Cycling plan to blame drivers for all crashes...

[ecom]

This past summer, I've honestly seen more bicyclist have more violations than automobiles regardless of sheer number of vehicles. In a span of 3 months, I saw three bicyclists collide with pedestrians knocking them on their ass and taking off in typical cyclist fashion. Comparatively I've seen zero automobiles striking pedestrians in the same time period.

I've yet to see a bicyclist stop for a red light in front of my office which happens to sit on a section of road with heavy auto, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic. Bicycles have a lane wide enough to fit tandem rear wheel commercial truck, but they still ride on the sidewalk. It's not uncommon to see hundreds of people crossing the street on their walk signal and then have a bicyclist barge through. But then again, equipping bikes with brakes isn't fashionable in the bicycling community even though they are required by vehicle code.

Additionally, we have bicycle advocates that tout not having to abide by California Vehicle Code, such as stop signs, is an advantage of riding a bicycle when CVC explicitly states that bicycles shall obey all regulations for cars except those which do not apply to them. For example emissions test or excessive emissions -- although with some riders i think that's questionable.

As far as bicycle parking is concerned, that's another issue completely. I've seen hundreds of bikes locked to wheel chair ramps such that they can no longer be utilized by people in wheelchairs.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
I highly doubt that...sheer number of vehicles dictates that. Nonetheless, when a cyclist violates a traffic law he puts himself at risk. When a motorist violates a traffic law he puts himself and other people at risk.

Even if the accident is 100% the cyclist's fault, the guy who hits him has to live with it. When a cyclist violates the law, he's definitely not the only one at risk.

And I agree with JLee here; I have seen far more cyclists blow through red lights and stop signs than I've ever seen cars. I see cyclists riding side by side every day during the summer despite the law being very clear that bicycles must ride single-file. Yes, I see plenty of cars doing stupid/illegal things, but as a percentage of total riders/drivers, the bicycles I see violate traffic laws at a much higher rate than automobiles.

ZV

100% agree. Cyclists blow through lights and intersections at will around here. THEY are the ones who need cracking down upon, not motorists. I don't feel they should have the same rights to the road as a car....when they start paying taxes on their bikes every year, buying license plates, getting inspections and being required to have insurance, maybe I'll change my mind.

This very sort of pathetic disregard of cyclists is exactly why this type of law is being considered. Well done, you're bringing it upon yourself.

Plus, why is it that every anti-cycling poster in here has 1000's of anecdotal stories about cyclists 'blowing through' stop signs and such, yet as soon as ONE cyclist bemoans the near fatal actions of a driver they get jumped on like fuck? Bit odd, eh? Or is it just that you have no sense of compassion for those cyclists that get plowed down and killed becasue some fat fuck couldn't see where he was going for 20 seconds while he stuffed his gaping maw with a quesadilla on his way to the drive through dry cleaner.

It pretty plain. The consequences of a collision with a cyclist for a driver are minimal to none. For a cyclist they are life or death. Putting more onus upon the driver to take care around more vulnerable road users is right.

Don't forget, however, that even if this were law, it would not prevent a Cyclist from being to blame when an incident was his fault. I don't know why posters keep pissing and moaning about drivers getting 100% blame, because they wouldn't. They would simply be considered to be to blame unless evidence proves otherwise. If you drive safely and courteously, you have nothing to worry about. Whats the big deal?

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: ecom
This past summer, I've honestly seen more bicyclist have more violations than automobiles regardless of sheer number of vehicles. In a span of 3 months, I saw three bicyclists collide with pedestrians knocking them on their ass and taking off in typical cyclist fashion. Comparatively I've seen zero automobiles striking pedestrians in the same time period.

I've yet to see a bicyclist stop for a red light in front of my office which happens to sit on a section of road with heavy auto, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic. Bicycles have a lane wide enough to fit tandem rear wheel commercial truck, but they still ride on the sidewalk. It's not uncommon to see hundreds of people crossing the street on their walk signal and then have a bicyclist barge through. But then again, equipping bikes with brakes isn't fashionable in the bicycling community even though they are required by vehicle code.

Additionally, we have bicycle advocates that tout not having to abide by California Vehicle Code, such as stop signs, is an advantage of riding a bicycle when CVC explicitly states that bicycles shall obey all regulations for cars except those which do not apply to them. For example emissions test or excessive emissions -- although with some riders i think that's questionable.

As far as bicycle parking is concerned, that's another issue completely. I've seen hundreds of bikes locked to wheel chair ramps such that they can no longer be utilized by people in wheelchairs.

