Bikes vs. cars: Here’s what the police say
Posted on July 14th, 2008 – 4:27 PMBy Roadguy
The following news release was issued today by the Minneapolis Police Department. It’s almost as if they’ve been reading our recent conversations:
SHARE THE ROAD, SHARE THE TRAIL
The truth about seven common bike safety myths
Jul. 14, 2008 (MINNEAPOLIS) More people in Minneapolis take to the streets and trails on bicycles during summer. This year the cost of gasoline has made biking to work and biking for fun more attractive than ever. But with more people on bikes on our City streets and trails, it’s really important to separate truth from myth when it comes to bike safety and laws. Some biking accidents can be avoided when you know the facts. Here are seven common myths about bike safety and laws — dispelled!
MYTH: Bikes must use the right lane on the road.
FACT: Cyclists are required to stay to the right in most cases, but may ride in the lane that is appropriate to their destination. That means bikes may use the left lane to turn left, to pass, and to avoid road hazards or parked cars.
MYTH: Bikes don’t have to stop for traffic lights or stop signs.
FACT: Cyclists are responsible for following all traffic laws on the road and on trails, including signaling for turns, stopping for lights and stop signs, using headlights and rear reflectors, and yielding to pedestrians at corners and crosswalks.
MYTH: Cars have the right of way at crossings.
FACT: Both drivers and cyclists are required to follow all signs and pavement markings at each trail crossing. Cars have to stop for a bicyclist or pedestrian in a trail crossing.
MYTH: Bicyclists have to ride in the bike lane, or on a trail when provided.
FACT: Cyclists do not have to ride in a bike lane if it is not safe due to surface hazards and parked cars. Cyclists also do not have to ride on trails. Most Minneapolis trails have a speed limit of 10 mph. As a result, many bicyclists who want to travel faster use the road.
MYTH: Cars can drive as close as possible to a bike lane without entering it.
FACT: Passing cars must provide a minimum of three feet clearance from a bike at all times even when a bicyclist is in a designated bike lane.
MYTH: Bikes must use the street.
FACT: Cyclists may ride on sidewalks except in business districts or where posted. Studies have shown that it is often safer to ride on the street.
MYTH: Bikes and pedestrians don’t mix.
FACT: It’s easy for cyclists and pedestrians to share trails and sidewalks when everyone is respectful. Cyclists should slow down when passing pedestrians. Bicyclists, be sure to give a polite warning and pass on the left with as much clearance as possible. Pedestrians should stay or move to the right when being passed or use a designated pedestrian path when available.
Minnesota biking law gives cyclists the same rights and responsibilities as motorists. Minneapolis is one of the most bike-friendly cities in the country. How bike-friendly are you? For questions about traffic laws concerning bike riding and safety call 311. To find more information on biking in Minneapolis online, explore http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/bicycles.
73 Responses to "Bikes vs. cars: Here’s what the police say"
I thought I saw a post here earlier this spring saying that cyclists don’t actually have to come to a complete stop at stop signs… That they can roll through if it’s safe to do so. (sort of like most of the cars I see at stop signs around town!)
Only in Idaho, Rico… only in Idaho.
For now… 
Yeah, there’s a movement to expand that idiocy to Minnesota. Just another example of how bicyclists feel they’re better than the rest of us.
How can we spread the word on the Seven Deadly Myths?
I always thought that the anti-bike sentiment out there was simple bullying and rage… But I wonder if there really are people that just don’t know the rules…
Can they stick this on the TV news? Not to slam Roadguy’s readership level, but this information needs to be put up in flares and lights.
What’s with this behavior: People that ride on the sidewalk, and blow through the don’t walk signal. It’s very dangerous to make a right turn on red, cause they are approaching at 15-20 mph. These people seem to assume they are pedestrians, cause they are on the sidewalk, and thus have the right of way, no matter what.
This is not a fact: “FACT: It’s easy for cyclists and pedestrians to share trails and sidewalks when” It’s just an opinion. IMO bikes should stay off sidewalks.
Key sentence:”Minnesota biking law gives cyclists the same rights and responsibilities as motorists.”. And the key word there is “responsibilities”. Driving NB up I think it was Bryant in S. MPLS a couple weeks ago there was a parade of bikes not only blowing through the lights and stop signs, but not even bothering to attempt to slow or check for cross traffic.
