Good use of police resources.....

Got stopped by the cops while biking to work today. Apparently I was too far from the curb!

Had a discussion about what " close as reasonably possible" meant. He threatened with a ticket, I countered with the fact that I get to determine what as close as reasonably possible means, not him, not the driver in the lane beside me.

I then also suggested that he should shadow me 4 cars back in the center lane for the remainder of my commute and then tell me if I was riding too far from the curb.

He then went on his merry way!

Good for you!

Commie bastards.

LOL I cop actually tried the too far from curb crap? Dumbass. Me thinks we need a city council that will tell the cops to obey the law, not make law up as they please.

We can't have bikes consuming the curb lane for obvious reason - including your own safety. I live on a 2-lane road with no shoulder and the regular bike teams seem to think they have a right to go three-wide while cars pile up behind them and pass dangerously on this very busy stretch. Everybody in the area has complained and now the RCMP patrol it regularly and ticket them for this dangerous behavior. I recently saw a bike pedalling on the centre of the median lane at rushour on Pembina. One would think that the hundred honks and verbage would have wised that fool up. Common sense should apply if the law doesn't. I'm guessing you were a foot or more from the curb - in which case you might as well have put up a pylon and closed the lane to traffic.

Jondo wrote:We can't have bikes consuming the curb lane for obvious reason - including your own safety. I live on a 2-lane road with no shoulder and the regular bike teams seem to think they have a right to go three-wide while cars pile up behind them and pass dangerously on this very busy stretch. Everybody in the area has complained and now the RCMP patrol it regularly and ticket them for this dangerous behavior. I recently saw a bike pedalling on the centre of the median lane at rushour on Pembina. One would think that the hundred honks and verbage would have wised that fool up. Common sense should apply if the law doesn't. I'm guessing you were a foot or more from the curb - in which case you might as well have put up a pylon and closed the lane to traffic.

Actually the HTA says " as close as reasonable practicable', which means I get to choose where I go in the lane.
Generally for me " as close as reasonably practicable" means in the right tire mark or about 1m from the curb. in this case I was further out to avoid some potholes and moving to the middle of the lane at the light ( which is the recommended procedure).

AFAIAC, if a car can pass me in my lane without having to go into the other lane, I'm too close to the curb.

Don't like it? You still have 2 other lanes. And yes I do ride in the median lane, but only when it's the proper lane to be in. I behave like a vehicle, I should be treated as a vehicle by other drivers.

any closer then 1 metre and you start running into the various drains and whatnot. Many times when biking I have had to hit those because a vehicle figured it was okay to be really close to me on the left hand side.

As for the riding 3 wide on the street, this is against the law so I have no issue with the RCMP ticketing for that. But riding "as close as resonably practical" is as Norberter states, up to the cyclist. Like Norberter I ride in the right tire mark or closer to the middle of the lane to be safe. Consider the fact that 1 metre is approximately a bit more than 3 feet and if a cyclist were to fall off their bike towards the curb, that 1 metre would mean my head would hit the curb right at my temple, so is this reasonable? If I am travelling too slow for your liking, as with any other vehicle on the road, pass on the left whether that be into another lane going the same way or wait until the oncoming lane is clear of traffic and pass as required. As for the cyclist travelling in the left median lane, consider the possibility s/he may have been preparing to turn left at the next available intersection.

Traveling too slow, be it a bicycle or a car, is bloody dangerous on its own. Some jurisdictions mandate minimum speed limits. Too bad we don't here. But then common sense does not seem to apply to Manitoba traffic laws...

I LOVE us versus them cyclist/driver debates this time of the year. Every single year.

We all trot out the same old lame arguments and no one is ever satisfied.

Perhaps we all need to recognize we don't have exclusive domain over the road we are traveling in the moment. Drivers have no business crowding cyclists. Cyclists have no business slowing down traffic.

That summed it up perfectly.

There is an old guy on a trike that rides on Pembina sometimes. Probably about 10 km/hr

I'm riding 30-35 km/hr. With traffic probably no more than 50 km/hr. That's not slowing down traffic.

St. Norberter, you figure you're the "average cyclist" out there? You figure all cyclists behave as you do? You know, follow all laws, stay right as much as reasonable, stay off sidewalks, etc...

I will accept your premise that you are an exceptional cyclist. However, in my experience, the vast majority of cyclists simply ignore traffic laws and do whatever they please on the roads and sidewalks of Winnipeg.

BTW, if you are occupying a traffic lane, riding at 30-35kmh, in a 50 or 60 kmh zone, that is slowing traffic...

If you are riding at 50kmh in a 50kmh zone good on you. How often do you keep up with the flow of traffic?

I was driving down Donald this morning when I encountered a cyclist just motoring along. I gave him a wide berth, as did most motorists. No problems.

