|
Nanny statism continues. Councillor mulls idea of licensing bicycles like cars!! (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| kaniz |
Mmm, Cyclists are supposed to follow the same laws of the road as cars - and technically, if we dont follow those laws there are fines.
| quote: |
ONTARIO HIGHWAY TRAFFIC ACT
A bicycle is considered a vehicle under the Ontario Highway
Traffic Act (HTA), which means cyclists must obey all traffic
laws just like other road users. If you don't obey the law you
can be fined a minimum of $105 ($90 fine + $15 victim surcharge).
|
For a breakdown if you're curious, read here
If the police are not enforcing those laws to begin with - why is requiring a license going to change that?
How is adding more laws and licensing going to help if the current ones are generally not being enforced?
I'm not for required licensing / vests / helmets, but I am all for more consistent and strict enforcement of the current rules - and outside of the 'once a year blitz'.
I also think that the laws regarding bikes with wheels below X size needs to be reconsidered and also include an age-factor. The law is there so that children can learn to ride bikes on the sidewalk in safety (and generally in residential/less populated areas) - using the wheel-law to whip down a yonge street is stupid.
Should be a combination of wheel size / age and location. |
|
|
| beatjunkie |
Well maybe with a little more attention to the problem like licensing, officers will treat the infractions a little more serious?
I'm just going on pure observation and opinion on my end. If you're one of those cyclist that cut lanes, run red lights, and don't follow the same traffic laws as the others on the road then I'm speaking to you. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by beatjunkie
Just did and I'm still for the licensing of cyclists. They have to start being accountable for some of the stupid they pull in traffic and if fining or licensing will help I'm all for it.
I hate to paint all cyclists with the same brush but if you're not doing anything wrong/breaking the laws of the road then what's the problem? |
the problem is another layer of expensive bureaucracy combined with another excuse for a cash grab. Especially when we have laws in place already. The problem is that our left wing city hall wont mandate the police to charge cyclists with infractions. |
|
|
| kaniz |
Just seems like when current laws are not being enforced, throwing more laws on top seems to be counter productive.
If the police are not stopping cyclists for infractions now - what difference does it make if we have a license or not?
So, if they do this, and I don't have a license - if the police do stop me, I just get an extra fine for missing a license on top of whatever law I'm breaking? thing is - they are not even stopping people for breaking the law in the first place.
Start enforcing the laws first before throwing more on top.
And really - if they did this, it'd just be adding a great deal of cost to implementing it, enforcing it, setting up testing / licensing centers / etc.
I also think the idea of requiring a kid in grade 2 to get a license so he can bike to school to be somewhat absurd :| |
|
|
| Orko |
I'm not sure what the solution is.
In an objective view, both cyclists and car drivers are idiots. No one group dumber than the other. Drivers hate bikers, and bikers hate drivers, and it's clear in this thread which side you sit on.
My biggest issue is with the difference in momentum in shared roads. A 3000 pound car moving at 40kmph is much more dangerous to a biker, than a 150 pound (bike, person together) moving at 20 kmph to a pedestrian. A biker hits a person, the accident probably isn't that bad. But, a driver hits a biker, and it's game over for the biker.
Jay, telling bikers to get off of main roads, and only on side roads is not a good solution. Have you ever used the bike 'high ways' in Toronto? The detours it takes you on are insane. It takes you twice as long as it should to get you places. Plus, they 'roads' are not thought out well because they lead you up very large hills, when they don't need to.
Then there are the random breaks in the routes. The signs mysteriously disappear, and the route continues 2-3 blocks away, without any kind of indication of where you have to go.
I would welcome more bike lanes on existing roads. In the summer they can be utilized by bikers, so they feel a bit more comfortable and safer. While in the winter, the extra space will be/can be used for snow plows to dump snow. |
|
|
| smuncky |
| quote: | Originally posted by Orko
I would welcome more bike lanes on existing roads. |
apparently 1000km of additional bike lanes/paths was approved by council in 2001. but like all things in the city, it is a slow process and a couple years behind schedule. |
|
|
| feelgood |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
I'm always amused at pedestrians and cyclists who think they have a god-given right to cause thousands of dollars in property damage because somebody pissed them off.