I think that is the beef a lot of us have: bikers scream for their rights, but only if they benefit them. They ignore the parts about following traffic laws and not obstructing the flow of traffic.
Can’t have it both ways, hypocrites!
Regarding the rules for bikes and stop signs, I think there was a bill proposed to allow bikes to do a rolling stop(still a far cry from the biking habits I witness) which got some press awhile back. Not sure if it passed or die in deliberation.
Glad that the “10mph on the bike path” law is getting pounded into some heads again. Doesnt seem to sink in with too much ease.
Barry: It was on the WCCO 6pm news tonight.
I’m fairly certain a lot of people don’t know about the 3-foot passing rule, or the rule that allows cyclists not to hug the curb or to (gasp!) leave the bike lane if it is chock-full of discarded Starbucks cups and broken beer bottle.
People in cars and on bicycles always note the bad behavior. No one comments on the good behavior from both sides, and there is quite a bit of that as well.
Jay - Idaho’s bicycle friendly laws are about recognizing that bicycles and automobiles are different types of vehicles, that require different behaviors from their operators and therefore should be governed by a different set of rules even though they operate in the same space.
Slowing down and then going through a stop sign (instead of stopping) on a bike is not likely to kill 4 children crossing at a crosswalk, while even the smallest car could likely kill and/or maim all of them in the same scenario. Additionally, if I were to follow the letter of the law precisely, I could sit waiting to make a left-turn at a stoplight *forever* on my bicycle because I would not trip the sensor. I don’t think my employer would accept that as an excuse for not being to work on time.
These types of laws are about making cycling AND driving safer by reducing conflict points and acknowledging the differences in the vehicles and allowing their operators to use their best judgment.
And hey… there are a lot more drivers out there who think they are better then everybody else. You can see them everyday - speeding, ignoring posted “no right on red” signs, illegal parking, rolling stops, etc. This isn’t something that is endemic of cyclists. It’s endemic of the entire American culture. Remember that the next time you are 5 mph in excess of the posted speed limit on I-35 or I-90 and you are passing people who are obeying the law.
The way I see it, is that most cyclist know the likelihood of being stopped by the police is almost zero. The same goes for the most drivers as well.
Like barryS stated, it is becoming part of American culture, to blatantly disregard the rules and do as one pleases. The repercussions are not strong enough to deter the rude behavior of most of society. The crap they show on TV and in movies that is meant as “entertainment” seems to be spilling out into everyday life. Julie, this is why the bad behavior is so noticeable, it is not main stream these days to be decent and good. No wonder why Americans travelling abroad are not exactly greeted the same way as they were 15-20 years ago.
I’m a biker, and I’m sick and tired of other bikers trying to rationalize blowing through stop signs. “We won’t kill people if we do it!” Well, you could be killed by a car coming out of nowhere, or you could seriously injure a pedestrian. “It’s hard to start pedaling again when you stop!” Suck it up and do it, the exercise is why you are on a bike in the first place.
I stop at every stop sign, even if there aren’t any cars. I stop at every light. I don’t blow through lights just because I’m pissed. If I am turning left, I get off the road and WALK my bike on the crosswalks, thus avoiding being stuck at lights that won’t trip. I do this every day, and it’s not hard. All bikers can do this.
Few things make me more angry than cars or bikes that show wanton disregard for the laws.
I was wondering if the city wants to comment on the statement “FACT: Both drivers and cyclists are required to follow all signs and pavement markings at each trail crossing. Cars have to stop for a bicyclist or pedestrian in a trail crossing.”
In St. Louis Park, there are signs that state is it state law that trail users need to yield to cars. What is the reality?
Ah, another bikes vs. cars debate with the usual comments. All we’re missing is something from ProfS stating how time = money. Sigh.
I don’t bike. I would never try to compete with 4,000 lb vehicles, made of steel, as compared to a 20 lb bike - a 200:1 weight ratio,
It seems a significant percentage of folks, ignore their common sense, once they get on the bike. In the same vein of unawareness, they arbitrarily decide which traffic laws to obey. They don’t care that they are impeding / inconviencing / making 95% of the drivers work to accomdate them. Additionally, they apply the same logic to biking on the sidewalk.
Biking works for them, cause everyone else (motorists and pedestrians) should adjust to their random behavior.
The other day in UpTown, a cyclist locked his bike to the meter beside my new 535i, and slightly scratched the right front fender. I just want to let you cyclists know that some of us drivers carry hand tools. A hefty wire cutter gave me some amount of satisfaction!
