laws that may need breaking.

  • Thread starter Bran Everseekin
  • Start date



Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bran Everseekin

Guest
I am begining to realize that some places do not have planners so much as people with a plant to
make stop signs. maybe you should elect some one that makes yeild signs.

here is my favourite bit of bad legislation. 20(b) permits cyclists to use the "sidewalks" on
bridges or overpasses in recognition that there is no escape and that climbing the brides on the
roadways can be a slow process

21. Crossing on Sidewalk

In traversing any bridge or river crossing upon the sidewalk as provided in Section 20(b),
every person operating a bicycle shall:

(a) proceed with due care and attention and with reasonable consideration for all
pedestrians; and,

(b) yield the right of way to all pedestrians; and,

(c) dismount and walk the bicycle when passing a pedestrian proceeding in the same direction
upon such sidewalk.

a and b make sense but c? I ride slowly, give warning, and pass when they stop acting like chickens
with their heads cut off. if I were to follow the law in this case i would never get anywhere as my
walking is not the best in the world due to the fibro and a "trick" knee.

--
I hurt before the ride so fibro gives me a head start on the rest of the pack. silver lining?
[email protected]
 
J

Jon Isaacs

Guest
>a and b make sense but c? I ride slowly, give warning, and pass when they stop acting like chickens
>with their heads cut off.

Curious if there is something about the warnings you give that are causing pedestrians to "act like
chickens with their heads cut off." ?? Sometimes I ride through large groups of "pedestrians" on the
campus where I work and they seem to be pretty stable regardless of the number there might be.

jon isaacs
 
B

Bran Everseekin

Guest
[email protected] (Jon Isaacs) spake thusly on or about Mon, 10 Feb 2003
13:03:24 UTC

-> Curious if there is something about the warnings you give that are causing -> pedestrians to "act
like chickens with their heads cut off." ?? Sometimes I -> ride through large groups of
"pedestrians" on the campus where I work and they -> seem to be pretty stable regardless of the
number there might be. ->

I ring the silly little bell (they are conditioned to bells because the law requires their use) when
I am still back a ways then when I need them to move I say "excuse me." then they dart all over
because there are no rules for them to follow about where they should go and because cyclists,
bladers and boarders tend to fly down the bridges at traffic speeds. This time of the year its only
people on bikes. They are better in the summer than at -35C because bikes are expected. Meeting or
passing groups is always more unpredictable than pairs or singles

I expect them to behave erratically and they often oblige. I have never clipped a ped. because I
thought i could slip by without warning them or because I expected them to behave differently than
they did. When i was younger i used the roadway both up and down but I am way too slow climbing now
and the drivers are way more offended at being passed by a bike on the descents.

--
I hurt before the ride so fibro gives me a head start on the rest of the pack. silver lining?
[email protected]
 
S

Scott Lindstrom

Guest
[email protected] wrote:
> [email protected] (Jon Isaacs) spake thusly on or about Mon, 10 Feb 2003
> 13:03:24 UTC
>
> -> Curious if there is something about the warnings you give that are causing -> pedestrians to
> "act like chickens with their heads cut off." ?? Sometimes I -> ride through large groups of
> "pedestrians" on the campus where I work and they -> seem to be pretty stable regardless of the
> number there might be. ->
>
> I ring the silly little bell (they are conditioned to bells because the law requires their use)
> when I am still back a ways then when I need them to move I say "excuse me."

I'm curious why you don't say "Passing on your left" -- that will give them an indication of which
way to move. I suspect some of 'em are just moving around to turn to see where you are. You're not
really giving an indication by your actions whether you're passing on their left or right.

This usually works for me on the bikepath near my house as I pass them at about 10 mph, fighting the
everpresent headwind.

Scott
 
T

Terry Morse

Guest
Scott Lindstrom wrote:

> I'm curious why you don't say "Passing on your left" -- that will give them an indication of which
> way to move.

Saying "passing on your left" often just confuses them, causing them to move unpredictably.
I've been run off a path more than once by walkers who moved left until there was no more room
on the path.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://www.terrymorse.com/bike/
 
M

Mike S.

Guest
"Harley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Silly bell; Then you say "On your left;" if conditions demand it you can say; "On you right;"
> should keep them from running around.
>

I've found riding on the W&OD in VA, that if you say "on your left," that that's the way they're
going to turn around and look.

I've standardized on "passing," which gets fewer people turning into me and more just moving to the
right some.

