Open letter to bicycling Santa

[guido911]

What ticks me off is that cyclists can use the street, but they do not carry liability insurance. If one of those idiot cyclists causes an accident, I guess the person(s) in the cars are SOL.

[Ed W]

quote:Originally posted by guido911

What ticks me off is that cyclists can use the street, but they do not carry liability insurance. If one of those idiot cyclists causes an accident, I guess the person(s) in the cars are SOL.

Somewhere up above I wrote that licensing for drivers was instituted because of the potential damage to people and property posed by motor vehicles.  While it's true that cyclists cause occasional injury and death, it's a very rare event.  Besides, the potential damage from 250 pounds of bicycle and rider (in my case, at least!) can't compare with the damage done by a ton or more of steel and glass, even at low speeds.

But you seem to imply that cyclists are exempt from responsibility for any damages they may cause.  We all know that's simply not true.  Riding a bicycle doesn't give any of us a 'get out of jail free' card.  If it did, the roads would be jammed with bicyclists.

Next.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Ed W

quote:Originally posted by guido911

What ticks me off is that cyclists can use the street, but they do not carry liability insurance. If one of those idiot cyclists causes an accident, I guess the person(s) in the cars are SOL.

Somewhere up above I wrote that licensing for drivers was instituted because of the potential damage to people and property posed by motor vehicles.  While it's true that cyclists cause occasional injury and death, it's a very rare event.  Besides, the potential damage from 250 pounds of bicycle and rider (in my case, at least!) can't compare with the damage done by a ton or more of steel and glass, even at low speeds.

But you seem to imply that cyclists are exempt from responsibility for any damages they may cause.  We all know that's simply not true.  Riding a bicycle doesn't give any of us a 'get out of jail free' card.  If it did, the roads would be jammed with bicyclists.

Next.

Not even close. How dead do you have to be to require insurance? A 250lb load moving at 25 mph is deadly. Try running into a wall and see. Somewhere in my past I remember talking to a jogger who was hit. It is not all that rare. And in the bigger picture even if the bicyclist is the only one hurt we all pay even if he has insurance. Just like we pay for smokers who are sure its their risk only. Absolutely no reason for a bicycle capable of negotiating city streets to not be insured. None.

Licensing may have been designed for cars but that is hardly a reason to not extend it to bikes that ride the city streets. You're logic is failing....

Next.

[Ed W]

quote:
It is not all that rare. And in the bigger picture even if the bicyclist is the only one hurt we all pay even if he has insurance. ...Absolutely no reason for a bicycle capable of negotiating city streets to not be insured. None.

Extending that logic, it would be reasonable to require insurance verification from anyone using the public way, motorists, cyclists, pedestrians, and presumably horseback riders.  Each is capable of inflicting some harm or damage, but the crux of the argument is how much    damage and how often.  If bicyclists were causing wide-spread harm, the state and the city would clearly act to mitigate that harm by enacting legislation.  This has not happened because such damages are (thankfully) rare.

I can think of two incidents over the last year in which a cyclist killed a pedestrian, yet the carnage inflicted by motorists surpasses that on an hourly basis.

Next.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Ed W

quote:
It is not all that rare. And in the bigger picture even if the bicyclist is the only one hurt we all pay even if he has insurance. ...Absolutely no reason for a bicycle capable of negotiating city streets to not be insured. None.

Extending that logic, it would be reasonable to require insurance verification from anyone using the public way, motorists, cyclists, pedestrians, and presumably horseback riders.  Each is capable of inflicting some harm or damage, but the crux of the argument is how much    damage and how often.  If bicyclists were causing wide-spread harm, the state and the city would clearly act to mitigate that harm by enacting legislation.  This has not happened because such damages are (thankfully) rare.

I can think of two incidents over the last year in which a cyclist killed a pedestrian, yet the carnage inflicted by motorists surpasses that on an hourly basis.

Next.

No points there. First, I don't agree with your extension of logic. I carry identification (a license). I am responsible for any damage I do and if I spent time jogging on public streets in traffic at 25mph I would be required eventually to be licensed and insured (besides getting my own talk show). If you own a horse that regularly walks on city roadways, I assure you it better be insured and licensed. Even my Schnauzer has a license tag and required to have shots.

You aren't making valid comparisons. If we had the number of bicyclists that they have in China that might be a good comparison. I'm sure someone will pull stats out to show injuries but this really is common sense. If you run with the big boys (semis, cars, motorcycles) you should be prepared for licensing, insurance and injury. Good luck with educating the public to just watch out for you. They can barely handle their own cars.