DGB,
Perhaps you want to be a real human and involve the police and see how well it goes when you admit to vandalism. Did you see the biker actually damage your car or just ASSume it was him due to the location if his bike? Takes a real big person to damage someones property out of spite for something you cannot prove.
Wow. I’m very impressed with your police. The Twins are a great place to live.
I didn’t realize it was legal to ride on the sidewalk. I don’t do that myself for obvious reasons, but it is good for my younger children. Definitely a crowded world compromise.
I think much of the anger from motorists in the above comments comes from the fear of hitting a bike. I empathize. I give bicycles a huge passing margin (usually 8 feet or more), but I often think that with a moment’s inattention I could kill or badly hurt someone.
Not only would I cause harm to that person and their loved ones, it’s an accident that would irreparably damage my own life.
That’s scary, and fear can produce paradoxical responses — like passing far too close to a bicycle, or becoming angry at the riders who expose a motorist to that unspoken fear.
There are no easy answers. We live in a crowded world. Protected lanes and bike paths give the option for slower riders to go at their own speed, and ensure that those who do drive by cars are more likely to be able to compensate for mistakes of any origin.
Yup, Pete, except that it’s not even a debate! The self-righteous bikers try to impose their “correct” style of biking (disregarding the fact that some of their strategies ignore their safest and legal rights) and the “it’s all about me” motorists get on their soap box and rant their weary diatribes. Big sigh.
Can’t we all just get along?
I’m really tired of this ongoing bikers vs. cars discussion.
Bikers are not perfect. They run stop signs, slow traffic, blah blah blah.
Cars are not perfect. They run stop signs, speed, increase our demand for oil, blah blah blah.
We can post and post until we’ve all lost our jobs from spending too much time on the internet and we are not going to change anyone’s opinion.
If you want to ride, ride.
If you want to drive, drive.
Let’s just all try to be respectful, and not assume that one biker who blows through a light does not represent all bikers. Just as one driver who threatens to run me down if I get in his way does not represent all drivers.
I hope the local bike laws are ammended. Specifically stopping @ lights/signs when there is no traffic. Until then I will continue to blow through stop signs at my convenience… Also, I don’t like to see bikes locked up to every sign, meter, tree, etc. There are plenty of bike racks >> use them.
I see more cars breaking more laws and more dangerous laws than bikes do, but I have yet to read anyone state that.
True, there are more cars than bikes in the first place, but there are still more cars breaking more laws and more dangerous laws, despite the ratio. I could fill this entire space just writing about only half the laws I saw broken by cars in my 11 mile commute home from work yesterday.
DGB, what did you do, exactly? Cutting a brake line on a bike, for example, has much more dire consequences than the boo-boo on your Bimmer. You just gave me more reason to make my arleady sour generalization of pompus BMW owners even more sour. How do you know the “slight scratch” wasn’t already there or happened at any time from a rock flying up, or [put any possibility here].
And, DGB, mentioning that it is a “competition” (bikes among cars) is the mentality for the reason that we end up with all these debates, anyway. I don’t even see how there is room for a debate in the first place, but it’s obviously a heated one at that!
Approaching my car, I clearly saw the bike was partially resting against it. I had to move the bike several inches, so I could leave the parking space. This is when I noticed that the handlebar had scratched my fender. I was also very annoyed that I had to mess with this bike while wearing a suit.
I add this to my previous observations: many cyclists just do what they damn well please. I’m sure that moron knew it’s improper to ‘bolt’ cycles to street signs and parking meters.
I feel no remorse about a valve stem.
Sean says: “And, DGB, mentioning that it is a “competition” (bikes among cars) is the mentality for the reason that we end up with all these debates, anyway.” I am not refering to a win/lose competition. As living organisms we compete every day with nature, viriuses, bacteria, other humans and animals. In the same vein refering to the a 200:1 weight ratio, which puts a cyclist at an extreme disadvantage. It’s like a farmer with a mule trying to compete against a farmer with a huge tractor.
With respect to DGB’s post, what is the Star Tribune policy on posts touting a criminal act?
What if DGB’s victim had his brake cables snipped and injured himself when his brakes didn’t work? I hope the Star Tribune would accomodate any requests (e.g., for an IP addresss) by the victim’s PI lawyer or the MPD, because DGB is a dangerous criminal who puts his vanity above the safety of others.
