Well, while researching that last reply to Chalo about the cyclist-cyclist crash when one stopped in a group century, I stumbled across these terrible laws in Rhode Island:
Wow! That's pretty terrible. However, here's one that I'll take advantage of on scary roads: Bicycles may use the sidewalk: rilin.state.ri.us31 19 12.HTMOpen ↗ We don't get any pedestrians on sidewalks anyway, especially on the scary roads that I'm afraid to ride. Route 2 in East Greenwich, south of Frenchtown Road comes to mind -- it's two fast lanes in each direction, both narrow, no shoulder, high traffic. There's an unused sidewalk for some of this section...now if only they'd extend it the rest of the way, it would be tolerable to cycle from Division Rd all the way south to as far as I've ever gone.
I guess I'll have to print out that law and keep it with me when riding. -- Rick "Sidewalk? Sideride!" Onanian
Those are very bad laws indeed. I recently finished a tour through Rhode Island and was unaware of these. I'm glad I was. I might have been killed trying to follow the left hand law. I would appreciate it if you could complain to your state reps about this. I live in Mass so have no standing; otherwise, you can be sure I would vigorously work to change these. You might want to contact the League of American Bicyclists as well.
Originally posted by Rick Onanian ...I stumbled across these terrible laws in Rhode Island:...Bicycles must make dangerous, cyclist-killing left turns: rilin.state.ri.us31 19 15.HTMOpen ↗
but I am a little confused. 31-19-15 says " Left turns. – (a) A person riding a bicycle intending to turn left shall, unless he or she complies with the provisions of § 31-16-2, approach the turn in a position as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway..."
31-16-2 prescribes a more conventional approach to off-side turns for "Motor and Other vehicles"
Which all seems to be saying cyclists should make a turn in this stupid way, unless they choose to do it in a more sensible way. Which doesn't sound logical at all. Does anyone else read it the same way?
Originally posted by Rick Onanian Well, while researching that last reply to Chalo about the cyclist-cyclist crash when one stopped in a group century, I stumbled across these terrible laws in Rhode Island:
Wow! That's pretty terrible. However, here's one that I'll take advantage of on scary roads: Bicycles may use the sidewalk: rilin.state.ri.us31 19 12.HTMOpen ↗ We don't get any pedestrians on sidewalks anyway, especially on the scary roads that I'm afraid to ride. Route 2 in East Greenwich, south of Frenchtown Road comes to mind -- it's two fast lanes in each direction, both narrow, no shoulder, high traffic. There's an unused sidewalk for some of this section...now if only they'd extend it the rest of the way, it would be tolerable to cycle from Division Rd all the way south to as far as I've ever gone.
I guess I'll have to print out that law and keep it with me when riding. -- Rick "Sidewalk? Sideride!" Onanian
Hi, Rhode Islander here, Coventry, I doubt that any cop will cite you for a violation but, always keep an eye out for those terrible Rhode Island drivers. I try to plan my long rides to be out of traffic as much as possible to avoid any potential crashes.
If I read 31-19-15 correctly it seems to indicate that 31-16-2 supercedes it. Therefore, the following applies...
(2) Left turns on two-way roadways. (i) At any intersection where traffic is permitted to move in both directions on each roadway entering the intersections, an approach for a left turn shall be made in that portion of the right half of the roadway nearest the center line of it and by passing to the right of the center line where it enters the intersection, and, after entering the intersection, the left turn shall be made so as to leave the intersection to the right of the center line of the roadway being entered. Whenever practicable the left turn shall be made in that portion of the intersection to the left of the center of the intersection.
Rick Onanian said:
Well, while researching that last reply to Chalo about the cyclist-cyclist crash when one stopped in a group century, I stumbled across these terrible laws in Rhode Island:
Wow! That's pretty terrible. However, here's one that I'll take advantage of on scary roads: Bicycles may use the sidewalk: rilin.state.ri.us31 19 12.HTMOpen ↗ We don't get any pedestrians on sidewalks anyway, especially on the scary roads that I'm afraid to ride. Route 2 in East Greenwich, south of Frenchtown Road comes to mind -- it's two fast lanes in each direction, both narrow, no shoulder, high traffic. There's an unused sidewalk for some of this section...now if only they'd extend it the rest of the way, it would be tolerable to cycle from Division Rd all the way south to as far as I've ever gone.
I guess I'll have to print out that law and keep it with me when riding.
Hi, Rhode Islander here, Coventry, I doubt that any cop will cite you for a violation but, always keep an eye out for those terrible Rhode Island drivers. I try to plan my long rides to be out of traffic as much as possible to avoid any potential crashes.
They're not terrible RI drivers; they're just terrible drivers. They exist elsewhere, although we like to take credit for their sole existence (just like the "Rhode Island Rolling Stop", which is just as common in other states, etc).