The most common bike-car collision is a driver failing to yield at a stop sign.

Link

 

[LTC8K6]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: ecom
This past summer, I've honestly seen more bicyclist have more violations than automobiles regardless of sheer number of vehicles. In a span of 3 months, I saw three bicyclists collide with pedestrians knocking them on their ass and taking off in typical cyclist fashion. Comparatively I've seen zero automobiles striking pedestrians in the same time period.

I've yet to see a bicyclist stop for a red light in front of my office which happens to sit on a section of road with heavy auto, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic. Bicycles have a lane wide enough to fit tandem rear wheel commercial truck, but they still ride on the sidewalk. It's not uncommon to see hundreds of people crossing the street on their walk signal and then have a bicyclist barge through. But then again, equipping bikes with brakes isn't fashionable in the bicycling community even though they are required by vehicle code.

Additionally, we have bicycle advocates that tout not having to abide by California Vehicle Code, such as stop signs, is an advantage of riding a bicycle when CVC explicitly states that bicycles shall obey all regulations for cars except those which do not apply to them. For example emissions test or excessive emissions -- although with some riders i think that's questionable.

As far as bicycle parking is concerned, that's another issue completely. I've seen hundreds of bikes locked to wheel chair ramps such that they can no longer be utilized by people in wheelchairs.

The most common bike-car collision is a driver failing to yield at a stop sign.

Link

Yeah, but who is going to take the cyclist's word? That site doesn't look very fair. 😀

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: mb
I know some people on this forum will support this.

I can sort of see why they would do this. It puts the burden on motorists to make sure they don't hit cyclists. Kind of like how we do with pedestrians in crosswalks in California. Pedestrians have right of way over motor vehicle traffic so if you hit a pedestrian in a cross walk you are automatically at fault.

You're saying that if the light is green and you're going the legal limit, and some dude sprints out in front of you at the last second when you can do nothing to avoid him, you would be at fault as the driver? I seriously doubt that would hold water in court, regardless of the law.

Obviously, pedestrians already IN the crosswalk have the right-of-way everywhere that I've ever been. But it's not the motorist's fault if the pedestrian runs right out in front of them.

No, pedestrians must wait for the green light at intersections with traffic lights. All other intersections, even intersections where there is no stop sign for cross traffic, the motor vehicle must stop for pedestrians.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Don't forget, however, that even if this were law, it would not prevent a Cyclist from being to blame when an incident was his fault. I don't know why posters keep pissing and moaning about drivers getting 100% blame, because they wouldn't. They would simply be considered to be to blame unless evidence proves otherwise. If you drive safely and courteously, you have nothing to worry about. Whats the big deal?

Government advisers are pushing for changes in the civil law that will make the most powerful vehicle involved in a collision automatically liable for insurance and compensation purposes.

Being automatically liable suggests that the car drivers insurance will be forced to pay out. With it being civil law all the cyclist has to do is cast doubt that they were completely at fault to get some compensation. They may well have blown through a junction, but if they say "I think DivideBYZero was speeding and if they hadn't been they wouldn't have hit me", and since the law assumes you are guilty, the onus is on you to prove you weren't speeding. Good luck with that.

There are no details of any safeguards to attribute blame to the cyclist if they are in the wrong.

Insurance companies have said that it is a bad idea and that premiums will skyrocket... what does that tell you? (other than insurance companies are out to make money).

 

[amdhunter]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: amdhunter
As someone who has BEEN HIT by a bicyclist, I think this is a retarded law.
The dumbass came off a sidewalk, down a one way street and slammed into my car causing a really nice dent. Lucky I drove a piece of shit back then.

Seeing as they don't have to carry insurance, I felt pretty good that he took a nice hit to the asphalt for causing damage tho.

Yeah, fuck all cyclists because you got a lump of metal scratched by one dick head. :roll:

Yeah, well lumps of metal cost thousands to fix.

 

[exar333]

Worthless law IMHO.

It shouldn't matter what vehicle you have, if you are at fault, you are at fault. Plain and simple.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Don't forget, however, that even if this were law, it would not prevent a Cyclist from being to blame when an incident was his fault. I don't know why posters keep pissing and moaning about drivers getting 100% blame, because they wouldn't. They would simply be considered to be to blame unless evidence proves otherwise. If you drive safely and courteously, you have nothing to worry about. Whats the big deal?