As I approached Stradbrook, I slowed, with traffic, attempting to turn right. I was there waiting to turn when the cyclist blew by on the right and forced the car ahead of me, legally turning right in the right turn lane, to slam on his brakes.

Dude merely swerved right and kept on his merry way northbound Donald.

My point is this is very typical of cyclists.

Not all of us.....what I do if I am not turning is ensure that I am behind the turning vehicle, more or less near the centre of the rear and after he executes his right turn then I can blast forwards whilst moving to the right to allow the faster traffic to go past me.....makes sense to me, takes a bit of coordination but worth the effort. Of course there will always be knob motorists who could not care less if I or any other responsible cyclist is following the rules.

Now square all this with the fact that my dad got a ticket for going to slow and impedeing traffic. And one metre from the curb is far from reasonable.

I cycle and drive. I will obey the traffic laws in either case. I'm not going to ride 15 cm away from the curb at all times, but at the same time, I have to be aware of what's around me. I'm pretty reasonable and will shove over when cars approach with a good amount of time for them to see, and so far I've had zero problems. They appreciate me giving them a berth to move past.

No amount of traffic laws are going to protect me from the ever present laws of physics, so either blatantly disregarding laws and peeving off drivers, or getting into a pissing match with a 3-5000lb vehicle over " who's correct " on the roadway still ends up with me on the losing side, in a very horrible way. Just as I wouldn't do the same thing in my car with a dump truck, or any other piece of heavy equipment.

grumpy old man wrote:St. Norberter, you figure you're the "average cyclist" out there? You figure all cyclists behave as you do? You know, follow all laws, stay right as much as reasonable, stay off sidewalks, etc...

Unfortunately I'm not the average cyclist. Most ride on the sidewalks, filter on the right and blow red lights.

Unfortunately they give those of us that do obey the laws and act like a vehicle a bad name.

IF streets were safer and more accomidating then perhaps more cyclists would obey the laws and act like a vehicle.

grumpy old man wrote:BTW, if you are occupying a traffic lane, riding at 30-35kmh, in a 50 or 60 kmh zone, that is slowing traffic...

It's only slowing traffic if a) the traffic is moving at the speed limit or b) the traffic cannot see me early enough that they can't make a lane change to pass me. In majority of cases I don't slow traffic.

grumpy old man wrote:If you are riding at 50kmh in a 50kmh zone good on you. How often do you keep up with the flow of traffic?

Quite often actually. When I am in a diamond lane I am often exceeding the speed of traffic. And BTW I am often impeded by the slow speed of rush hour traffic.

grumpy old man wrote:I was driving down Donald this morning when I encountered a cyclist just motoring along. I gave him a wide berth, as did most motorists. No problems.

As I approached Stradbrook, I slowed, with traffic, attempting to turn right. I was there waiting to turn when the cyclist blew by on the right and forced the car ahead of me, legally turning right in the right turn lane, to slam on his brakes.

Dude merely swerved right and kept on his merry way northbound Donald.

My point is this is very typical of cyclists.

From your story, cyclist shouldn't have been in that lane as it is right turn only. Cyclist should have made a lane change to the median lane sometime before the intersection.

Jondo wrote:Now square all this with the fact that my dad got a ticket for going to slow and impedeing traffic. And one metre from the curb is far from reasonable.

Reasonable is subjective. What I consider reasonable is different than what you consider reasonable. I suspect you are not a cyclist.

Given the state of the roads in this city, one meter is more than reasonable. In some cases you need to ride on the far left side of the lane.

Want to experience in your car what cyclists experience with some of these roads? swap your tires for low profile's then inflate them to 60 psi, and replace your suspension with steel bars. Then drive down the curb lane all the way down pembina. Once your car is trashed you'll change your tune pretty quick.

Miz point wrote:Not all of us.....what I do if I am not turning is ensure that I am behind the turning vehicle, more or less near the centre of the rear and after he executes his right turn then I can blast forwards whilst moving to the right to allow the faster traffic to go past me.....makes sense to me, takes a bit of coordination but worth the effort. Of course there will always be knob motorists who could not care less if I or any other responsible cyclist is following the rules.

But you're not following the rules Blanche. You'd be dead wrong. It is illegal to pass on the right. It is illegal to go straight in a turning lane. It is illegal to change lanes in an intersection.

You should not be in the turning lane at all!

Ummm, who's the knob in this case?

grumpy old man wrote:

Miz point wrote:Not all of us.....what I do if I am not turning is ensure that I am behind the turning vehicle, more or less near the centre of the rear and after he executes his right turn then I can blast forwards whilst moving to the right to allow the faster traffic to go past me.....makes sense to me, takes a bit of coordination but worth the effort. Of course there will always be knob motorists who could not care less if I or any other responsible cyclist is following the rules.