That said, they all are out of the woodwork today. Twice, watched people signal left for a right move, and I watched one lady who was completely unable to parallel park her Camry in a space big enough for my full size pickup...she kept on trying to do it on the forward stroke, rather than the reverse, which resulted in her just edging farther and farther away from the curb.
She finally gave up with her car 4 feet from the curb and left it there. -- Rick Onanian
Well, while researching that last reply to Chalo about the cyclist-cyclist crash when one stopped in a group century, I stumbled across these terrible laws in Rhode Island:
This is standard verbiage, except that on one-way roads cyclists are usually allowed to ride as close as practicable to the left edge. Also, when turning, cyclists are usually allowed into a left lane or left-turn lane.
That is horrid. You _have_ to make left turns from the right edge of the road. If there is a light, you have to cross, wait for the light to change and cross again. These laws do not conform to standard code.
--
David L. Johnson
__o | If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach a _`\(,_ | conclusion. -- George Bernard Shaw (_)/ (_) |
If I read 31-19-15 correctly it seems to indicate that 31-16-2 supercedes it. Therefore, the following applies...
(2) Left turns on two-way roadways. (i) At any intersection where traffic is permitted to move in both directions on each roadway entering the intersections, an approach for a left turn shall be made in that portion of the right half of the roadway nearest the center line of it and by passing to the right of the center line where it enters the intersection, and, after entering the intersection, the left turn shall be made so as to leave the intersection to the right of the center line of the roadway being entered. Whenever practicable the left turn shall be made in that portion of the intersection to the left of the center of the
intersection.
Then what is that other law about? One-way roads? You still have a mess if turning onto a one-way road according to that law. Also, I presume that nonsense about intersections controlled by a light would still apply.
--
David L. Johnson
__o | As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not _`\(,_ | certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to (_)/ (_) | reality. -- Albert Einstein
Section 31-16-2 describes the normal way of making a left turn from close to the center line, and it applies to all vehicles, including bicycles. Section 31-19-15 then gives bicycles an alternative way of making a turn. It starts out with the words, "A person riding a bicycle intending to turn left shall, unless he or she complies with the provisions of section 31-16-2," and goes on to describe the clumsy, double crossing method. So if you use the section 31-16-2 procedure of turning from the near the center line, you don't have to follow section 31-19-15. It's a second option, not the only choice.
I have to admit, there have been plenty of times, especially on multi-lane streets, when I haven't had the skills or the foresight (or maybe the guts) to work my way to the left in time and I've had to make a two-step left turn.
In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...
Quoted message said:
Well, while researching that last reply to Chalo about the cyclist-cyclist crash when one stopped in a group century, I stumbled across these terrible laws in Rhode Island:
Wow! That's pretty terrible. However, here's one that I'll take advantage of on scary roads: Bicycles may use the sidewalk: rilin.state.ri.us31 19 12.HTMOpen ↗ We don't get any pedestrians on sidewalks anyway, especially on the scary roads that I'm afraid to ride. Route 2 in East Greenwich, south of Frenchtown Road comes to mind -- it's two fast lanes in each direction, both narrow, no shoulder, high traffic. There's an unused sidewalk for some of this section...now if only they'd extend it the rest of the way, it would be tolerable to cycle from Division Rd all the way south to as far as I've ever gone.
The key phrase in all those laws you quoted is "as close as practicable". I don't consider it practicable to make a left turn off of Boston Neck Road from the right shoulder. The only reasonable way is from the traffic lane (or left turn lane where it exists).
Quoted message said:
I guess I'll have to print out that law and keep it with me when riding. -- Rick "Sidewalk? Sideride!" Onanian
-- Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!
In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...
...
Quoted message said:
rilin.state.ri.us31 19 12.HTMOpen ↗ We don't get any pedestrians on sidewalks anyway, especially on the scary roads that I'm afraid to ride. Route 2 in East Greenwich, south of Frenchtown Road comes to mind -- it's two fast lanes in each direction, both narrow, no shoulder, high traffic. There's an unused sidewalk for some of this section...now if only they'd extend it the rest of the way, it would be tolerable to cycle from Division Rd all the way south to as far as I've ever gone.
I wonder how Block Island got that special provision put in there just for them?
Quoted message said:
-- Rick "Sidewalk? Sideride!" Onanian
-- Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!
In article <[email hidden]>, Rick Onanian <[email hidden]> wrote:
snip
Quoted message said:
They're not terrible RI drivers; they're just terrible drivers. They exist elsewhere, although we like to take credit for their sole existence (just like the "Rhode Island Rolling Stop", which is just as common in other states, etc).
snip
Quoted message said:
Rick Onanian
The worst drivers, even though they me be the nicest people, are in the New Bedford area of Mass. (USA).
The gretest driving hazards are in RI, although the State does warn you.
BUMP!
Have A Nice Day!