Just wait until the day one of them calls the police - or better yet, the day you find out that one of them keeps a baseball bat in the trunk, or a handgun in the glove box. |
When someone gambles with your life its a little different than being pissed off at nothing.
as for the consequences im fully aware of what could happen, i can also assure you that a bike is faster than any car/pedestrian through the city.
re: Solution?
Education, education, education. Not necessarily police state fines.
Up here in Guelph theres a bit of a problem with excessive fining to the point where it has actually stymied the number of bicycle commuters, and there are more people driving around town, 1 person per car.
Perhaps a bit more signage indicating to cyclists and drivers what the rules of the road are? Right at intersections where cyclists and drivers can read them. Bikes should have no problem riding with car traffic. In progressive cycling cities such as those found on the US west coast, its amazing to see the number of cyclists on the road riding with cars. Granted, the cyclists are far more obedient of rules, as well as the drivers.
So somewhere down the road (hah) both drivers and cyclists have to meet half way. I doubt itll be a top down infrastructure based approach such as adding more bike lanes. Instead the solution will be a more informed demographic...and with a more informed group there will be a mutual understanding of how both driver and cyclist should conduct themselves on the road. At least thats the way its worked in leading North American cities.
I've done some work with Bicycle initiative groups and while most are touting that there should be bike lanes everywhere, I find thats a bit too utopian and definitely far too expensive. I dont need more tax dollars being idly spent.
0.02$ |
|
|
| malek |
| quote: | Originally posted by feelgood
When someone gambles with your life its a little different than being pissed off at nothing.
as for the consequences im fully aware of what could happen, i can also assure you that a bike is faster than any car/pedestrian through the city.
re: Solution?
|
yes the solution is that hopefully someone runs you over and you realize that a car is bigger and faster driven by someone who wants to get back at ya, city or not.:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
Imagine how much transit we could get with all the bike lane, speed hump and lane reduction money.
Shovelling money into a mode of transportation that next to nobody uses for the possibility of next to nobody + 1 using it in the future is a very poor choice and setting wrong priorities.
We need to focus on mass transit or else people by default will use the car. Plain and simple.
I suggest die hard bicyclists might consider a move to miami or somewhere tropical. Vancouver at the very least!
We have what is called a nordic climate. Let's face it for what it is! |
|
|
| Engine9 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
I suggest die hard bicyclists might consider a move to miami or somewhere tropical. Vancouver at the very least!
We have what is called a nordic climate. Let's face it for what it is! |
or mod your bike for the winter, like so:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/37/91211594_4947168a81.jpg?v=0 |
|
|
| Orko |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
Imagine how much transit we could get with all the bike lane, speed hump and lane reduction money.
Shovelling money into a mode of transportation that next to nobody uses for the possibility of next to nobody + 1 using it in the future is a very poor choice and setting wrong priorities.
We need to focus on mass transit or else people by default will use the car. Plain and simple.
I suggest die hard bicyclists might consider a move to miami or somewhere tropical. Vancouver at the very least!
We have what is called a nordic climate. Let's face it for what it is! |
Ah nothing? Mass transit is incredibly expensive for initial costs, maintenance, labour, repairs...on and on.
Put a bike lane in, and forget about it, pretty simple. There is no way you can argue mass transit vs bikes on a cost basis.
A LOT of people in the city bike. Fine most of them will not bike in the winter, why should that restrict our plans for the rest of the year?
By that logic we should get rid of cars, because you cannot drive in the winter due to all the snow, since we have to pay for plows and salting. |
|
|
| feelgood |
| quote: | Originally posted by Orko
Ah nothing? Mass transit is incredibly expensive for initial costs, maintenance, labour, repairs...on and on.
Put a bike lane in, and forget about it, pretty simple. There is no way you can argue mass transit vs bikes on a cost basis.
A LOT of people in the city bike. Fine most of them will not bike in the winter, why should that restrict our plans for the rest of the year?
By that logic we should get rid of cars, because you cannot drive in the winter due to all the snow, since we have to pay for plows and salting. |
Let's not forget how unionized mass transit is capable of crippling a city at its whim. |
|
|
|
|
