Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Rant: Cyclists in Vancouver


Recommended Posts

I, like many drivers who commute regularly, also shake my head at least once a day at an insane cyclist.

BUT.....

It is a law in Canada that ALL Canadians have access and use of ANY non private road. Since there is currently laws regulating motorized vehicles to the extreme, and hardly enforced (when is the last time you heard about someone receiving a ticket for not signalling properly?) cyclists are one of the last groups of people who are using our roadways without being unfairly and heavily regulated.

It is strange but when reading the Charter of rights and freedoms (1982)

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-15.html

and the Canadian Bill of Rights (1960)

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-12.3/page-1.html#h-1

It would seem that requiring motor vehicles to have registration and requiring minimum speeds and tolls to use some of these roads, as well as requiring licenses to use the roads is actually in violation of our constitution.

So as frustrating as some of the cyclists can be, it is their right to do so, and I for one am all about people embracing their rights and freedoms in this great country. So I am standing behind the bikers on this one, throw any ideas of increased regulation out the window.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Change in topic. Anyone else hate when cops do speed checks on Nordel way at the bottom of the hill right before the ramp to the highway? They're always there and I can't understand why they can't just leave the area alone, they cause traffic and make my travel 5-10 mins longer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I, like many drivers who commute regularly, also shake my head at least once a day at an insane cyclist.

BUT.....

It is a law in Canada that ALL Canadians have access and use of ANY non private road. Since there is currently laws regulating motorized vehicles to the extreme, and hardly enforced (when is the last time you heard about someone receiving a ticket for not signalling properly?) cyclists are one of the last groups of people who are using our roadways without being unfairly and heavily regulated.

It is strange but when reading the Charter of rights and freedoms (1982)

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-15.html

and the Canadian Bill of Rights (1960)

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-12.3/page-1.html#h-1

It would seem that requiring motor vehicles to have registration and requiring minimum speeds and tolls to use some of these roads, as well as requiring licenses to use the roads is actually in violation of our constitution.

So as frustrating as some of the cyclists can be, it is their right to do so, and I for one am all about people embracing their rights and freedoms in this great country. So I am standing behind the bikers on this one, throw any ideas of increased regulation out the window.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ignored your stupidity. My point is this whole discussion is based on the assumption cars have priority or are the main user. That's not true. Your stupid little example of something that's clearly illegal and in no way what I was trying to say was therefore ignored.

The people saying it's dangerous for 14 year olds to bike on streets--it's only dangerous because we let it be dangerous. People rant and rave about stupid cyclist this, and stupid cyclist that. Yes, there are plenty of stupid cyclists, but there are way more stupid drivers and stupid drivers kill. Stupid cyclist may hurt themselves, that's about it (yes, there are extreme examples but that's true the vast majority of the time).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. You're the one completely ignoring my point.

Using the roads is a privilege, not a right. If you can't or refuse to operate your vehicle in a way that complies with the rules of the road that privilege can and should be revoked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a recent drive (approx. 20 mins) I saw:

Drivers speeding 20+ over the speed limit, driver(s) talking on cell phone

Cyclists wearing no helmet, riding on the wrong side of the road, riding on the sidewalk, or all of them

A mother with children in tow j-walking across the street

What does this illustrate? There are a LOT of people who do not care enough or do not know enough to follow the rules of the road. It all ends up with good drivers like myself (no at-fault accident, not speeding tickets for 10+ years) paying higher insurance premiums to pay for the idiots that populate our roads. It's not until you are in a serious accicdent where someones life was at stake that you are thankful that you followed the rules of the road.

I had a cyclist cut across the road in front of me when I was garduating highschool. I wasn't speeding and was paying attention. I tried to stop, but I still hit the cyclist. It was a 7 year old kid who ended up in the hospital even though a helmet was worn. If I had been speeding or not paying attention, death would have been the likely outcome. What really irritates me are people who behave like the examples I gave. Someones gonna die because of those behavours, and GOOD people end up paying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is more room for automobiles for a few good reasons:

1.Size. Automobiles are bigger than bikes. They need more room.

2.# of automobiles being used at any given time in the city. Way more than bicycles.

3. Necessity for the city to function (trucks, deliveries, buses, taxis workers etc. etc.) Many people have jobs that require this form of transportation.

4.Distance. Generally speaking, automobiles have to go further than what could be expected from a cyclist. I currently live in Ladner and work downtown. Anyone who expects me to bike to work can get bent. I drive to a skytrain and go from there.

That's just 4 reasons off the top of my head. Arguing about who has more room is just silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not more room, more linear km's. my point simply that going from 99 to 98.5 percent of lanes dedicated to vehicles is not going to create gridlock as you hear from some... More cyclists equals more space for commercial traffic and those that must drive, it's a win win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure but. That wasn't my where my gripe was. I'm upset about how cyclists act like they own the road, swerve in and out of traffic carlessly, and refuse to use the dedicated bike lanes downtown and opt to use the sidewalk which inconviences the pedestrians. The bike lanes are there to stay, so they should be used and bikes need to stay off the sidewalks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a cyclist (not to work however, too dangerous) and I have to agree with this. I also think that cyclists should have to dismount and cross intersections in the crosswalk. Just yesterday I was driving home and Mr. shaky legs new bike rider decided he was in a car....veered (rather dangerously) between traffic to get to the front of the left turn lane at the lighted intersection on a red. Light turned green and the entire line of cars waiting to turn (it isn't a turning light) had to sit while he pushed off and got going. Again - he was totally unsteady and the cars couldn't navigate around him so he really slowed up traffic and was a hazard out there.

I'm all for cycling, but it has it's place. To become part of traffic - no. If that cyclist does lose it on a bit of gravel/whatever, then he's no match for the cars. Sure, some/most situations call for riders to be close to traffic...but I think they belong on the side of the road, where people can negotiate around them and go. When they try to integrate into traffic, it's dicey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...