Government advisers are pushing for changes in the civil law that will make the most powerful vehicle involved in a collision automatically liable for insurance and compensation purposes.

Being automatically liable suggests that the car drivers insurance will be forced to pay out. With it being civil law all the cyclist has to do is cast doubt that they were completely at fault to get some compensation. They may well have blown through a junction, but if they say "I think DivideBYZero was speeding and if they hadn't been they wouldn't have hit me", and since the law assumes you are guilty, the onus is on you to prove you weren't speeding. Good luck with that.

There are no details of any safeguards to attribute blame to the cyclist if they are in the wrong.

Insurance companies have said that it is a bad idea and that premiums will skyrocket... what does that tell you? (other than insurance companies are out to make money).

The more I hear drivers bitch about this legislation the more I support it. I've been driving for nearly 30 years and over half a million miles and have never even come close to hitting a cyclist. As a cyclist I've been nearly hit a number of times by inattentive motorists.

In short, you guys are so full of shit it makes my jaw drop.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: amdhunter

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: amdhunter
As someone who has BEEN HIT by a bicyclist, I think this is a retarded law.
The dumbass came off a sidewalk, down a one way street and slammed into my car causing a really nice dent. Lucky I drove a piece of shit back then.

Seeing as they don't have to carry insurance, I felt pretty good that he took a nice hit to the asphalt for causing damage tho.

Yeah, fuck all cyclists because you got a lump of metal scratched by one dick head. :roll:

Yeah, well lumps of metal cost thousands to fix.

Cry more. Like the mother of a cyclist that got smeared to a paste by a dozing driver. How much would that cost to fix? Oh yeah, it can't be fixed, but boo hoo you got a scratch on a panel of your lovely new car, waaahahaha...jesus. :roll:

 

[exar333]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Don't forget, however, that even if this were law, it would not prevent a Cyclist from being to blame when an incident was his fault. I don't know why posters keep pissing and moaning about drivers getting 100% blame, because they wouldn't. They would simply be considered to be to blame unless evidence proves otherwise. If you drive safely and courteously, you have nothing to worry about. Whats the big deal?

Government advisers are pushing for changes in the civil law that will make the most powerful vehicle involved in a collision automatically liable for insurance and compensation purposes.

Being automatically liable suggests that the car drivers insurance will be forced to pay out. With it being civil law all the cyclist has to do is cast doubt that they were completely at fault to get some compensation. They may well have blown through a junction, but if they say "I think DivideBYZero was speeding and if they hadn't been they wouldn't have hit me", and since the law assumes you are guilty, the onus is on you to prove you weren't speeding. Good luck with that.

There are no details of any safeguards to attribute blame to the cyclist if they are in the wrong.

Insurance companies have said that it is a bad idea and that premiums will skyrocket... what does that tell you? (other than insurance companies are out to make money).

The more I hear drivers bitch about this legislation the more I support it. I've been driving for nearly 30 years and over half a million miles and have never even come close to hitting a cyclist. As a cyclist I've been nearly hit a number of times by inattentive motorists.
In short, you guys are so full of shit it makes my jaw drop.

Sounds like you are doing something wrong. Just because your on a bike, it doesn't mean you have to cease to watch out for cars. It's just like driving, you can do everything right and still get in an accident. Avoidance skills are sometimes just as important as good driving skills when it comes to avoiding accidents.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: ExarKun333

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Don't forget, however, that even if this were law, it would not prevent a Cyclist from being to blame when an incident was his fault. I don't know why posters keep pissing and moaning about drivers getting 100% blame, because they wouldn't. They would simply be considered to be to blame unless evidence proves otherwise. If you drive safely and courteously, you have nothing to worry about. Whats the big deal?

Government advisers are pushing for changes in the civil law that will make the most powerful vehicle involved in a collision automatically liable for insurance and compensation purposes.

Being automatically liable suggests that the car drivers insurance will be forced to pay out. With it being civil law all the cyclist has to do is cast doubt that they were completely at fault to get some compensation. They may well have blown through a junction, but if they say "I think DivideBYZero was speeding and if they hadn't been they wouldn't have hit me", and since the law assumes you are guilty, the onus is on you to prove you weren't speeding. Good luck with that.

There are no details of any safeguards to attribute blame to the cyclist if they are in the wrong.

Insurance companies have said that it is a bad idea and that premiums will skyrocket... what does that tell you? (other than insurance companies are out to make money).