So, if anyone sees a 535i with a fender scratch parked in Uptown . . .
“I’m sure that moron knew it’s improper to ‘bolt’ cycles to street signs and parking meters.” - DGB
This brings up an interesting point. I ride my bike everyday, and have definitely noticed more people doing the same. There are just not enough bike racks in the city right now, and its getting harder and harder to find a place to “properly” lock ones bike. Signs and Meters are pretty much all thats there, in many neighborhoods. Anyone know if that big bicycle package that went through a few weeks ago included budget for more Racks?
Regarding:
MYTH: Cars have the right of way at crossings.
FACT: Both drivers and cyclists are required to follow all signs and pavement markings at each trail crossing. Cars have to stop for a bicyclist or pedestrian in a trail crossing.
When riding on the Cedar Lake Ext Trail through SLP, the signs on the trail say specifically that trail users have to stop and yield to road traffic at all road crossings. I recall an article on the SLP website sometime back (of course, I can’t find it now) that said that these crossings are NOT crosswalks and that automotive traffic should not stop for the crossings.
Anyone know anything about that?
Many cars do what they please. In fact, I see more cars do as they please than bikes!
Just yesterday on my way home, I was on 36th street heading towards Portland. Every single day there people make the shoulders into extra lanes and dart in and our of parked cars, and take the stoplights like stop signs. EVERY DAY.
Today on 394 westbound when the speed limit changes from 55 to 45 around Ridgedale Drive, I was the only car out of about 15 who changed my speed when the speed limit changed. You can’t tell me I was the only driver who saw the bright orange rectangles atop the speed limit signs. Of course not, because cars do what the please.
If people cared enough to respect and follow the rules, then the 200:1 ratio doesn’t mean anything and everyone would get along great.
The only defense DGB had is that it’s illegal to lock a bike to a meter, but he sort of cancelled out any claim he might have had with his own actions.
You do realize every biker in uptown will be gunning for a 5 series bimmer with a douchebag getting out of it right? Denoting the model of your waste of money was a nice touch and must have been hard…”do I try and brag and risk further vandalism or do I simply say “my car”?” Seems your brain lost that debate…I wonder what won it?
Dave,
Those crossing have come up before. We didn’t get anything conclusive from RoadGuy yet, but others have pointed out that SLP may be using their own wording of the trail-crossing law to override state law, which they cannot do.
There were even rumors that the crossings are supposed to be changing back to normal-looking crosswalks, but it’s just rumor for now.
I wish Roadguy would write a column on myth/fact for drivers, so the myth that red lights and stop signs are not mandatory, but can be interpreted by the driver are indeed a myth. Unfortunately, he would have to dedicate several hundred pages to educate MN drivers……
According to this:
http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/bicycles/bicycle-parking-rules.asp
it is legal to secure a bicycle to a signpost. Only signposts and bike racks, which is good to know!
Vandalism is not going to improve the situation, DGB. Perhaps among the tools you carry in your car, you might include a pen and paper?
No Minnesota Statutes mention trail crossings specifically, so this is what I could find.
It appears that pedestrians have the right of way at trail crossings if they are marked pedestrian crossings. Minn Stat 169.21 Sub. 2(a); Minn Stat. 169.01 Sub 37(2). Bicyclists have the same rights and duties as pedestrians at such crossings. Minn Stat 169.222 sub. 4(f). One of those duties is not to cross in front of vehicle traffic so as to leave drivers no opportunity to yield. Minn Stat 169.21 Sub. 2(a). If trail crossings are unmarked, then bicyclists and pedestrians must yield the right of way. Minn Stat 169.21 Sub. 3(a).
Ah! OK. I see the problem right here:
MYTH: Bikes and pedestrians don’t mix.
FACT: It’s easy for cyclists and pedestrians to share trails and sidewalks WHEN EVERYONE IS RESPECTFUL.
I think that key part is missing from both sides of the argument. Extend that statement to include cars and I believe the real problem is exposed, folks.
In these “discussions,” why does everyone get hung up on bikers vs. motorists? Why not focus on behavior instead and try to address that? Instead, a motorist refers to “you bikers,” or the cyclist refers to “you drivers.” Here’s a thought: instead of being lazy in your thinking and stereotyping those you disagree with, why not direct your criticisms at the offending behavior. I’d be willing to bet, the “idiot” cyclist who blows through a stopsign is the same “idiot” motorist who runs the stoplight because he/she is too lazy, self-absorbed, and indifferent to be concerned with how their actions affect others.