But you're not following the rules Blanche. You'd be dead wrong. It is illegal to pass on the right. It is illegal to go straight in a turning lane. It is illegal to change lanes in an intersection.

You should not be in the turning lane at all!

Ummm, who's the knob in this case?

I think she is responding in general as opposed to the specific situation you described. If so, then she is doing nothing wrong.

She is describing a car turning right from a straight/right turn lane.

Car signals right turn, she moves to center of right hand lane. This is the correct and safest move as it prevents any following vehicles from executing a right turn while she is proceeding through intersection ( right hook).

Once clear of the intersection, she moves towards the right of the right hand lane, allowing faster traffic to pass.

I don't see where she indicates she made a lane change or where she is passing on the right.

Exactly. I did not specify a turning lane in my discourse GOM. I know as a driver and as a cyclist just what the rules of engagement are and I get pretty friggin fed up when I am cut off, threatened, cussed at etc...when I am following said rules as a cyclist. Seems to me many "four-wheelers" should go back and rewrite their driving exams.

Today for example I saw a semi trying to execute a right hand turn from Main onto Logan. For a semi to execute this turn he must move into the adjacent lane to his left in order to make the right. I counted six cars that pulled the sneaky move around him to the right when clearly his right turn signal had been engaged. The truck front would have been in clear sight with regard to the initialization of the right turn maneuver. I could see the frustration on his face from where I stood. If one was being tested for a driver's license and they pulled a boner move like that they would be flunked.

When I am operating a motor vehicle, like I was today, and I see a cyclist who will undoubtedly catch up to me as i am about to make a right hand turn I make sure I make eye contact with him before I execute that turn....yes, heaven for-bloody-bid I SLOW DOWN. It does not take much of an effort to be a good, conscientious and courteous driver or cyclist.

grumpy old man wrote:

Miz point wrote:Not all of us.....what I do if I am not turning is ensure that I am behind the turning vehicle, more or less near the centre of the rear and after he executes his right turn then I can blast forwards whilst moving to the right to allow the faster traffic to go past me.....makes sense to me, takes a bit of coordination but worth the effort. Of course there will always be knob motorists who could not care less if I or any other responsible cyclist is following the rules.

But you're not following the rules Blanche. You'd be dead wrong. It is illegal to pass on the right. It is illegal to go straight in a turning lane. It is illegal to change lanes in an intersection.

You should not be in the turning lane at all!

Ummm, who's the knob in this case?

You are for the simple fact that you are assuming wrongly what I was discussing. I was discussing defensive cycling from the POV of not being hit by a car making a right turn when I am going straight. I did not say I was in a turning lane. Christ. I never said I was passing on the right either but I have certainly had many motorists do that to me when I was rightfully occupying whatever lane it was that i needed at a specific time.

St Norberter wrote:

Jondo wrote:We can't have bikes consuming the curb lane for obvious reason - including your own safety. I live on a 2-lane road with no shoulder and the regular bike teams seem to think they have a right to go three-wide while cars pile up behind them and pass dangerously on this very busy stretch. Everybody in the area has complained and now the RCMP patrol it regularly and ticket them for this dangerous behavior. I recently saw a bike pedalling on the centre of the median lane at rushour on Pembina. One would think that the hundred honks and verbage would have wised that fool up. Common sense should apply if the law doesn't. I'm guessing you were a foot or more from the curb - in which case you might as well have put up a pylon and closed the lane to traffic.

Actually the HTA says " as close as reasonable practicable', which means I get to choose where I go in the lane.
Generally for me " as close as reasonably practicable" means in the right tire mark or about 1m from the curb. in this case I was further out to avoid some potholes and moving to the middle of the lane at the light ( which is the recommended procedure).

AFAIAC, if a car can pass me in my lane without having to go into the other lane, I'm too close to the curb.

Don't like it? You still have 2 other lanes. And yes I do ride in the median lane, but only when it's the proper lane to be in. I behave like a vehicle, I should be treated as a vehicle by other drivers.

I have no problem with what you say, I say good for you. I do have a problem with this on a very different level.
If you behave like a vehicle, and want to be treated as a vehicle then you should also be required to have insurance like a vehicle. Since the potential for catastrophic injury is very high on a bike in trafic. Just imagin what the rates would be like... Obviously car insurance wont subsidize you, they dont for motor cycles.
off on a tangent...
I would love to be able to ride a motor cycle to work and back every day, It would require way less gasoline. But the insurance rates are so prohibitive. I wonder why? maybe it is a conspiracy?
Jack rates up so high that people drive cars only and burn more gas, more gas burnt = more double taxes we pay = more polution. Therefor the NDP government and their public insurance monopoly = Non green, Non progressive, archaic - pro commie bastages.