The more I hear drivers bitch about this legislation the more I support it. I've been driving for nearly 30 years and over half a million miles and have never even come close to hitting a cyclist. As a cyclist I've been nearly hit a number of times by inattentive motorists.
In short, you guys are so full of shit it makes my jaw drop.

Sounds like you are doing something wrong. Just because your on a bike, it doesn't mean you have to cease to watch out for cars. It's just like driving, you can do everything right and still get in an accident. Avoidance skills are sometimes just as important as good driving skills when it comes to avoiding accidents.

No shit sherlock. :roll: It's my avoidance skills that saved me from those idiots.

Here are two incidents I was in not to long ago, you tell me if I did something wrong...I can't wait for this...:roll::roll::roll:

1st incident: I was riding down a major road near my house on my way to work one morning (2 lanes each direction with a wide median and bike lanes on both sides). I'm going about 21-22mph and there is zero traffic going either way. I see a car pulling out from a side street way off to my left, she is heading for another side street down the road 100' or so from the one she pulled out from so she is just going diagonally across this major road and we are heading for a collision. I am wondering what this oblivious driver is doing becuase I notice her wheels aren't turning to merge into the southbound traffic, she's heading for a collision with me. I see this unfolding and start slowing dramatically to avoid plowing into her. I avoided the accident and she never even saw me or realized how close she had come to potentially killing someone.

2nd incident: Riding down same road farther up on different day. There is a construction zone in the right lane and there is no bike lane in this stretch of road anyway so I'm riding in the right most part of my lane. An old lady in a Toyota Corolla passed me and then immediately made a right hand turn in front of me. It was all I could do not to plow right into her as she cut me off.

I'll even give you another incident: Riding down (same road again), coming up on a school zone. I'm in the bike lane and traffic is backed up on the road, crawling along. I'm coming up on an SUV and get alongside, I'm going slightly faster than traffic at this point, when I notice she's coming over into the bike lane which will force me into parked cars so I start banging on her SUV with my open hand to get her attention. She notices me finally and backs off. This one would have been really bad because I would have either hit parked cars or her SUV as she cut me off.

In all these incidents I was riding down the road with complete right of way.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Originally posted by: JLee
The egotistical self-righteous arrogance displayed by certain people in this thread is astounding.

This is an internet forum, isn't it?

 

[marvdmartian]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: marvdmartian

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: mb
I know some people on this forum will support this.

I can sort of see why they would do this. It puts the burden on motorists to make sure they don't hit cyclists. Kind of like how we do with pedestrians in crosswalks in California. Pedestrians have right of way over motor vehicle traffic so if you hit a pedestrian in a cross walk you are automatically at fault.

At the same time, pedestrians and cyclists must understand that even with the right of way on their side, they still can't violate the laws of physics. I don't care what the law says, if I'm driving a 4000 pound vehicle at 30 mph, I cannot stop in 5 feet of distance. It amazes me that educated people don't understand that if they step (or ride) into the street, in front of a moving motor vehicle that doesn't have the time/distance to stop, they WILL get hit!!

I'm all for giving right of way to pedestrians. I believe that bicyclists need to learn to SHARE the road with drivers (and vice-versa). I usually will defer to both of them, even if I don't have to do so (on base, where I work, they teach the airmen to wait for a gap in traffic, unless they're signaled by the driver to cross). Oftentimes, I give right of way to pedestrians just because I figure I'm in my car, dry and warm/cool (depending on the time of year), and they're outside, wet and hot/cold, and I feel sorry for them.

But bicyclists are oftentimes oblivious to their surroundings (much like SUV drivers :roll: ). The town I live in hosts an annual 100 mile bicycle race every year, and more than once I've seen visiting bicyclists riding 4 or 5 wide, side by side, down the road, while in town (and NOT riding in the protected lanes of the race, or on race day). Even though the law (and common sense) says ride single file, these guys act like wanna-be Hell's Angels in bicycle shorts, and put themselves at risk. :roll:

Races are something completely different and should have roads blocked off when the riders go through.

As for other cyclists, I don't think they're oblivious, there just isn't a whole lot they can do while riding to protect themselves or prevent accidents (other than riding responsibly and obeying the laws-which many of us do despite all the anecdotal evidence to the contrary being dispensed in this thread).

Yes, they do block off the streets/lanes for the race, but we usually have people coming in up to a week before the race, and they're riding all over the place. Unfortunately, often side by side, as if the lane was already closed off for them! Sorry if I didn't point that out accurately.

And the oblivious remark I made was concerning those same riders, who don't follow the rules, and think that everyone should defer to them, regardless of how obnoxiously or stupidly they're riding.