Mike
 
T

Tom Keats

Guest
[email protected] wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> escape and that climbing the brides on the roadways can be a slow process
^^^^^^

I was going to crack wise, but I found the strength to resist the temptation <g>

cheers, Tom
 
B

Bran Everseekin

Guest
[email protected] (Harley) spake thusly on or about Mon, 10 Feb 2003
15:14:24 UTC

-> Silly bell; Then you say "On your left;" if conditions demand it you can -> say; "On you right;"
should keep them from running around. ->

found that to be less than enjoyable as the only people that have a clue what you mean by that is
the people that would rather be riding. Additionally this is Canada and ignorant demands are
replaced by politness. "Excuse me" works far better everywhere i have been unless I am passing a
cyclist that needs to know that the dodge options are limited for a bit.

--
I hurt before the ride so fibro gives me a head start on the rest of the pack. silver lining?
[email protected]
 
M

Matt O'Toole

Guest
"Mike S." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> "Harley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
news:[email protected] ...
> > Silly bell; Then you say "On your left;" if conditions
demand it you can
> > say; "On you right;" should keep them from running
around.
> >
>
> I've found riding on the W&OD in VA, that if you say "on
your left," that
> that's the way they're going to turn around and look.
>
> I've standardized on "passing," which gets fewer people
turning into me and
> more just moving to the right some.

If they're turning into you then you're not giving them adequate notice. Either warn them sooner,
slow down, or both. It's not so much what you say but when, and how.

I also think a bell sounds more cheerful than a mere warning, plus it's universally recognized.

Matt O.
 
B

Bran Everseekin

Guest
Scott Lindstrom <[email protected]> spake thusly on or about Mon, 10 Feb 2003 15:20:10 UTC

-> I'm curious why you don't say "Passing on -> your left" -- that will give them an indication ->
of which way to move.

because it does not work any better but does seem to cause more panic as they are thinking I must
move to my right "oh **** which way is right?"

really there is no harm in letting them settle down and move as they will regardless of what I say.
They will move aside one way or the other and sometimes one will conclude at the very last second
that they should have moved to the other side. This is all the privilege of pedestrian life. I am
not trying to keep up some average speed or beat a record for a training log. I am just getting
places by bike or riding because I enjoy it.

the point of the OP was that the law requires cyclists to stop, dismount and pass walking and then
remount and proceed. The way I do pass works well enough that I have not had any physical contact
with pedestrians in the 25 years I have mostly been in this city. even when I cared about how fast i
was going I willingly gave the walking ones their right of way when I had to share with them.

according to the laws of the town I am passing illegally. I am passing safely and courteously
though. Regardless of what i say I still need to let them settle out so it is safe to pass.

--
I hurt before the ride so fibro gives me a head start on the rest of the pack. silver lining?
[email protected]
 
J

Jon Isaacs

Guest
>> escape and that climbing the brides on the roadways can be a slow process
> ^^^^^^
>
>I was going to crack wise, but I found the strength to resist the temptation <g>

>cheers, Tom

Are you sure you resisted temptation?

Don't think so, fortunately.

jon isaacs
 
B

Bran Everseekin

Guest
[email protected] (Tom Keats) spake thusly on or about Mon, 10 Feb 2003
19:26:24 UTC

-> > escape and that climbing the brides on the roadways can be a slow process -> ^^^^^^ -> -> I was
going to crack wise, but I found the strength to -> resist the temptation <g> ->

so that is why i stopped getting wedding invites. here I thought it was an age thing.

--
I hurt before the ride so fibro gives me a head start on the rest of the pack. silver lining?
[email protected]
 
[email protected] wrote:
> I am begining to realize that some places do not have planners so much as people with a plant to
> make stop signs. maybe you should elect some one that makes yeild signs.

>
> (c) dismount and walk the bicycle when passing a pedestrian proceeding in the same direction
> upon such sidewalk.

It makes sense. The reason is, bridges quite often have narrow sidewalks and certainly there is no
place for the pedestrian to evade or bicyclist to pass safely on such narrow sidewalks. From what I
read, using the sidewalk is an option for the bike and in my opinion, a bad option. It is not an
option for the pedestrian. If you are riding on this bridge on a sidewalk coming up to a pedestrian
walking, how is he/she supposed to yeild? They have no place to go, unless they jump off the bridge
or go into the road. So given the choice, the bike should yield to the pedestrian if sharing a
sidewalk or make sure there is plenty of distance to pass.
 
Matt O'Toole wrote:

> I also think a bell sounds more cheerful than a mere warning, plus it's universally recognized.

A bell is much easier to hear from a longer distance. If you riding 15mph and saying "on your left"
you better be using a very loud voice because by the time you say it and they are within distance to
hear you , you will be passing them by the time they react to it.
 