DGB says, “I add this to my previous observations: many cyclists just do what they damn well please.”
Yeah, you really have to together, don’t you. Taking out revenge on the person’s bike instead of calling the police and having a report filed, you decided to as you damn well pleased. Hypocrite!
Aasgaard says: “So, if anyone sees a 535i with a fender scratch parked in Uptown . . .” aasgaard, you are another hypocrite, whining to Star Trib to take action on DGB for his idiocies, why trying to get people in Uptown all worked up. Dickhead!
Ah yes. I just LOVE the way Bike vs Car discussions always bring out the very BEST in people…….
In related news, Matty, Barry and I are meeting for beers tonight. Not lying.
Pete - Try arguing that point with a group of economists. You’ll be laughed out of the room.
If time isn’t money (aka value), then why do we drive anywhere? Why not have all cars drive a 3mph and save all of the lives? Why don’t we save the cost of cars and just walk everywhere? For that matter, why buy a bike when you could walk there instead? Funny, for as much as people rip on me for pointing out the reality that time is money, nobody has been able to address that question. When someone does, let me know.
…yawn..
Don’t you people have anything else to complain about?
Prof S, I don’t think anyone will argue that time doesn’t equal money. I think what gets to many people here, me included, is the aggressiveness in which you argue the point: “It’s all about me and everyone else be damned if they’re costing ME money.”
You have yet to provide me with a convincing argument that if I’m in the left lane driving the speed limit, I should inconvenience myself to pull over because I’m costing you money, regardless of your illegal behavior in acquiring said money.
Here’s a business proposition for you in such a case: For $50 I will send you my license plate number and our secret little horn honk. For an additional prepaid amount until it is used up, I will, upon hearing you behind me, move over a lane and deduct $5 from your prepaid amount, if it’s a multilane road. For a two-laner, I will pull over on the shoulder for $10 to let you by. If no shoulder is available, I’ll pull over at the next intersection for $20 for my inconvenience.
If I don’t pull over, it’s because you’re either out of prepaid amount and can send me more, or it’s not safe to pull over, or I just damn well don’t feel like it at that time.
Yup, time is money. I can be bought.
Perhaps DGB will join us at Grumpys tonight and bring his vehicle so we can all oooh and aaah at the scratch on his car. I’m wearing a blue polo fellas, that should make me pretty easy to pick out of the crowd!
Prof S - we are going to address that question… over beer.
Cowboy: “aasgaard, you are another hypocrite, whining to Star Trib to take action on DGB for his idiocies, why [sic] trying to get people in Uptown all worked up. Dickhead!”
You’re right. I should have stayed out of the debate to leave room for your name calling.
Besides, assuming you know the actual definition, how am I a hypocrite? I simply wanted to point out that DGB committed a criminal act by deliberately damaging someone’s property. I think it’s wrong, and I wouldn’t do it, and if someone takes him to task for it within the confines of the law, then all the better.
Then again, I’m just a whiner, not a macho cowboy like you. By theway, where does your horse fit into this car/bike schism?
MnBikeCommuter kind of hit it on the head, nobody is arguing about the idea that time=money, just the idea that everyone must lunge into the ditch rather then delay another driver by a second or two. Time is money, but there are some delays that must be factored into fixed costs, and I would argue that the extra time spent to obey the traffic laws falls into this catagory.
DGB writes
“I would never try to compete with 4,000 lb vehicles, made of steel, as compared to a 20 lb bike - a 200:1 weight ratio”
It’s not a competition. This isn’t a 3rd world country where size matters on the road.
Yeah, with the Twins on break the frat boy crowd is cut down a bit at Grumpy’s. 
There shouldn’t be too many guys in Polos so we should be able to spot you barryS.
I’ll be a guy in black denim shorts, a gray t-shirt and I’ll have a blue Chrome messenger bag > and yellow lensed cycling glasses. I’ve already put in a trip to downtown St. Paul and back to Midtown today so I’m already thirstily looking forward to 5:30.
Whoever said that civil discussion can’t bring people together to learn from each other in meaningful ways? Perhaps the Roadguy blog should be considered for a prize of some sort. Cheers.
