Why are cyclists seen as sacred by the left?

[Boges]

A mother gets hit by a truck in Toronto a few weeks ago. Tragic loss of life. But by no means does it warrant a piece of legislation like this.

Toronto NDP MP Olivia Chow met on Monday with the family of a cyclist killed earlier this month to push for a law that would require side guards on large trucks.

The issue made headlines earlier this month when 38-year-old Jenna Morrison died after she was clipped by a truck and pushed under the back wheels on Dundas Street West at Sterling Road.

Her death triggered an outpouring of grief from Toronto cyclists, who held a memorial ride in her honour.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/11/28/chow-truck-side-guards.html

Anyone have any evidence that cyclists are more dangerous now than ever before? Every time a cyclist gets hit by a car it's like they were a saint. Remember that lunatic Darcy Sheppard that decided to attack former Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant and ended up getting run over. He was treated like a saint by the cyclist movement.

We're constantly reminded that murder rates are down so extra efforts for crime and punishment is fear mongering. Double standard?

Edited November 29, 2011 by Boges

[guyser]

A mother gets hit by a truck in Toronto a few weeks ago. Tragic loss of life. But by no means does it warrant a piece of legislation like this.

Probably why it wont get implemented.

Every time a cyclist gets hit by a car it's like they were a saint. Remember that lunatic Darcy Sheppard that decided to attack for Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant and ended up getting run over. He was treated like a saint by the cyclist movement.

Correction, he was a Saint amongst the courier , idiot cyclist,anarchist crowd.

[olp1fan]

Because it is Jack Layton's widow and Jack was big into bicycling and protecting bicyclists

[eyeball]

Probably why it wont get implemented.

That's probably what the trucking industry in Britain said before it was implemented there.

[sharkman]

I saw this militant cyclist attitude first hand while working temporarily in Regina. There were about 1200 employees and efforts were made by management to ensure cyclist safety. Since cyclists were riding to work in the dark and almost getting hit, management attempted to hand out reflective vests to the cyclists. One co-worker cyclist became visible angered that such a request was made to him, that he wear a vest in the dark. I guess he'd rather get hit so he could reach cycle sainthood or something.

Another very strange cycle story is that in Regina they ride bicycles in the middle of freaking winter. I am not making this up. Stupidist thing I have ever seen. Oh, and they feel they own the road whether they're on a bike or walking. I had numerous pedestrians just step off the curb in front of me so I had to brake to avoid hitting them. Jaywalking completely and glaring at me like I'm at some kind of fault. I think these same flatlanders move to BC and get hit regularly.

Edited November 29, 2011 by sharkman

[Black Dog]

A mother gets hit by a truck in Toronto a few weeks ago. Tragic loss of life. But by no means does it warrant a piece of legislation like this.

Why not, exactly?

Anyone have any evidence that cyclists are more dangerous now than ever before? Every time a cyclist gets hit by a car it's like they were a saint. Remember that lunatic Darcy Sheppard that decided to attack former Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant and ended up getting run over. He was treated like a saint by the cyclist movement.

What's your point?

We're constantly reminded that murder rates are down so extra efforts for crime and punishment is fear mongering. Double standard?

No, it's apples and oranges.

[cybercoma]

Because cycling promotes a healthy lifestyle and is much better for the environment that driving. The violence many of you show for people who are trying to do things differently, trying to create a better world through their actions is ridiculous. If not outright promoting this as a better means of tranportation, the very least we can do is be accommodating.

[cybercoma]

And the divisive rhetoric here does nothing for discussion.

Cyclists are not sacred or militant.

The problem is that bylaws require cyclists to use the roads and not the sidewalks, then jerks in vehicles don't give the bike-riders the space that they're legally required to use.

[sharkman]

Because cycling promotes a healthy lifestyle and is much better for the environment that driving. The violence many of you show for people who are trying to do things differently, trying to create a better world through their actions is ridiculous. If not outright promoting this as a better means of tranportation, the very least we can do is be accommodating.

In your first line, you start it with 'because'. I guess I missed it, what question are you answering? Also, what violence is being shown to cyclists by many of us?

