Rant: Cyclists in Vancouver

[MillerGenuineDraft]

I just finish a 3 hour lecture at UBC and get a text from a friend who lives downtown to go and meet him to grab a beer or 5 with a group of our friends. I think to myself, "Sure why not, it's been a long day." So I hop onto the 99 B-line and make my way toward Granville, to transfer busses and head north into the West End. As I am on the 99 B-line, a cyclist tries cutting the monstrous bus, nearly getting hit and potentially cracking his skull into pieces. Thankfully the bus driver slams the breaks in time, preventing what would have been a a fatal accident.

What's my point with this? Is it that cyclists are morons? Potentially, yes. But this isn't even what bothers me most.

As I walk toward the pub, I see my friends sitting on the patio, pitchers and all. Once I sit down, I tell them about what just happens, and we start having a heated discussion on cyclists in Vancouver. One of my friends, Jeff, who is all for cycling in the big city, stresses that maybe if there were less drivers on the road, and more cyclists, these problems simply wouldn't persist.

Now, as this is happening, a gentleman who had cycled his way to the bar gets off his bike, locks it up, and sits with his group of friends on the patio, and starts drinking. By this point, I'm asking my friend Jeff if he thinks this is acceptable. He doesn't say much. For the entire duration that my friends and I were at this bar drinking, the cyclist who was eating and drinking with his friends decides to head out. Now this guy is 5/6 beer deep, and is going to be biking home on a road with registered drivers. In my eyes, I see this as a big issue.

We have the city of Vancouver promoting the use of bikes, where we are adding even more bike lanes to the city. But why is it that people who are biking can just join in on these roads, without even having a registered license to do so? They are biking on the same road that owners of registered vehicles are driving on. In order to drive on the roads, you are required to read a book, pass a test, then take a test that allows you to legally drive on the roads. With cyclists, it's just a matter of grabbing your bike and helmet, and going to town.

I think this city needs a program that cyclists are required to take, in order to bike on these roads - especially downtown Vancouver. How many times do you see a cyclist get hit/almost get hit? How many times is the driver portrayed as the bad guy in the situation?

So is my point still that cyclists are morons? Potentially, yes.

[D.Doughty]

F biking.

[Dragonfruits]

i fully agree bikers should be put through some program in order to bike on the same roads as cars and even some sort of licensing too unfortunately i don't see this happening any time soon

[MillerGenuineDraft]

i fully agree bikers should be put through some program in order to bike on the same roads as cars and even some sort of licensing too unfortunately i don't see this happening any time soon

[NikiShiz]

Although they are annoying and hold up traffic I don't mind cyclists as long as they follow the laws....when they weave in and out of traffic is where I draw the line.

In a somewhat related note these bike lanes are also really starting to cause a lot of traffic...although the number of cyclists has increased since their implementation, the number of drivers hasn't necessarily decreased (the argument for them was to encourage people to bike instead of drive, as well as safety). I see more and more bike lanes all across DT now.

[inane]

So is my point still that cyclists are morons? Potentially, yes.

[Baka]

I was driving thought Rittenhouse Square in Philly and they were holding an art show outside in the park. So a cyclist was between me and the car in front of me and he was looking at the art not paying attention. Then the car in front of him had to come to an abrupt stop from stopped traffic and the cyclist still looking at the art hits the back of the car and literally flips forward off his bike and faceplants into the rear hood of the car. The cyclist then loses it and starts telling the driver to get out and fight as he bangs on the car (the biker was probably late 20's or 30 and the driver was at least 60). The driver refuses to get out and is apologizing through the window but the biker eventually just gets his bike and as he rides past the car he spits in the guys window before weaving away through the other cars.

I like biking but I honestly hate bikers in the city they are as annoying as cabs.

[22sedins33]

As someone who uses bikes as a primary mode of transportation I can see both sides of things.

On one side, as a cyclist it's really hard to get noticed. Legally where I'm from we're not allowed to be on the sidewalks so we have to be on the street and seeing as we aren't as fast as cars, lane changes are hard (even if they're just for left hand turns) because, obviously, cars don't really want to slow down for the bikers. In the end you either have to be gutsy or extremely patient. It can also often be safer to be out in traffic just because it assures you'll get noticed.

On the flip side, it's frustrating for drivers because the roads are essentially for them and it really sucks going half the speed you're supposed to be going. The onus is put on the driver to be aware of the bikers which can be hard because they don't always follow the same rules of the road. Unpredictable things are hard to avoid.