This topic has been hashed and rehashed since before I started reading and posting on this blog.
I didn’t start reading today’s comments until 2 pm today. Had to chuckle at Pete’s 8:52am post (knew it was coming).
DGB’s 8:57am post is typical of DGB.
And sure enough here comes ProfS 12:33pm post with his time/money comment that we’ve hear every time this topic comes up.
My favorite is yuki’s 9:19 am post. He/She couldn’t have said it better.
I myself have never had a problem with bikers being on the roadways. They are in my life for less than 2 minutes. I don’t see any reason to get upset over something I CANNOT control. Bikers have the same right to be on the roads as I, a motorist, has.
Aasgaard, I was wrong in calling you a dickhead. It was left over anger from reading DGB’s post.
But lets examine the post in question.
First, you state:
“I hope the Star Tribune would accomodate any requests (e.g., for an IP addresss) by the victim’s PI lawyer or the MPD, because DGB is a dangerous criminal who puts his vanity above the safety of others.”
Then you state:
“So, if anyone sees a 535i with a fender scratch parked in Uptown . . .”
So first you hope for legal action, then you throw out an insinuation for…what, vandalism against all 535i’s with a scratch? What if it is the wrong 535i, should the Star Trib accommodate any requests (e.g., for an IP address) by the victim’s PI lawyer?
You are right, I guess you are not a hypocrite, but you are probably not the model citizen that you think you are.
Oh and Aasgaard as far as my horse, well you can kiss it’s…
If I can make Grumpy’s I’ll be wearing a suit, driving an XC-90. Is that around 5:30 - 6:00?
Anyone who thinks calling the police will help for a bike locked up wrong or a cyclist running a stop sign is an idiot. Has anyone here ever dealt with the police (in Mpls, suburbs don’t count) They could care less about things like this. Property damage less than $500 will never, ever, be investigated (trust me as a building manager). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And looking up an IP address >>>
Thank you, Cowboy, for the measured and constructive response. In all candor, I may have used the ellipsis to avoid any outright hypocrisy — at least subliminally.
And, from a daily bike commuter to my pedaling friends, some of you are fast rising to the top of my pet peeve list. When approaching an intersection at which a bike is stopped for a red light, please fall in line behind the bicylist that is already waiting for the light. Do not take pole position! If you are indeed the faster bicyclist, you’ll have plenty of time to pass when the bikes are back in motion.
One thought that often gets lost during conversations such as these: As a motorist, every cyclist you enounter is one less car, truck, or SUV who could certainly be more of an impediment to your progress. Granted, if you’re stuck behind them, your progress will be slowed temporarily. But they are a much smaller obstacle to get in your way.
The thing that irritates and scares me the most about bike on the River Road or any street, is the impatient jerk who has to pass the bike thinking there is enough room between him, the bike and the on coming traffic. This person would not pass a slow car by pulling into the on coming lane, but they sure as hell don’t have a problem with bicycles. My experience with most of the people like this are SUVs and pickup trucks, but that’s a completely different gripe.
Regarding the trail crossing debate, my interpretation is that it depends on timing. I think SLB hit it right.
As I understand it, a trail crossing is a step below a crosswalk, something like a two-way stop sign. They have to judge if they can make it across without impeding cross traffic; those crossing on a trail can’t just jump out and make everyone on the road stop. With a crosswalk, you just legally have to give traffic enough time to yield. In any case, if someone misjudges or falls in the middle of the street or a vehicle enters the road close to the trail crossing, etc., the street traffic still has to stop and let those on the trail finish crossing.
Likewise, if you see cyclists waiting by the side of the road at a trail crossing, you don’t have to stop for them, but you need to be aware that they might jump out. In a full crosswalk, you should stop if it can be done safely. It’s always something of a judgment call whether to stop and try to hold up traffic in order to let someone (child, family, etc.) cross because others next to you or coming the other way may not yield.
I gotta say West River Rd… I absolutely avoid biking there at all costs. Everyone is nuts on there, bikes, cars, peds… aaagh! I’ll cross the river and ride on the St Paul side (bike lane) thank you very much!
Aasgaard says: “When approaching an intersection at which a bike is stopped for a red light, please fall in line behind the bicylist that is already waiting for the light. Do not take pole position!”
I totally agree. And definitely do not take the pole posistion if the person who is already there has already passed you once!
As a cyclist, I could list a ton of other cyclist pet peeves, but that is another conversation.
