Bicyclists =/= targets of genocide

[Lace Neil Singer]

And the question about physical mass is a relevant one. As a motorcyclist, I have all too often had to yield the right of way to a motorist due to my wish to not end up dead. I know full well that if a car hits me, I run the risk of death. I have in fact been knocked off my bike by stupid motorists and it was only luck, and a huge amount of protective gear, that meant I escaped with minor injuries both times.

A cyclist is even more at risk; which is why I want to facepalm whenever I see cyclists riding on busy main roads sans helmets, reflectors or any kind of protective gear at all. The road doesn't get any softer just cuz it's summer; if you're going to cycle on a main road, you should definitely wear something like jeans so that your legs are protected, and good shoes. Wearing flipflops and shorts will not do your legs the slightest bit of good, should you come off and hit tarmac... and not wearing a helmet will ensure that if you don't die, you could well end up in a coma or with brain damage.

Yes, I have seen some good, lawabiding cyclists; like the family of four I saw riding thru town who rode single file, with everyone wearing helmets, reflective strips and all wearing jeans and trainers. But sadly, they make up a minority; the aforementioned Lycra Louts who think that they have the right to ride on the road but not observe its rules who risk their lives and those of other road users by overtaking on the inside, jumping red lights, riding in the centre of the road and sometimes on the pavement, narrowly missing mowing down pedestrians. I've had to jump out the way as a cyclist came roaring down the pedestrian section of a pavement; the bike section, where he ought to have been, was completely ignored. An old lady or a mother with a pushchair might not have been able to get out of the way in time.

There are dozens of incidents where cyclists break the laws or collide with pedestrians, so making cyclists out to be innocent victims is just stupid. And comparing their "plight" with genocide of minorities is beyond stupid; it shows appalling ignorance. Hell, why not invoke Godwin's Law and compare other road user's reaction to cyclists thinking they're above the law to Nazis? It seems like the author of the article is just one step away from that.

Oh yeah, and here's a couple of articles about cyclists hitting pedestrians. Happens way more often than a lot of smug cyclists want us to believe.

http://londoniscool.com/give-me-a-fu...crazy-cyclists
http://adrianfitch.wordpress.com/200...otor-vehicles/

[jackfaire]

Growing up cyclists belonged on the sidewalk. I feel the same way but 2 things one I will watch for other cyclists and two the areas would bike few people use the sidewalks for walking.

Also proving myself right is no good if I also just proved myself dead. I will not ever ride in so called bike lanes. I do no belong in the same road with a car. I don't think I have ever been able to pedal as fast as they move.

[MadMike]

There are dozens of incidents where cyclists break the laws or collide with pedestrians, so making cyclists out to be innocent victims is just stupid.

Yeah, it almost happened to me at the beach last week. I was crossing the street with the green light AND the walk signal, and two idiots on bikes come flying right across my path. At least the one had the decency to say "Excuse me", but my understanding is that when you're on a bike, you're basically the same as a car. You have the right to ride on the roads (unless they say "motor vehicles only"), but you also have to obey the same laws as the cars do, which include yielding to pedestrians and stopping at red lights. Too many cyclists insist on the part about the rights, but ignore the part about obeying the laws. I'm not saying they all do that, or even that most of them do, but there are enough of them that they give cyclists a bad name.

And then there was the group of idiots that I saw from the deck of the motel where I was staying. There were a dozen of them or so, and they were riding all over the street, yelling and making all kinds of noise, and taunting the drivers of the cars they were holding up. I wouldn't condone any of the drivers running them over, but I wouldn't have felt any sympathy for them if it had happened either.

[Nyoibo]

What pisses me off about cyclists and a lot of thier attitudes is they want all the rights of everyone else on the road, but don't have to take any of the responsibilities, as part of the responsibility of driving a car I have to have it registered, which includes compulsory 3rd party insurance, so if anyone is injured then their expenses are covered, it's also recomended that people have comprehensive insurance, so that any damage caused to property is also covered, cyclists don't have to have that, most of the money from registration goes to roads, they don't pay that either but they harp on about "I have just as much right to use the road as any car" No, you don't, you have less, I pay for the privelage and pay to ensure others person and property are coveren in case of an accident, you don't.

