haven't had time to post but if you seen a small dude on a black and yellow Trek wearing a Team Discovery Jersey, then that's me.

Monday I went for a ride to Woodbine Beach, coming from Lawrence Ave W. & Caledonia Rd. down to Bloor and east to Danforth and south to Coxwell.

I got cutted off by a lady in a 04 black Honda Civic, turning from left lane to right lane. There was a parked BMW car on the right lane so I had to pass it on the left. The lady cuts me off, she doesn't see me, I slam my breaks, I have cleats attached to the pedals and no other choice to unclip so I fell right onto the BMW side window.. Good thing the alarm didn't go on.
I hate how people can just turn whenever they want.. I hate how they don't even signal... I hate how they don't even check their mirrors.

Countless times I've been clipped on my elbow from cars and I don't even take much space.
I've gone though 6 inner tubes in 1 month from pot holes where I rather hit the pot hole than to swurve left.
I've had to get my front wheel trued about 2 times.

Sucks *ss.

Lanny:

Stupid driver tricks, are many., we could write many many pages of comments on them, the real issue is to make sure that we don't get caught between a 2000kg killing machine and an unmovable object.

As for the Sheppard/Bryant case, it's not up to us to make noise about it, the courts should go through the process of determining what happened, who was responsible for what, and to dole out the appropriate punishment if need be. What we do NOT want to do, is to taint a potential jury pool, the media is doing enough of that already,

Personally I think the drunk driving laws should be extended to include bicycles, only means taking the word motor out of the phrase "operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated", There might be some other logistics that would need to be dealt with, like do you lose your licence if drunk on a bicycle? You could argue that both ways,

Sorry, but I disagree with the last point. Bicycles are not motor vehicles. It would be grossly unfair to treat cyclists with motor vehicle licences more harshly than those who do not have licences. And the last thing we need is yet another way in which the authorities could harass cyclists. They already have enough opportunities. Think for a moment about the requirement for a bicycle to have a bell. I don't like cluttering my bike with unneeded accessories. But if I'm caught without one, I could be fined $ 128. That's the same fine as for improper opening of a vehicle door, which as all too many of us know, can result in injury or death.

Otherwise, it will be interesting to see how the courts will go about finding enough people to sit on a jury who have not yet formed an opinion of the case, or for that matter have formed an opinion of either the accused or the victim for some other reason which would prejudice their opinion.

lost_patrol I agree. I hate having a bell on my road bike. It doesn't feel right. I don't understand why I even need a bell when mostly my reaction to something is to scream out, for caution. I believe a bell is only useful for shared pathways like on Woodbine Beach. My voice is forsure louder than a bell.

To use a bell for something really quick like someone driving in a car making a right turn takes alot of time to look at your bell, flcik the thingy to make the sound and look up. That's is a total distraction, and in those milliseconds, I could be hit, or hit into them.

Lights I do agree with, as with improper brakes and all.. but bells?

Some of you may disagree, but I hate bells. Especially on a roadbike when you want to go light and drop grams.. heh.

Now that I've helped Lanny hijack his own thread, let's take it back to the topic of cars vs bikes vs people. The Bryant case is receiving attention south of the border. I've just spotted an article by a lawyer who writes on cycling and the law on the bicycling.com website. For some reason (perhaps the perspective given by distance? or simply a higher standard of journalism?), it provides more information than the Toronto media, which generated a lot more smoke and heat than light.
http://bicycling.com/blogs/roadrights/2009/09/16/when-worlds-collide/

Bells are intended as a warning device., I've been on trails a few times and heard "eft", huh, what the heck does "eft" mean, is this a new word, does it have anything to do with me. I realized it was a guy on a road bike saying "on your left", easy to iss if your not listening for someone talking to you. They might as well be yelling την Αριστερά σας* at you. I noted this only by seeing him in my mirror. A bell doesn't need interpretation, that Brrrrring is unique to bicycle bells, it means caution there is a bicycle around, this gets you a look from most folks, which is the intended point, once they locate you, it's easier to avoid the same physical space. There are small bells that are really quite light, I have one that we used on my wifes bike for a while is probably 20g tops, mine is about 50g, she wanted a big one and I think it's a heavy 100g or so.

As to the original thread, there was a story today that some bike courier pounded the #### out of some guy in a BMW today, the whole story isn't out yet, from what I could gather the road narrowed and the bicycle was in the traffic lane, and the Bimmer was trying to motivate the guy to get out of the way, the only way 1500kg of metal can. Of course the automobile worshipping media was trying to spin this as being the bike couriers fault, they just forgot to edit out the sound bite with the bicycle cop, that spilt the beans,

Looks like the drivers have placed the straw that broke the camels back this year, and the cyclists are not taking it anymore. While I don't condone violence, I have had a couple of times, wanted to reach into a car, pull the driver out, and slap him silly for the bonehead moves some of them pull.

* The online translator tells my the phrase is "on your left" in Greek, my apologies to those speak Greek if it's incorrect.

Some riders use whistles to get your attention, They are far more effective than a bell which no one hears anyhow. Can a whistle be used instead of a bell in the eyes of the law ?

Alarm bell to be sounded
(5) Every motor vehicle, motor assisted bicycle and bicycle shall be equipped with an alarm bell, gong or horn, which shall be kept in good working order and sounded whenever it is reasonably necessary to notify pedestrians or others of its approach. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 75 (5)

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90h08_e...

I'm pretty sure whistles are reserved for the use of the police in many quarters.

There is a relevant article here http://bicycling.com/blogs/roadrights/2009/08/

I don't actually know what the law is in Ontario. A bell or other signalling device is clearly required per the post above, but I don't know about whistles although a lot of cyclists seem to ride with them. Unfortunately, motorists and for that matter pedestrians and others simply ignore them, and there is obviously a discrepancy between what is mandated by the Highway Traffic Act and what we actually have to do to defend ourselves.

A bell, or a whistle, or a scream of outrage, just won't do the job. The incident mentioned above by Wogster is unfortunately typical, and in extreme cases - the Bimmer moving the cyclist out of the way !!! - ends up with a Bryant vs cyclist situation, i.e. a dead cyclist. When a 10 kg bicycle has a physical confrontation with a 2000 kg motor vehicle and an aggressive driver, the cyclist is guaranteed to lose.

The obvious solution is street justice, and that won't work either. Note the situation a few weeks ago in which a Chinatown store owner nabbed a thief and held him for police, and was himself taken down and charged with forcible confinement. Ridiculous - Monty Python would have had a ball developing a skit on the topic - and very damaging to the real victim of the crime, but that's how the system works.

How do we go about developing a culture like I saw when riding in Quebec a few weeks ago, where motorists and cyclists respect each other? And even if we try, will any of us live long enough to see it happen? Motorists are hostile, and governments are about as bad, in spite of what they may say.