If time isn’t money (aka value), then why do we drive anywhere?
Ah, my world is complete.
I hope all the anger and revenge (Please see DGB) is just blog rage and not for real. If this is what people on the the roads really think, I’ll trade my bike and compact car for a military tank.
DGB, the biker probably did not even realize he bumped your ride. If he did, he should have left a note. Your response only escalates the situation. Hope you didn’t have food in your teeth, cuz you might have been on camera when you did that.
“Likewise, if you see cyclists waiting by the side of the road at a trail crossing, you don’t have to stop for them, but you need to be aware that they might jump out. In a full crosswalk, you should stop if it can be done safely.”
I’m pretty sure the law is that you have to stop for pedestrians *in* the crosswalk, not pedestrians *waiting* to cross. That can create some very unsafe conditions.
Pete - I noticed you conveniently neglected to answer the question. Why spend money on parking, gas, and automobile if you can walk? Why bike when you could save the cost of the bike and walk instead?
I want to know. How do you explain that?
“…fear can produce paradoxical responses — like passing far too close to a bicycle, or becoming angry at the riders who expose a motorist to that unspoken fear.
There are no easy answers”
Very interesting!
I have a few answers:
Hang up, buckle up, follow the traffic rules; put down the newspaper–and the “hand tools,” and remember what .08 means; And, drive with a smile instead of a scowl…
Then, you won’t hurt anyone. If you do, it won’t be your fault.
MnBikeCommuter: why do you drive in the left lane at the speed limit, when you know you will be holding up traffic? And why are you “inconvenienced” to get the hell out of the way? You are not the police, so why do you care if others want to drive faster? What is it to you? Are you one of the a-holes who knowingly, willingly and intentionally ties up traffic because “I’m driving the speed limit”? Got no problem with you driving the speed limit, but why be a jerk and gloat over holding up the flow of traffic? Incomvenience my a$$. Get the hell out of the way!
lovetodrivegirl: you are wrong. bikes don’t have the SAME right as cars. They are entitled to share the road, but under different circumstances. You make the same mistake as some of the rogue bikers: you read as far as the part of them having the right to be on the road, but ignore the parts about how they cannot hinder the normal flow of traffic.
JH: same goes for you: the bikes you mention, by causing traffic to have to make dangerous moves to get around them, are hindering the normal and reasonable flow of traffic, a state statute violation.
Got no problem with bikes, horse drawn carriages, rickshaws, whatever on the road, as long as they are following the rules. That is the beef here–bikes who want all their “rights” but want no part of living up to their end of the deal in actually following the law.
(case in point J, who says:”I hope the local bike laws are ammended. Specifically stopping @ lights/signs when there is no traffic. Until then I will continue to blow through stop signs at my convenience…”)
Yep. It’s all about YOU.
Morg, don’t let “J” wreck the image for all the bikers. He’s the equivalent of DGB and his “tools.”
Most bicyclists really are law abiding–because we know we will get creamed if we’re not. If they are riding to the far right of the lane, and there still is not room, then, yes, they are stuck there. Cyclists can’t just jam the brakes and jump off the road, when traffic is right behind them. A lot of the narrow roads around here look like they WERE built for horse-n-buggy.
Lovetodrivegirl IS correct. Cyclists have the same rights -AND- the same duty to follow the rules. And, really, how much time are you stuck behind a bike every day… 30 seconds total? 15? Maybe not even every day?
Morg, get your eyeglasses on. I said, “Bikers have the same right to be on the roads as I, a motorist, has.”
This means the road is not only MINE, the motorist. It means I, the motorist, has to SHARE the road.
Seems like a simple concept to me.
A few comments:
- To you bikers who deliberately blow through stop signs and red lights: you are no different than the bad drivers you complain about.
Also, keep in mind that if you do blow through a stop sign or light and get hit…it’s not the driver’s fault. It’s YOURS. And you’ll likely end up in the hospital as a result.
- Nevermind that it’s those bikers who deliberately break such laws who are giving all bicyclists a bad name. It’s no wonder drivers are irritated at bikes.
- Morg: please read section 169.222 of the state statutes. Subdivision 1 in particular.
Morg - “MnBikeCommuter: why do you drive in the left lane at the speed limit, when you know you will be holding up traffic?”
Looks like Morg wants to speed (break the law) all the whilst complaining about cyclists breaking the law. Kinda funny.