What do you think of the co-working cyclist I mentioned who got visibly angered at having to wear a vest for his safety in the dark?

[Wilber]

The problem is that bylaws require cyclists to use the roads and not the sidewalks, then jerks in vehicles don't give the bike-riders the space that they're legally required to use.

Cyclists are also required to follow the rules of the road as though they are vehicles. Unfortunately, too many don't.

[Black Dog]

In your first line, you start it with 'because'. I guess I missed it, what question are you answering?

Read the thread title.

What do you think of the co-working cyclist I mentioned who got visibly angered at having to wear a vest for his safety in the dark?

I dunno: why don't you tell us why he was angry and not give us your own biased interpretation. ("I guess he'd rather get hit so he could reach cycle sainthood or something.")

[Black Dog]

Cyclists are also required to follow the rules of the road as though they are vehicles. Unfortunately, too many don't.

Same goes for drivers.

[jacee]

A mother gets hit by a truck in Toronto a few weeks ago. Tragic loss of life. But by no means does it warrant a piece of legislation like this.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/11/28/chow-truck-side-guards.html

Anyone have any evidence that cyclists are more dangerous now than ever before?

I think you mean "in more danger", and the answer is obviously that there are more adults riding bicycles these days, resulting in more accidents. This is especially true as some drivers (like Michael Bryant) are becoming increasingly aggressive toward cyclists (as in this thread), and are less willing to accommodate the increased numbers, and the fact that cyclists insist on their right to the road: They are often commuting or working too, and do have a right to be there.

I like the idea of sideguards on trucks. Makes total sense to me. Also keeping big trucks off city streets as much as possible.

Cyclists are becoming more numerous all the time, and we have to address the safety issues.

[Wilber]

Same goes for drivers.

From what I see, drivers are more likely to than cyclists. For instance, from the way they act, I don't think many cyclists realize that if they ride their bike in a crosswalk, they are a vehicle, not a pedestrian and do not have the right of way.

[eyeball]

Cyclists are also required to follow the rules of the road as though they are vehicles. Unfortunately, too many don't.

Apparently there are arguments as to why different rules should apply.

I've heard of jurisdictions experimenting with things like allowing cyclists to regard stop lights as yield signs because doing so prevents congestion by keeping the traffic flowing.

Personally I think the answer is dedicated lanes and smart cars slaved to computerized automated traffic systems. Of course I live 100 miles form the nearest traffic light on an old dirt road so...take that with a grain of grit I guess.

[sharkman]

Read the thread title.

I dunno: why don't you tell us why he was angry and not give us your own biased interpretation. ("I guess he'd rather get hit so he could reach cycle sainthood or something.")

I wasn't asking you and frankly have little interest in your thoughts.

[Black Dog]

From what I see, drivers are more likely to than cyclists.

Yeah right. I'd say motor vehicles violating basic rules of the road (speeding, failing to stop completely at stop signs, running yellow or red lights, failing to signal, etc.) are so ubiquitous that they don't even register anymore.

But no, the problem is those pesky cyclists.

For instance, from the way they act, I don't think many cyclists realize that if they ride their bike in a crosswalk, they are a vehicle, not a pedestrian and do not have the right of way.

Leaving aside the fundamental absurdity of treating a bike the same way you would a car or truck, has it ever occurred to you that the shortcuts and illegal moves cyclists pull are often motivated by simple self-preservation? For example, the law dictates a left turn must be made from the far left lane, which is all well and good until you end up in front of some total psycho.

[Black Dog]

I wasn't asking you and frankly have little interest in your thoughts.

Then put me on ignore, shithead.

[eyeball]

Another very strange cycle story is that in Regina they ride bicycles in the middle of freaking winter. I am not making this up. Stupidist thing I have ever seen. Oh, and they feel they own the road whether they're on a bike or walking.

Not stupid, just tough as nails. One of the first jobs I ever had was as a bike courier out of a print shop around Church and Queen Streets somewhere...anyhow I recall one winter day when the took us off the bikes by ten in the morning because it was snowing so hard and switched to buses and street cars. They put us back on the bikes by two in the afternoon when the buses and street cars couldn't get through.

We owned both the road and the sidewalks that day.

