Interesting comment by Bob Mionske:
Many motorists—specifically, those who refuse to share the roads—mistakenly believe that their possession of a driver’s license gives them a superior claim to the road. These are the motorists who exclaim that, “Until cyclists are licensed and insured, they don’t have a right to the road.” In fact, the right to travel is an ancient right, now recognized as one of our constitutional rights, and the roads are the commons, open to all for travel and other uses. Rather than signifying a superior claim to the road, a driver’s license merely grants the holder the revocable privilege of operating a motor vehicle on the commons. Because other road users are not required to be licensed (and that tacitly means this right cannot be revoked) their right to use the roads is in fact superior to that of the motorist.
Bob's take does shine a new light on the never ending stuggle betwixt road cyclists and drivers, especially the tired arguments put forth by some drivers, that we don't have the right to the road since we allegedly don't(although we really do) pay taxes, aren't licensed, and aren't insured (worth consideration).
I don't think Bicycling magazine is worth the trees killed to print it or the energy spent to maintain its online presence. Bob Mionske's columns and those by the Bike Snob, though, are redeeming factors.
Many motorists—specifically, those who refuse to share the roads—mistakenly believe that their possession of a driver’s license gives them a superior claim to the road. These are the motorists who exclaim that, “Until cyclists are licensed and insured, they don’t have a right to the road.” In fact, the right to travel is an ancient right, now recognized as one of our constitutional rights, and the roads are the commons, open to all for travel and other uses. Rather than signifying a superior claim to the road, a driver’s license merely grants the holder the revocable privilege of operating a motor vehicle on the commons. Because other road users are not required to be licensed (and that tacitly means this right cannot be revoked) their right to use the roads is in fact superior to that of the motorist.
Bob's take does shine a new light on the never ending stuggle betwixt road cyclists and drivers, especially the tired arguments put forth by some drivers, that we don't have the right to the road since we allegedly don't(although we really do) pay taxes, aren't licensed, and aren't insured (worth consideration).
I don't think Bicycling magazine is worth the trees killed to print it or the energy spent to maintain its online presence. Bob Mionske's columns and those by the Bike Snob, though, are redeeming factors.