[Pete]

With gas prices, tempertures and tempers rising, bikes and cars seem to be coming into greater conflict.

A common complaint by motorists is bikes aren't registered or taxed, and should have no right to the road (ignoring the current vehicle statues in the Great State of Oklahoma which grant cyclists the same rights as motor vehicles - see HB2926 - http://www.tulsawheelmen.com/articles.php?article=27 )

Our friends at the Texas Bicycle Coalition with the help of a Canadian study figured out that bicyclists are actually subsidizing motorists.

www.malcolmfoster.com/CyclistsPayTheirShare.pdf

Follow this:

- 95% of cycling adults own automobiles, they pay registration and fuel taxes for an average of $700 a year per car same as every other motorist.

- It costs cities and counties over $1100 per vehicle per year to maintain streets and roads.

- The extra $400 comes from government's general funds, which are sales, property and income taxes. Taxes that are paid by everyone, including the 5% of cyclists who don't own cars. Even renters indirectly pay property taxes.

Given that most of us drive our cars many more miles per year than we ride our bikes, we're paying an average of 50 times more per mile traveled than a motorist.

In Oklahoma we pay about 35¢ a gallon in taxes on gasoline, a few cents less for diesel. That is not a sales tax. Even as the price of gas goes up, the tax remains the same. If road costs were truly reflected in the price of gas, we'd be paying over $6 a gallon for gas today.

Bicyclists, along with government, subsidizes motor vehicle usage.

So the next time you're confronted with the "taxes" issue, you've got the answer.

Motorists aren't mad. They're jealous.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Pete

With gas prices, tempertures and tempers rising, bikes and cars seem to be coming into greater conflict.

A common complaint by motorists is bikes aren't registered or taxed, and should have no right to the road (ignoring the current vehicle statues in the Great State of Oklahoma which grant cyclists the same rights as motor vehicles - see HB2926 - http://www.tulsawheelmen.com/articles.php?article=27 )

Our friends at the Texas Bicycle Coalition with the help of a Canadian study figured out that bicyclists are actually subsidizing motorists.

www.malcolmfoster.com/CyclistsPayTheirShare.pdf

Follow this:

- 95% of cycling adults own automobiles, they pay registration and fuel taxes for an average of $700 a year per car same as every other motorist.

- It costs cities and counties over $1100 per vehicle per year to maintain streets and roads.

- The extra $400 comes from government's general funds, which are sales, property and income taxes. Taxes that are paid by everyone, including the 5% of cyclists who don't own cars. Even renters indirectly pay property taxes.

Given that most of us drive our cars many more miles per year than we ride our bikes, we're paying an average of 50 times more per mile traveled than a motorist.

In Oklahoma we pay about 35¢ a gallon in taxes on gasoline, a few cents less for diesel. That is not a sales tax. Even as the price of gas goes up, the tax remains the same. If road costs were truly reflected in the price of gas, we'd be paying over $6 a gallon for gas today.

Bicyclists, along with government, subsidizes motor vehicle usage.

So the next time you're confronted with the "taxes" issue, you've got the answer.

Motorists aren't mad. They're jealous.

Spin. Weak spin at that. The assumption is you drive your car less because you ride your bike more than the average motorist, therefore you pay more per mile for road maintenance. I can use that logic too. My car weighs less than my neighbors suburban and he vacations more than I do. I'm so jealous.

[Ed W]

[/quote]

Spin. Weak spin at that. The assumption is you drive your car less because you ride your bike more than the average motorist, therefore you pay more per mile for road maintenance. I can use that logic too. My car weighs less than my neighbors suburban and he vacations more than I do. I'm so jealous.
[/quote]

Enlightenment dawns!  I understand now.  Facts - however interesting - are irrelevant.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Ed W

Spin. Weak spin at that. The assumption is you drive your car less because you ride your bike more than the average motorist, therefore you pay more per mile for road maintenance. I can use that logic too. My car weighs less than my neighbors suburban and he vacations more than I do. I'm so jealous.
[/quote]

Enlightenment dawns!  I understand now.  Facts - however interesting - are irrelevant.
[/quote]

I think we're at a stalemate. We've stated our positions, facts are not in evidence, and neither of us is moving. I wish you luck in your endeavor to educate the public and I'll watch carefully for you in traffic.[8D]