In the end, big cities just need to do what it takes to make things safer for both parties. Bike paths are lifesavers (literally) and it's just the transition period that sucks for everyone involved. If the changes being made are wise ones things should clear up soon enough.

[Common sense]

No seatbelt = $167 fine (http://www.icbc.com/driver-licensing/tickets/paying-disputing/chart-offenceswithfines)

No helmet = $29 fine (http://www.theprovince.com/news/vancouver/Cyclists+wear+helmets+also+fines/8515699/story.html)

Equal? I don't think so.

[inane]

Although they are annoying and hold up traffic I don't mind cyclists as long as they follow the laws....when they weave in and out of traffic is where I draw the line.

In a somewhat related note these bike lanes are also really starting to cause a lot of traffic...although the number of cyclists has increased since their implementation, the number of drivers hasn't necessarily decreased (the argument for them was to encourage people to bike instead of drive, as well as safety). I see more and more bike lanes all across DT now.

[MillerGenuineDraft]

Although they are annoying and hold up traffic I don't mind cyclists as long as they follow the laws....when they weave in and out of traffic is where I draw the line.

In a somewhat related note these bike lanes are also really starting to cause a lot of traffic...although the number of cyclists has increased since their implementation, the number of drivers hasn't necessarily decreased (the argument for them was to encourage people to bike instead of drive, as well as safety). I see more and more bike lanes all across DT now.

[canucks_dynasty]

Licensing bicyclists will never happen as it's probably cost too much to start up, maintain, and impossible to enforce. How many bicyclists get ticketed for not wearing a helmet??? I'd guess...NOT MANY.

My co-worker has installed those camera recorders on his car. Because of near accidents with other cars and bicyclist. This way he has positive proof of who was at fault.

[MillerGenuineDraft]

Licensing bicyclists will never happen as it's probably cost too much to start up, maintain, and impossible to enforce. How many bicyclists get ticketed for not wearing a helmet??? I'd guess...NOT MANY.

My co-worker has installed those camera recorders on his car. Because of near accidents with other cars and bicyclist. This way he has positive proof of who was at fault.

[Common sense]

What laws? There are hardly any laws for cyclists. I could have my 14 year old nephew biking around Downtown Vancouver, and as long as he follows the "laws" it's perfectly legal. These "laws" don't need to be changed. They need to be created.

[NikiShiz]

What laws? There are hardly any laws for cyclists. I could have my 14 year old nephew biking around Downtown Vancouver, and as long as he follows the "laws" it's perfectly legal. These "laws" don't need to be changed. They need to be created.

[MillerGenuineDraft]

The law also dictates that cyclists have protective equipment when riding, and by that I mean a helmet. Of course, this "law" is hardly practised and even less so enforced by law enforcement.

Perhaps it's time for change - make no helmet violations $167 (the same as no seatbelts) and maybe more cyclists will start to think of safety as a priority on the roads.

[ckamo]

I agree with the majority of the posters. Cycling isn't a bad thing, I think it's great the city is encouraging people to do it, but for the love of all that is good, PLEASE start educating people about proper biking etiquette and laws and ENFORCE them. I can't even count how many times I've seen cyclists run reds or stop signs. And rarely do I see cyclists signal before making a turn.

Edit:

I think getting bikes licensed will be really hard. What about kids? Would they need licences too?

[Common sense]

That's just a start in my head. The next step is to make these cyclists registered cyclists. Once again, it does not make sense that these cyclists are allowed to be on the same road as 2000 pound vehicles, without any sort of verification that they are capable. Look at the moron who had 5/6 beers on the patio, and biked off. Why is he legally allowed to bike on the roads? Am I the only one who sees this as rational?

[inane]

That's just a start in my head. The next step is to make these cyclists registered cyclists. Once again, it does not make sense that these cyclists are allowed to be on the same road as 2000 pound vehicles, without any sort of verification that they are capable. Look at the moron who had 5/6 beers on the patio, and biked off. Why is he legally allowed to bike on the roads? Am I the only one who sees this as rational?

[MillerGenuineDraft]

The question is - what law enforcement official is going to stop a cyclist when the bigger ticket (and catch) is in the drunk driver? Again, I offer this solution - since we want to treat cyclists the same way as other motor vehicle users, fine them in the same regard.