-- "Freedom Is a Light for Which Many Have Died in Darkness"
The worst drivers, even though they me be the nicest people, are in the New Bedford area of Mass. (USA).
I spend a lot of time driving in New Bedford (my company does a lot of work there), and I haven't had much of a problem. The only issue has been that there's never a traffic light where you need it, and the traffic moves fast; and I seem to go there in a dumptruck as often as a pickup; so it's a bit tough turning left.
Quoted message said:
The gretest driving hazards are in RI, although the State does warn you. BUMP!
I believe the rule is: The smaller the possible bump, the more likely there is to be a "Bump" sign to make everybody stop. If it's a drop-off from one layer of pavement to a lower layer, where your best bet is to just keep going your speed, there will definitely be a "Bump" sign. If it's the opposite side of that, with a 2" high sharp-edged tire-destroying mesa, then there is guaranteed to be no sign.
The worst drivers, even though they me be the nicest people, are in the New Bedford area of Mass. (USA).
I spend a lot of time driving in New Bedford (my company does a lot of work there), and I haven't had much of a problem. The only issue has been that there's never a traffic light where you need it, and the traffic moves fast; and I seem to go there in a dumptruck as often as a pickup; so it's a bit tough turning left.
Quoted message said:
The gretest driving hazards are in RI, although the State does warn you. BUMP!
I believe the rule is: The smaller the possible bump, the more likely there is to be a "Bump" sign to make everybody stop. If it's a drop-off from one layer of pavement to a lower layer, where your best bet is to just keep going your speed, there will definitely be a "Bump" sign. If it's the opposite side of that, with a 2" high sharp-edged tire-destroying mesa, then there is guaranteed to be no sign.
Quoted message said:
Have A Nice Day!
-- Rick Onanian
Yeah!
Like the Jamestown Saunderstown Bridge boondoogle.
Rick, have you ever ridden 138 eastbound from Kingston??
HAND
-- "Freedom Is a Light for Which Many Have Died in Darkness"
Rick, have you ever ridden 138 eastbound from Kingston??
Probably. I had a couple meandering, "get lost" rides where I know I spent a lot of time on 138 in that general area, but to pinpoint exactly...I don't recall. -- Rick Onanian
In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...
Quoted message said:
H. M. Leary said:
Rick, have you ever ridden 138 eastbound from Kingston??
Probably. I had a couple meandering, "get lost" rides where I know I spent a lot of time on 138 in that general area, but to pinpoint exactly...I don't recall. -- Rick Onanian
I drive that section all the time, and I would have to be pretty desperate to ride that section on a bike: 45 - 50 mph moderate-to-heavy traffic, and no shoulder.
-- Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!
Rick, have you ever ridden 138 eastbound from Kingston??
Probably. I had a couple meandering, "get lost" rides where I know I spent a lot of time on 138 in that general area, but to pinpoint exactly...I don't recall.
I drive that section all the time, and I would have to be pretty desperate to ride that section on a bike: 45 - 50 mph moderate-to-heavy traffic, and no shoulder.
Sounds like Route 2 just south of my house. I only rode there once; it was really scary, but I was going home from one of my bonked, failed century attempts, and I didn't have the energy to battle the hills on the better roads. Now I think I'd just start making phone calls and hope somebody comes for me, rather than ride that section again... -- Rick Onanian
In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...
Quoted message said:
David Kerber ns_dkerber@ns_ids.net said:
Quoted message said:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 13:51:18 GMT, "H. M. Leary" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Rick, have you ever ridden 138 eastbound from Kingston??
Probably. I had a couple meandering, "get lost" rides where I know I spent a lot of time on 138 in that general area, but to pinpoint exactly...I don't recall.
I drive that section all the time, and I would have to be pretty desperate to ride that section on a bike: 45 - 50 mph moderate-to-heavy traffic, and no shoulder.
Sounds like Route 2 just south of my house. I only rode there once; it was really scary, but I was going home from one of my bonked, failed century attempts, and I didn't have the energy to battle the hills on the better roads. Now I think I'd just start making phone calls and hope somebody comes for me, rather than ride that section again...
Isn't most of Rt 2 a 4-lane in that area? If so, that's better than 138's 2-lanes.
Quoted message said:
-- Rick Onanian
-- Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!
Sounds like Route 2 just south of my house. I only rode there once; it was really scary, but I was going home from one of my bonked, failed century attempts, and I didn't have the energy to battle the hills on the better roads. Now I think I'd just start making phone calls and hope somebody comes for me, rather than ride that section again...
Isn't most of Rt 2 a 4-lane in that area? If so, that's better than 138's 2-lanes.
Yes, I was thinking 2 lanes in each direction. They're narrow lanes, no shoulder, and there's usually parallel traffic in them.
Just north of me, they narrowed it a few years back from four lanes to two, with really wide shoulders and broken-yellow passing zones. I really ought to bike in that direction someday, but it's uphill the whole way. -- Rick Onanian