 

[jlee]

Do you pro-cyclists here want me to come and post every time I see a cyclist run a light or a stop sign? Or ride without lights at night? Or ride on the sidewalks downtown when tons of people are walking? Or how about riding on the wrong side of the road - at night - without a light? Geewhiz, that's real safe.

I'm not saying that cyclists are always in the wrong, but some seem to think that they're incapable of screwing up. WRONG.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: JLee
Do you pro-cyclists here want me to come and post every time I see a cyclist run a light or a stop sign? Or ride without lights at night? Or ride on the sidewalks downtown when tons of people are walking? Or how about riding on the wrong side of the road - at night - without a light? Geewhiz, that's real safe.

I'm not saying that cyclists are always in the wrong, but some seem to think that they're incapable of screwing up. WRONG.

Depends, do you want me to post whenever I see a motorist breaking a traffic law?

Seriously, all the bitching and moaning in this thread about those anarchist cyclists is bullshit and it pales in comparison to the number of idiots I see doing stupid shit in cars on a daily basis. Stuffing their fat bloated faces with food, reading the newspaper...or a book, applying makeup, texting, driving aggressively or dangerously...I won't even get into the blatant traffic violations. How many times have you been driving along and witnessed some jackass in a car doing something stupid/illegal and thought to yourself, "how come there's never a cop around when you need one?"

JLee, you seem like a decent guy but I know that cops tend to be some of the most jaded people I've ever met...not surprising since they do a job that everyone they deal with resents them for. You said you live in a college town and patrol regularly in an area that is mostly college students so naturally you'll see some of the biggest asswipes on the planet roaming around drunk or on drugs half the time...it's no wonder you see them do stupid shit. They do not represent society in general though...well, depends on where you live I guess. 😛

The trouble with labeling cyclists is that you run the gamut from children to teenagers to college students to working professionals. Of course you're going to encounter varying levels of intelligence and respect for the law in those groups.

I live in San Diego, CA which has a population of about 3 million people and dedicated bike lanes on most of the roads. I don't live near a college, I ride during daylight hours and drive mostly during daylight hours in town. I've lived here for 12 years and ridden and driven many thousands of miles on these streets and I don't see cyclists as being a problem or a hindrance to motor vehicle traffic at all. Sorry, I just don't see it.

 

[jlee]

As I said earlier, I'm sure it differs by locale - I don't doubt that in the least. 🙂

 

[foghorn67]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
The more I hear drivers bitch about this legislation the more I support it. I've been driving for nearly 30 years and over half a million miles and have never even come close to hitting a cyclist. As a cyclist I've been nearly hit a number of times by inattentive motorists.

In short, you guys are so full of shit it makes my jaw drop.

You can't seem to comprehend the fact that your experience does not come close to equaling others experiences.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
The more I hear drivers bitch about this legislation the more I support it. I've been driving for nearly 30 years and over half a million miles and have never even come close to hitting a cyclist. As a cyclist I've been nearly hit a number of times by inattentive motorists.

In short, you guys are so full of shit it makes my jaw drop.

You can't seem to comprehend the fact that your experience does not come close to equaling others experiences.

You can't seem to comprehend the fact that you and most other posters have never seriously cycled on the road and therefore have next to no experience.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
The more I hear drivers bitch about this legislation the more I support it. I've been driving for nearly 30 years and over half a million miles and have never even come close to hitting a cyclist. As a cyclist I've been nearly hit a number of times by inattentive motorists.

In short, you guys are so full of shit it makes my jaw drop.

You can't seem to comprehend the fact that your experience does not come close to equaling others experiences.

You can't seem to comprehend the fact that you and most other posters have never seriously cycled on the road and therefore have next to no experience.

:thumbsup:This

 

[foghorn67]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
You can't seem to comprehend the fact that you and most other posters have never seriously cycled on the road and therefore have next to no experience.

:thumbsup:This

After you two stop kissing and hugging each other, you also have to realize that is a stupid assumption, since neither of you know me. And you are flat out wrong.
As a motorist and a cyclist, I see way more cyclist running stop signs and red lights than I do cars doing so.

 

[ecom]

Bicycle ran into my vehicle today. Cop put the guy in cuffs!😛

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
You can't seem to comprehend the fact that you and most other posters have never seriously cycled on the road and therefore have next to no experience.

