Design Template by Bikingtoronto

« DDOT's study of C Street and North Carolina Ave, NE | Main | Freeing up Bike Rack Space at the Rosslyn Metro Station »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

the link on the langley park cycle tracks story is bad. can you fix that?

OK. It should work now.

I am not sure that we should seek repeal of the mandatory shoulder use law, only that it is applied according to the full reading of the law and the understanding urged by the BPAC. This means that cyclists can't be deliberately annoying to cars, but that if they take the entire lane if justified.

I am far more interested in modified of the contributory negligence law

I know LAB opposes mandatory shoulder use laws, and counts it against a state in their bike friendly rankings. Vehicular cyclists like to ride like they are a driver in a car, so riding on the shoulder is counter to that goal. Personally I like to have the freedom to ride where I think is best, and we've seen how the law can be badly misapplied. I doubt that is an isolated event.

I agree that riding on the shoulder is counter to us being "vehicles," and can be misapplied. However, if you remove that requirement, the next time someone in a car gets annoyed at a cyclist (like 30 sec from now), there will be a push simply to ban bikes from various roads.

I dunno SJE, 45 states and DC don't have mandatory shoulder laws and it doesn't seem to be a problem there.

I have to commend MBPAC for their letter in the Leymeister case, they wrote the letter I wanted to write. It's rare indeed to see a governmental unit openly advocating for the right of cyclists to use travel lanes.

Contrarian: I acknowlege your point but stand by my position. Here is why.

People ride and drivers drive pretty much the same regardless of shoulder laws. Repealing a law might not make much difference in that regard.

Unless the law is particularly bad (like negligence rules) I generally prefer to change the interpretation of laws, rather than the laws themselves, because of unintended consequences.
This is because repealing a law does not change the interest group who liked the law in the first place (e.g. motorists) They will find other ways to get what they want and such changes might be to our greater detriment. Indeed, repealing a law sometimes signals that other changes are afoot and so, if not ready with your supporters and lobbyists, you can find yourself in a net worse position.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Banner design by creativecouchdesigns.com

City Paper's Best Local Bike Blog 2009

Categories

 Subscribe in a reader