[Hyena Dandy]

I disagree. They do have as much of a right to be on the road, since there are laws applying to bicyclists as much as there are laws applying to auto drivers.

The problem is when people think they have the right, without accepting the responsibility.

[HYHYBT]

The problem is when people think they have the right, without accepting the responsibility.

True... and about such a variety of people and situations!

[Hyena Dandy]

True... and about such a variety of people and situations!

Yes. I could put it in my signature if I didn't love this one so much.

[BlaqueKatt]

most of the money from registration goes to roads, they don't pay that either but they harp on about "I have just as much right to use the road as any car" No, you don't, you have less, I pay for the privelage

WRONG! and this has been explained several times, in threads where you made the exact same erroneous statement. Roads are paid for out of local taxes NOT vehicle registration.

Highways are funded in very small part by vehicle registration, bicycles are normally not allowed on highways.

I actually pay MORE than you as a car driver do, and my bike does almost zero damage to the road surface(how often are vehicle roads repaved, the bike paths I ride on are well over 30 years old and still in perfect shape).

Wisconsin my state spends about $585 per household per year on roads, only 14% of that is covered by "user fees" the rest is from the general fund, or taxes EVERYONE pays.

The average driver travels 10,000 miles in town each year and contributes $324 in taxes and direct fees. The cost to the public, including direct costs and externalities, is a whopping $3,360.

On the opposite pole, someone who exclusively bikes may go 3,000 miles in a year, contribute $300 annually in taxes, and costs the public only $36, making for a profit of $264. To balance the road budget, we need 12 people commuting by bicycle for each person who commutes by car.

[Nyoibo]

Blaquekatt, remember I live in Australia not the US, a large portion of our registration fees also goes to compulsory insirane, if I get hit by a car I'm covered, if some dick on a bike hits me and I'm injure, tough shit for me I have to shell out to cover my injuries, until they have to pay the same I'm not going to support them.

Number of times I've been hit by a car = 1, number of times I've been hit by a bike = 3.

[Lace Neil Singer]

You could say the same for horse riders; they don't have to pay road tax either. However, the amount of times that I've risked injury by having to jump out of the way of a crazed horse rider is... zero. Happened countless times with cyclists.

One thing that bugs me is the idiot cyclists who scream, "Share the road!". Fine; I will share the road when you can obey the rules of the road and not act like a cretin.

[protege]

Depends on the state. According to PennDOT's funding report, Pennsylvania gets most of the funding for transit projects from the following sources:

* federal funds (highway and transit),
* liquid fuels taxes,
* licenses and fees,
* transfers from the Pennsylvania Turnpike,
* sales tax,
* lottery proceeds,
* General Fund monies, and
*other, more minor sources.

According to that report, "[m]ost federal funding for highways and transit originates from the federal Highway Trust Fund (HTF). Since it was established in 1956, the HTF has generally provided stable, reliable, and substantial highway and transit funding. However, that stability and adequacy has diminished in recent years. The major sources of revenue to the Highway Trust Fund are the federal 18.4-cent per gallon tax on gasoline and the 24.4-cent per gallon tax on diesel fuel. These user fees have not been increased since 1993."

Most of that cash goes towards maintaining the Interstate highway system. Then, there's the licensing and fees. These include motor vehicle registration, user fees on certain roads (the Turnpike...who also transfers some of that money to the state for other transit projects), sales tax on various goods and services, and some of the state's lottery proceeds. Other transit projects include the rural (not Interstate) highway system, and local roads.

With all that said, I didn't see anything about bicyclists paying taxes on gasoline and diesel. PA has a *state* gas tax as well. If they pay any road-related taxes, it's only on lottery tickets and sales. They're not being forced to pay for vehicle inspections, insurance, license plates, or other expensive items related to their method of transportation. So, at least in Pennsylvania, they do not pay the same amount that someone in a motor vehicle does.