Morg, I am not overly wild about sharing the road with bikes, but until it is state law that they are forbidden to be on the road, I will respect their rights. As far as “by causing traffic to have to make dangerous moves to get around them”, that is a bunch of crap. It is just a bunch of self absorbed jerks that think their needs are greater than anybody else’s.
So if MN State Highway Patrol car is the left lane driving the speed limit, do you go into a hissy fit, drive & flip him off, or ride his tail to try and intimidate him?
So what am I to do? Call 911 - wait for the polize? A bike with no license tag?
If I can’t find a parking space, do I park on the sidewalk? Do I park in the street? No, I find a space. It may be blocks away, or a ramp. I don’t decide to leave it where it’s at!
Here’s an example of “I’ll do what I damn well please”. Well so will I. You’re going to have to buy a new inner tube!
DGB, like I said before, you really have to together! You can piss & moan about the other guy all you want and when it comes right down to it, YOU ARE NO BETTER! In fact, you are probably worse. The person with the bike probably did not intend that the bike fall against your precious 535i (and by the way, it’s just a car), while you deliberately get out a wire cutter and cut the valve stem of the bike.
You can probably get medication for whatever ails your current state of mind.
Well said, cowboy. DGB, since you were not there to witness what actually led to the scratching of your car - it was completely wrong for you to take out your anger and frustration on the bike. All your blustering aside, you’d have been a “bigger man” had you actually confronted the cyclist, left a note, or called the police to report the incident. By intentionally vandalizing the bike, and smirking at your assumed revenge, you lower yourself considerably (with or without the suit).
Well said, Pete2, Cowboy…
DGB, Unless you work for the NTSB or the FBI, there’s no way you can know for certain who scratched your precious ride.
I understand there’s reduced police and more crime, so I’m in favor of a little vigilantism–but only when someone’s safety is threatened.
What you did plants a perception in this cyclist’s mind that it’s more of a bad neighborhood than it really is–and HE too, could begin “carrying tools.”
Job well done, there, DGB. Keep paying that anger forward.
just trying to stir the pot….
Really, I don’t want to get hit by a car, I have nightmares about being hit by a car on my bike. I do stop at Stop signs if needed, but if I can cross safely I’m going through the Stop sign/light. Do you really expect cyclists to stop at all Stop signs, even when there are no cars present???
Crital Mass is going to be great next Friday >>>
I admit I don’t stop at lights/signs when, and only when there’s no motorists (or cops) at or approaching the intersection. It’s not a great excuse, but because I’m commuting on my bike (and keeping one more car off the road), I’m interested in getting from A to B as efficiently as possible. I generally approach an intersection at about 14-18mph. I can stop quickly if need be, and I certainly don’t “blow” the intersection if there’s even a chance I may cross paths with a car, pedestrian, or fellow cycler. Common sense is my mantra. And yes, I’d be willing to say I feel motorists ought to be able to avoid coming to a full stop if the situation warrants a slow-and-go. The difference being, they can accelerate so much faster than a bike and do so much more damage if they cut it too close. I do not, however, drive my car the way I ride my bike. You may call me a hypocrite, if you like, but I’m firmly in the camp of acting accordingly for the given situation. This means, when it’s really, really late at night and absolutely nobody’s around - I (gasp!) don’t always wait for the light to turn green.
J asks: “Do you really expect cyclists to stop at all Stop signs, even when there are no cars present???”
My reply:
Absolutely yes. For 2 reasons:
A) it’s against the law to run them, and by doing so you’re making yourself no better than the cars that run them.
B) by doing so, wittingly or not, you’re contrubiting to the poor reputation that bicyclists have amongst drivers. Drivers would have a lot more respect for bicyclists if bikers followed the rules instead of flaunting them (and yes, I know the reverse is true).
Funny how Morg ends his post by stating: “Yep. It’s all about YOU” (referring to cyclists)
Funny how when bicyclists, by law, have the same rights to the roads as autos (except where restricted like freeways)he automatically assumes that the traffic referred to in the law regarding hindering the normal and resonalbe flow of traffic doesn’t include bicycles….
and just what exactly is “normal and resonable”…on Summer mornings in Minneapolis where bicyclists often out number cars we should just assume that the cars are the “norm” and traveling over the 25 mph speed limit is “resonable”
Yep Morg, seems like it’s all about YOU
