|
|
Post by bradmacmt on Jan 22, 2017 20:34:50 GMT -8
I understand the sentiment for the MT bill. There are far too many arrogant, irresponsible bicyclists in our area. It's a borderline plague, and I say that as someone that has spent a lot of time on marginal roads on a bike. Still, I can't agree with the bill. MT is a state where you have the right to be stupid, however you chose. I've reached the age where I wouldn't ride on a fraction of the roads I did in my youth. And when you've had a human being come through your windshield and die through no fault of your own... well, then you'd understand why I'm only halfhearted, not fully in opposition to this bill.
|
|
rebeccad
Trail Wise!
Writing like a maniac
Posts: 12,711 
|
Post by rebeccad on Jan 23, 2017 10:18:00 GMT -8
If you just want to get bikes off the scenic roads you like to drive for your own pleasure, and there are no better roads, then I have little sympathy. When possible, I use small, little-traveled roads. That does mean that there are no shoulders, since few secondary roads have them, so a car that has also chosen that road might just have to cope. Actually, an old friend, and prominent local dentist, who rode the back roads to work, some 20 miles each day, was struck and killed by a young lady who simply didn't see him. wkrn.com/2014/12/01/lewisburg-dentist-killed-in-bicycle-accident/He was planning his retirement, and he would of had a good one. Just because you can, doesn't mean it's a good idea. Do you think I'm not aware that this stuff happens, far too often?? But what you seem to be saying is that a biker should never venture off of bike paths* since we don't belong on big fast roads (agreed!) and little ones are too dangerous because drivers may not see us. I think most bikers know that they have a disproportional risk of being injured or killed in a collision with a car. See Rumi's post above. I try to reduce the likelihood that a driver will fail to see me, by wearing neon yellow-green, using lights, etc. But I refuse to give up my exercise and my enjoyment of scenic areas out of fear. *And when we ride on bike paths, we are often putting ourselves and others at risk, if we are trying to ride fast and hard for fitness, because the paths are too often multi-use paths, with pedestrians and small children wobbling all over the path. So unless our country is willing to spend a LOT of money developing dedicated bike roads, then we have to learn to share the road. Frankly, a cyclist who rides 15-20 mph belongs on the road more than on a multi-use "bike" path. |
|
rebeccad
Trail Wise!
Writing like a maniac
Posts: 12,711
|
Post by rebeccad on Jan 23, 2017 10:19:20 GMT -8
There are far too many arrogant, irresponsible bicyclists in our area. Sadly, true in many areas, including the Bay Area. And what I hate most about that is that all riders end up tarred with the same brush. |
|
BigLoad
Trail Wise!
Pancakes!
Posts: 13,000 
|
Post by BigLoad on Jan 23, 2017 10:35:07 GMT -8
MT is a state where you have the right to be stupid, however you chose. People seem to avail themselves of that right in every state. |
|
|
|
Post by hikerjer on Jan 23, 2017 17:59:30 GMT -8
|
|
kenv
Trail Wise!
Posts: 974
|
Post by kenv on Jan 24, 2017 10:55:50 GMT -8
The link didn't work for me, but if it says the bill was killed, I believe that's a good thing. I live in the hill country south of Austin and Austin is a mecca of bicyclists, too many the "arrogant, irresponsible" types. And the scenic roads where I live draw them by the thousands. Despite the hassles associated with the "shiny pants crowd" hogging the roads, I don't believe in passing laws to outlaw them. There are other ways of dealing with arrogant irresponsible cyclists that don't affect the courteous responsible cyclists.
|
|
texasbb
Trail Wise!
Hates chicken
Posts: 1,223
|
Post by texasbb on Jan 24, 2017 11:42:59 GMT -8
...I don't believe in passing laws to outlaw them. There are other ways of dealing with arrogant irresponsible cyclists that don't affect the courteous responsible cyclists. ^This. I don't like encountering bikes on open two-lanes. If there's much traffic at all, it seems I either have to endanger the cyclist, by buzzing him too close, or endanger myself, by coming to a near dead stop on a highway where traffic is going 70+ MPH (regardless of the actual speed limit). However...the power of the state to prohibit stuff should be used very, very sparingly, and even more rarely when its broad brush tars a lot of good or innocuous behaviors along with the bad. I have no problem when the Powers That Be designate specific roadways or sections thereof as off limits for cyclists (or hitchhikers, or whatever) based on specific facts, but we should give the govt only very small brushes. |
|
|
|
Post by hikerjer on Jan 24, 2017 12:14:57 GMT -8
I have no problem when the Powers That Be designate specific roadways or sections thereof as off limits for cyclists (or hitchhikers, or whatever) based on specific facts, but we should give the govt only very small brushes. Seems totally reasonable to me. Obviously, there are some roads that are just not suited to bicycle travel. However, a blanket ban on all secondary roads is a bit draconian, IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by hikerjer on Jan 24, 2017 12:17:50 GMT -8
The link didn't work for me, Sorry, I can't seem to get the link to work but essentially what it reported is the sponsor of the bill has withdrawn it in the face of huge resistance. He will reintroduce it after woking with various state bicycle advocacy groups and together they will come up with a reasonable and workable bill. Sometimes, its seems the system does work. |
|
kenv
Trail Wise!
Posts: 974
|
Post by kenv on Jan 24, 2017 12:34:42 GMT -8
Obviously, there are some roads that are just not suited to bicycle travel. However, a blanket ban on all secondary roads is a bit draconian, IMO. Totally agree. And probably unworkable. ....the sponsor of the bill has withdrawn it in the face of huge resistance. He will reintroduce it after woking with various state bicycle advocacy groups and together they will come up with a reasonable and workable bill. Well good on him. It will be interesting to see what "reasonable and workable" will look like when all is said and done. |
|