[Boges]

I ride my bike for recreational purposes, it's not that I hate cyclists.

I just don't see the need for sweeping legislation on trucks because of one unfortunate accident.

I don't see evidence that the mortality rate among cyclists is a huge problem. Tragedies will always happen.

What I object to is when a cyclist does die they are treated like they gave their lives for some greater cause in a war against the evil car.

Darcy Allan Sheppard was not a victim. He was the maker of his own demise yet people treated him like he was taken out by a big car conspiracy to kill people on bikes.

BTW since cycling isn't licensed there really isn't a way to punish those that don't cycle responsibly like there is with drivers.

Edited November 29, 2011 by Boges

[sharkman]

From what I see, drivers are more likely to than cyclists. For instance, from the way they act, I don't think many cyclists realize that if they ride their bike in a crosswalk, they are a vehicle, not a pedestrian and do not have the right of way.

You know, I think we have some defensive minded cyclists like the angry one I was referencing, right here in this thread.

Eyeball, I can't see how riding a bike on ice filled streets in -20c weather is advisable, but I guess some toughness is involved. But the pedestrians there really do take their life in their hands.

[Topaz]

I think both drivers of the truck and of a bike should be educated on how little the trucker can see, like the blind spots and how some bikers don't realize the blind spots, were a trucker can't see. Even drivers of buses have the same problem at times.

[Black Dog]

I ride my bike for recreational purposes, it's not that I hate cyclists.

I just don't see the need for sweeping legislation on trucks because of one unfortunate accident.

I don't see evidence that the mortality rate among cyclists is a huge problem. Tragedies will always happen.

The point is to present unnecessary tragedies. If you can prevent one unnecessary death, why wouldn't you do it?

What I object to is when a cyclist does die they are treated like they gave their lives for some greater cause in a war against the evil car.

Since you don't bike regularly, I assume you have no idea what it's like out there for those of us who just want our fair share of the road. The amount of shit and abuse I have got from drivers (despite being one of the most law-abiding cyclists you'll meet) is staggering.

BTW since cycling isn't licensed there really isn't a way to punish those that don't cycle responsibly like there is with drivers.

Yes there is. You catch them in the act, same as drivers.

[guyser]

The point is to present unnecessary tragedies. If you can prevent one unnecessary death, why wouldn't you do it?

Because slowing traffic down to a max speed of 20KPH would save hundreds of lives.

Since you don't bike regularly, I assume you have no idea what it's like out there for those of us who just want our fair share of the road. The amount of shit and abuse I have got from drivers (despite being one of the most law-abiding cyclists you'll meet) is staggering.

Yes there is. You catch them in the act, same as drivers.

I sure do.

As a triathlete , I bike not everyday but when I do go out I am out for hours and cover anywhere from 30k to well over 100.

The abuse is staggering, and I too get it occassionaly (worst is old ladies to Church on Sunday morns)however it goes both ways.

Cyclists piss of drivers because cyclists, all in all, abuse the rules. You know that to be true.They also dont get ticketed and they are not licenced and insured.

Not to mention the meatheads who dont like spandex shorts on cyclists, meatheads who have little brain matter and thinks it is 'fun' to F around on cyclists.

[Boges]

The point is to present unnecessary tragedies. If you can prevent one unnecessary death, why wouldn't you do it?

Possibly but I would disagree that the cost is worthwhile. Cost benefit analysis are made all the time. You could prevent all biking deaths by having bike lanes on every road everywhere but the cost is probably deemed to high.

Since you don't bike regularly, I assume you have no idea what it's like out there for those of us who just want our fair share of the road. The amount of shit and abuse I have got from drivers (despite being one of the most law-abiding cyclists you'll meet) is staggering.

I'm sure that goes both ways and drivers have to take shit from cyclists. They also have to take shit from pedestrians that don't follow the traffic signs. If a cyclists runs a red light and is T-boned who do you honestly think the cyclist union will blame?

Yes there is. You catch them in the act, same as drivers.

There isn't cycling insurance that is mandated by law that I'm aware of. The cost associated with some sort of careless conviction or the burdens associated with hitting a person even if you weren't in the wrong are great.

Edited November 29, 2011 by Boges