:thumbsup:This

After you two stop kissing and hugging each other, you also have to realize that is a stupid assumption, since neither of you know me. And you are flat out wrong.
As a motorist and a cyclist, I see way more cyclist running stop signs and red lights than I do cars doing so.

I'm an Optician. When are you next free?

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
You can't seem to comprehend the fact that you and most other posters have never seriously cycled on the road and therefore have next to no experience.

:thumbsup:This

After you two stop kissing and hugging each other, you also have to realize that is a stupid assumption, since neither of you know me. And you are flat out wrong.
As a motorist and a cyclist, I see way more cyclist running stop signs and red lights than I do cars doing so.

I'm an Optician. When are you next free?

If I didn't have anything better to do, I'd camp at a stop sign with a video camera. Just for you.

 

[exar333]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: ExarKun333

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Don't forget, however, that even if this were law, it would not prevent a Cyclist from being to blame when an incident was his fault. I don't know why posters keep pissing and moaning about drivers getting 100% blame, because they wouldn't. They would simply be considered to be to blame unless evidence proves otherwise. If you drive safely and courteously, you have nothing to worry about. Whats the big deal?

Government advisers are pushing for changes in the civil law that will make the most powerful vehicle involved in a collision automatically liable for insurance and compensation purposes.

Being automatically liable suggests that the car drivers insurance will be forced to pay out. With it being civil law all the cyclist has to do is cast doubt that they were completely at fault to get some compensation. They may well have blown through a junction, but if they say "I think DivideBYZero was speeding and if they hadn't been they wouldn't have hit me", and since the law assumes you are guilty, the onus is on you to prove you weren't speeding. Good luck with that.

There are no details of any safeguards to attribute blame to the cyclist if they are in the wrong.

Insurance companies have said that it is a bad idea and that premiums will skyrocket... what does that tell you? (other than insurance companies are out to make money).

The more I hear drivers bitch about this legislation the more I support it. I've been driving for nearly 30 years and over half a million miles and have never even come close to hitting a cyclist. As a cyclist I've been nearly hit a number of times by inattentive motorists.
In short, you guys are so full of shit it makes my jaw drop.

Sounds like you are doing something wrong. Just because your on a bike, it doesn't mean you have to cease to watch out for cars. It's just like driving, you can do everything right and still get in an accident. Avoidance skills are sometimes just as important as good driving skills when it comes to avoiding accidents.

No shit sherlock. :roll: It's my avoidance skills that saved me from those idiots.

Here are two incidents I was in not to long ago, you tell me if I did something wrong...I can't wait for this...:roll::roll::roll:

1st incident: I was riding down a major road near my house on my way to work one morning (2 lanes each direction with a wide median and bike lanes on both sides). I'm going about 21-22mph and there is zero traffic going either way. I see a car pulling out from a side street way off to my left, she is heading for another side street down the road 100' or so from the one she pulled out from so she is just going diagonally across this major road and we are heading for a collision. I am wondering what this oblivious driver is doing becuase I notice her wheels aren't turning to merge into the southbound traffic, she's heading for a collision with me. I see this unfolding and start slowing dramatically to avoid plowing into her. I avoided the accident and she never even saw me or realized how close she had come to potentially killing someone.

2nd incident: Riding down same road farther up on different day. There is a construction zone in the right lane and there is no bike lane in this stretch of road anyway so I'm riding in the right most part of my lane. An old lady in a Toyota Corolla passed me and then immediately made a right hand turn in front of me. It was all I could do not to plow right into her as she cut me off.

I'll even give you another incident: Riding down (same road again), coming up on a school zone. I'm in the bike lane and traffic is backed up on the road, crawling along. I'm coming up on an SUV and get alongside, I'm going slightly faster than traffic at this point, when I notice she's coming over into the bike lane which will force me into parked cars so I start banging on her SUV with my open hand to get her attention. She notices me finally and backs off. This one would have been really bad because I would have either hit parked cars or her SUV as she cut me off.

In all these incidents I was riding down the road with complete right of way.

Have you ever driven a car, or are you only 14 years old? These stories are played-out all the time driving cars too. Good job, you avoided a collision. Do you want a medal or something? Millions of people do this every day in their cars and on bikes.

Keep paying attention, and you probably will be just fine. Being a good driver means 50% good driving yourself and 50% avoidance skills around inattentive/bad drivers.

I have ridden bikes regularly (leisure, to work, etc.) for 20 years, and I can't say I see more bad drivers on my bike than when I am in a car. I assume everyone else on the road is a terrible driver, and it has worked very well to my advantage.