Even so, they really shouldn't be subjected to the road rage that some of them are. At least the ones who actually *obey* the traffic laws. Those bicyclists, I have no problem with. The ones I do, are the idiots who refuse to obey the rules of the road--they blow through traffic lights (and stop signs), and then throw a fit when they get hit

[BlaqueKatt]

Blaquekatt, remember I live in Australia not the US,

oh look-the cost of roads in austrailla-insurance and taxes are short the actual costs of the aus roadways by at least 17 Billion, which comes from your federal taxes, that everyone pays, and according to some other research, car owners get breaks on federal taxes....hmmmm.....

Myth: Motorists pay more in taxes and fees than is spent on roads

The Australian tax system provides generous deductions for the use of cars, and to a lesser extent for the purchase or leasing of cars. In most cases equivalent deductions are not available for use of public transport, even for business activities. The tax treatment of car expenses in Australia is so generous that it has induced people to use cars more often than they otherwise would.

[Hyena Dandy]

oh look-the cost of roads in austrailla-insurance and taxes are short the actual costs of the aus roadways by at least 17 Billion, which comes from your federal taxes, that everyone pays, and according to some other research, car owners get breaks on federal taxes....hmmmm.....

Myth: Motorists pay more in taxes and fees than is spent on roads

I'm not entirely sure that's what Nyoibo claimed, though. Someone else may have argued that, but I don't think she did.

She said

most of the money from registration goes to roads

And

Blaquekatt, remember I live in Australia not the US, a large portion of our registration fees also goes to compulsory insirane,

Though I could be wrong (I think insirane means insurance here, and is either a typo or a spelling I'm not used to) it seems clear to me that that statement was intended as "BECAUSE I live in Australia, a large portion of our registration fees also go to compulsory insurance."

Followed by a clarification which restates Nyoibo's point from her original post, which as far as I can tell, comes down to"

"Bike riders aren't compelled to pay insurance, while drivers are. I will not support the bike riders because if they mess up, I have to pay for my costs out of my own pocket." And the implication being "Having to pay insurance is part of the price for using the road, and since bicyclists don't have to, they shouldn't be allowed to use the road."

I don't agree with Nyoibo's argument, I'm just trying to clarify it.

Personally, I think that bicyclists should be allowed to use the road. Which, as far as they know, they are. They should also be obliged to follow the rules of the road. Again, they are.

Unfortunately, a lot of bicyclists do NOT follow the rules of the road. This is frustrating, and causes a lot of backlash. Which is unfortunate, and unfair to those who do. But its inevitable.

If you respect the speed you're going at, and respect that while you're not in a car, you still need to be responsible, because people on foot can still be hurt pretty bad, that's good. But not everybody does.

Riding a bike is good. Its good exercise. But it does not make you a better person than a motorist or a pedestrian. There are still rules that you neeed to follow. There are people, and I am not accusing you of being one, who don't understand that. Who expect the privilege of using the roads without the responsibilities to follow the rules. Stopping at red lights, signaling turns, yielding to pedestrians or motorists who have the right of way, etc.

I'm sure plenty of people respect that. But just like with motorists, its the ones who don't follow the rules that you notice.

Also.

Could someone explain how this is relevant to the thread? Just to be clear, Lachrymose, you don't ACTUALLY believe that this person is boasting about running over bikers. Its a joke, and I assume we all know that. Right?

[HYHYBT]

Why does it matter who pays what? It seems to me that, in this context, that's the same sort of reasoning as an SC who, say, screams about how they can park in the fire lane if they want because they spend XXX a week at your store. The rules of the road are for *everybody.*

[Lachrymose]

Could someone explain how this is relevant to the thread? Just to be clear, Lachrymose, you don't ACTUALLY believe that this person is boasting about running over bikers. Its a joke, and I assume we all know that. Right?

It was just meant to be a semi-related, semi-funny reply to:

Those who don't, though... well, we're not allowed to run over people just for being idiots, probably because everybody is one in one way or another