Terry Morse wrote:

>
>
> Saying "passing on your left" often just confuses them, causing them to move unpredictably.
> I've been run off a path more than once by walkers who moved left until there was no more room
> on the path.
> --

Remember we are talking about a bridge here. There is no room for the them to move out of the way in
many cases unless you want them to jump off the bridge or go out into the street. A lot of bridge
sidewalks are narrow, too narrow for a bike to pass a pedestrian safely. I stick the street in
nearly all cases when crossing a bridge.
 
O

One Of The Six

Guest
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] wrote:

>
> It makes sense. The reason is, bridges quite often have narrow sidewalks and certainly there is no
> place for the pedestrian to evade or bicyclist to pass safely on such narrow sidewalks. From what
> I read, using the sidewalk is an option for the bike and in my opinion, a bad option. It is not an
> option for the pedestrian. If you are riding on this bridge on a sidewalk coming up to a
> pedestrian walking, how is he/she supposed to yeild? They have no place to go, unless they jump
> off the bridge or go into the road. So given the choice, the bike should yield to the pedestrian
> if sharing a sidewalk or make sure there is plenty of distance to pass.
>

I agree, in fact I think cyclists should always yield to pedestrians where ever they cross paths. I
don't understand the "you are blocking my way" mentality.
 
O

One Of The Six

Guest
"Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>
> If they're turning into you then you're not giving them adequate notice. Either warn them sooner,
> slow down, or both. It's not so much what you say but when, and how.

Including the attitude. I don't find it a trouble to slow down to their speed and use an informative
style voice rather than an expecting style voice.

>
> I also think a bell sounds more cheerful than a mere warning, plus it's universally recognized.
>

It depends how the bell is rung. I've seen even dainty little bells express aggressive "get out of
my way" attitudes.
 
O

One Of The Six

Guest
I would never pass a pedestrian at 15 mph. It seems quite rude and dangerous for both parties. It
seems funny to me how many people can't translate what it feels like when cars, trucks and SUV's
wont take an extra moment to allow consideration to how it feels for pedestrians.

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Matt O'Toole wrote:
>
> > I also think a bell sounds more cheerful than a mere warning, plus it's universally recognized.
>
> A bell is much easier to hear from a longer distance. If you riding 15mph and saying "on your
> left" you better be using a very loud voice because by the time you say it and they are within
> distance to hear you , you will be passing them by the time they react to it.
 
O

One Of The Six

Guest
<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> the point of the OP was that the law requires cyclists to stop, dismount and pass walking and then
> remount and proceed. The way I do pass works well enough that I have not had any physical contact
> with pedestrians in the 25 years I have mostly been in this city. even when I cared about
how
> fast i was going I willingly gave the walking ones their right of way
when
> I had to share with them.
>
> according to the laws of the town I am passing illegally. I am passing safely and courteously
> though. Regardless of what i say I still need to let them settle out so it is safe to pass.
>

If you are traveling at pedestrian speed and not causing ill feelings amongst even the most
sensitive of individuals, then I can see where the law doesn't make sense for you. It was probably
written for those who feel their right of way takes precedent over others, or maybe those who just
can't comprehend that some people are more sensitive than they are.

In your case one of those little gems from my mother would work for you: "Any fool can blindly
follow a law, it takes intelligence to know when to break it".
 
Z

Zoot Katz

Guest
Mon, 10 Feb 2003 04:35:29 -0000, <[email protected]>,
[email protected] wrote: \szip
>a and b make sense but c? I ride slowly, give warning, and pass when they stop acting like chickens
>with their heads cut off. if I were to follow the law in this case i would never get anywhere as my
>walking is not the best in the world due to the fibro and a "trick" knee.

The bridges I cross, where sidewalk riding is mandatory, it's rare to encounter many pedestrians.

Between traffic and wind noises you can't hear conversational tones past about three bike lengths.
That means you're travelling at walking speed if you're to give them ample warning.

A bell does get their attention a bit further back but I still think it's inconsiderate to pass
at more than jogging pace even after they've seen me and usually plastered themselves to the
guard rail.

I pass them, mounted but un clipped, at a walking pace, cooing to them all the way if the sidewalk
is really narrow. Practically grovelling because bicycles on sidewalks are the bottom of the
pecking order.

It sounds like you're handling it quite sensibly and probably the same way I would.

I'd not want to hit a pedestrian while riding, regardless of its being theoretically prevented by
being prohibited.

If, without hitting a ped, I were cited and ticketed, I'd take my day in court to pitch-a-***** and
pay my fine.
--
zk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.