Yes, a bike is a car and should be treated like one. I’m tired of assholes like you yelling ‘get off the road’ or telling me to endanger pedestrians by riding in the sidewalk or mixed use trail or the door lane or the bicycle gutter.
What we need is normal roads with barriers blocking off cars from entering.
delirious_owl is being pretty inflammatory but they make a good point.
All too often a supposed “bike lane” is just built to a worse standard than parallel car lanes. It will have a worse road surface, sharp bends, confusing and long routing, less priority at intersections and traffic lights. Car lanes are the default and bike lanes are squeezed in as an afterthought.
This needs to change, bike lanes should be built to the same or higher standard as roads(although typically bike lanes can be much narrower). Multi lane bike motorways need to be buldozed through neighborhoods. An easy way to do this is just take part or all of an existing road and make it bike only.
What I’m saying is that in the eyes of the law, bicycles are the same as cars. Bikes belong on roads that are built for vehicular traffic.
I don’t want a different type of narrow trail that’s raised and windy with roots and trash. I want to use roads that are built to spec for cars. Fortunately, we already have plenty of them. The only problem is that cars are using them too.
If you want to make the road safer for bicycles, then ban vehicles with motors from half the roads. Like NYC and Berkeley have done.
If you don’t want to ban cars, then paint a big green stripe down the middle of the furthest right lane with a picture of a bicycle to make it clear to cars that that is the lane for bicycles and cars should pass bicycles in the passing lane. Like what Oakland has done.
Roads for cars are built almost exclussively for just cars. Its half the reason this community even exists. Roads speced for bikes wouldn’t need to tolerate nearly as much weight nor would they need to be as wide as car lanes. Many intersections would also be served with yields rather than traffic lights as most bike traffic can negotiate intersections easily.
That type of logic is why I prefer roads to bike trails.
Motorcycles need the full width of a road, so do bicycles. When engineers lower the specs for bicycles, they are thinking of a child riding 5 kph on a Sunday rec ride, but we need roads designed for cargo bikes hauling a weeks worth of groceries or rebar and cement down hill at 40 kph.
When you make the lanes smaller or don’t clean the land of debris or permit sharper turns, you endanger the lives of cyclists. That’s not OK. Cyclists are vehicles and our roads should meet the same specs as all roads.
Legally and saftey wise, motorcycles absolutely need the full width of the lane.
Some motorcyclists ride dangerously. Who knew?
But the motorcyclists uses all 3 thirds of the lane for different purposes. Another vehicle should never enter their lane, for their safety. Same with bicyclists.
They need to put a green stripe in the right most lanes and say that cars are not allowed in that lane, except for exiting. With extreme speed restrictions.
Yes, a bike is a car and should be treated like one. I’m tired of assholes like you yelling ‘get off the road’ or telling me to endanger pedestrians by riding in the sidewalk or mixed use trail or the door lane or the bicycle gutter.
What we need is normal roads with barriers blocking off cars from entering.
Bikes are cars. Treat us like them.
So pedestrians only on these roads? Like a sidewalk?
Or are you saying bikes should be treated JUST like cars, except better, with routes that exclude cars?
It sounds like what you want is separated, protected, raised bicycle lanes.
And I’m no fan of rising on the sidewalks, but cycling is literally one of the uses for a mixed use trail.
delirious_owl is being pretty inflammatory but they make a good point.
All too often a supposed “bike lane” is just built to a worse standard than parallel car lanes. It will have a worse road surface, sharp bends, confusing and long routing, less priority at intersections and traffic lights. Car lanes are the default and bike lanes are squeezed in as an afterthought.
This needs to change, bike lanes should be built to the same or higher standard as roads(although typically bike lanes can be much narrower). Multi lane bike motorways need to be buldozed through neighborhoods. An easy way to do this is just take part or all of an existing road and make it bike only.
Please no more bulldozing neighbourhoods. Bike lanes would be far easier to accomodate in a neighbourhood than a 6+ lane freeway was.
What I’m saying is that in the eyes of the law, bicycles are the same as cars. Bikes belong on roads that are built for vehicular traffic.
I don’t want a different type of narrow trail that’s raised and windy with roots and trash. I want to use roads that are built to spec for cars. Fortunately, we already have plenty of them. The only problem is that cars are using them too.
If you want to make the road safer for bicycles, then ban vehicles with motors from half the roads. Like NYC and Berkeley have done.
If you don’t want to ban cars, then paint a big green stripe down the middle of the furthest right lane with a picture of a bicycle to make it clear to cars that that is the lane for bicycles and cars should pass bicycles in the passing lane. Like what Oakland has done.
Bikes belong on roads that are built for bikes.
Roads built for cars are built for bikes.
https://roadswerenotbuiltforcars.com
Roads existed before cars & it was cycling organisations that campaigned to have them tarmacked & sealed for everyone’s benefit
Pavements were not built for vehicles yet in the UK over 350 people are killed or seriously injured by vehicles mounting it.
Roads for cars are built almost exclussively for just cars. Its half the reason this community even exists. Roads speced for bikes wouldn’t need to tolerate nearly as much weight nor would they need to be as wide as car lanes. Many intersections would also be served with yields rather than traffic lights as most bike traffic can negotiate intersections easily.
That type of logic is why I prefer roads to bike trails.
Motorcycles need the full width of a road, so do bicycles. When engineers lower the specs for bicycles, they are thinking of a child riding 5 kph on a Sunday rec ride, but we need roads designed for cargo bikes hauling a weeks worth of groceries or rebar and cement down hill at 40 kph.
When you make the lanes smaller or don’t clean the land of debris or permit sharper turns, you endanger the lives of cyclists. That’s not OK. Cyclists are vehicles and our roads should meet the same specs as all roads.
Technically speaking. Motorcycle do not need the full width. It is not uncommon to see them side by side in a single lane.
If your bike max speed is 40kph, thats the slower side of car speeds so the roads could still be designed far differently for bikes.
Legally and saftey wise, motorcycles absolutely need the full width of the lane.
Some motorcyclists ride dangerously. Who knew?
But the motorcyclists uses all 3 thirds of the lane for different purposes. Another vehicle should never enter their lane, for their safety. Same with bicyclists.
Please ride your bike on I-95, I beg of you
I have. And on the Autobahn in Germany.
They need to put a green stripe in the right most lanes and say that cars are not allowed in that lane, except for exiting. With extreme speed restrictions.
deleted by creator
They ride thousands of electric scooters on the sidewalks in China daily and rarely does anyone ever get hurt. Maybe you just suck ass at riding.
Lots of people do get hurt.
How much time have you spent in China?