Share the Road

1101113151621

Comments

  • sionisais wrote: »
    Compared to public transport however, they are very inefficient and, when you take servicing and cost of replacement/depreciation into account, expensive too.

    Depends on how you measure efficiency.

    My car goes when I want it to go, and is ready to leave when I am. I don't have to wait in street corners for my car to arrive, and I don't have to worry about missing my car if something comes up at work when I'm about to leave.

    My car makes me pretty efficient - public transport would be vastly less efficient for me.

    If you're talking about fuel efficiency, then we agree that a single-user car is less fuel efficient than a reasonably-used bus. In terms of cost, we had a survey a couple of years ago at work: "if there was a bus from X to Y, that cost $z, would you use it to get to work".

    I did the cost analysis comparing the bus to my current car (depreciation and all) and the bus was only modestly cheaper, assuming that by using the bus I wouldn't need to have the car. And it was enormously less convenient.
  • RooKRooK Admin Emeritus
    Depends on how you measure efficiency.

    My car goes when I want it to go, and is ready to leave when I am. I don't have to wait in street corners for my car to arrive, and I don't have to worry about missing my car if something comes up at work when I'm about to leave.

    That is true sometimes. Personal vehicles become massively less convenient when the destinations do not have parking available. Or, annoyingly worse, when there is parking available technically, but in practicality is difficult and time-consuming to obtain. Public transit or hired car are my preferred modes for going to the zoo, or museum, or playhouse, or arena, or anything downtown.
  • RooK wrote: »
    That is true sometimes. Personal vehicles become massively less convenient when the destinations do not have parking available. Or, annoyingly worse, when there is parking available technically, but in practicality is difficult and time-consuming to obtain. Public transit or hired car are my preferred modes for going to the zoo, or museum, or playhouse, or arena, or anything downtown.

    Sure. When I lived in London, the most efficient form of transport was my bicycle. A car would have been completely useless, because I never went anywhere that had parking. Even had there been parking available at my house and at my office, it wouldn't have been much faster to drive (at some times of day, it would have been slower to drive).

    My bicycle and my car both share the feature that they accommodate themselves to my schedule and route. For me, that's a big deal, as my schedule is rather variable. If you're in a large enough city with good enough public transport, then public transport can come somewhere close to approximating this (if you have buses / trains / trams / whatever going in all directions every 3-5 minutes, then you don't have to think about schedules - you just turn up and get on the first vehicle going the right way), but most towns can't achieve this. (And it all falls apart outside peak hours when the frequency goes down).

  • It didn't look like that was a road the tanker should have been on at all (at least, not where he turned into) - he couldn't even manage the turn staying on the road, even if the cyclist hadn't been there he'd have been at fault for mounting the curb.
  • Dave WDave W Shipmate
    He's turning in to make a delivery at a gas station, like this - here's Street View (from August 2017, apparently before the bike lane was added and Mobil took over the station.) I don't think there's any better way in than the one he took.
  • edited July 2018
    The trucker is at fault. Period. Though sdding bike lanes with paint and without accrual barriers is pretend infrastructure. Which blames stupid traffic design. Very bad. I travel through a number of areas where the safe thing to do is to leave the painted bike lane and fully block traffic.
  • The "right hook" is common, regardless of whether there is a bike lane or not. The truck driver is an idiot - driving over the curb proves it - but if you read the comments, the whole thing was the cyclist's fault for being in the trucker's blind spot. I'm all for defensive cycling, but it clearly hasn't occurred to them that the trucker likely passed the bike first and then turned - which happens all the time with all sorts of vehicles to every cyclist anywhere and everywhere - and just didn't fucking care.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    The "right hook" is common, regardless of whether there is a bike lane or not. The truck driver is an idiot - driving over the curb proves it - but if you read the comments, the whole thing was the cyclist's fault for being in the trucker's blind spot. I'm all for defensive cycling, but it clearly hasn't occurred to them that the trucker likely passed the bike first and then turned - which happens all the time with all sorts of vehicles to every cyclist anywhere and everywhere - and just didn't fucking care.

    If you make the mistake of reading the comments on any of these things, it's always the cyclist's fault. You could be asleep in bed when a a drugged up car thief drove a stolen sports car into your house knocking down a wall and crushing your bike in the process and the comments would still say it was your fault.
  • Dave W wrote: »
    He's turning in to make a delivery at a gas station, like this - here's Street View (from August 2017, apparently before the bike lane was added and Mobil took over the station.) I don't think there's any better way in than the one he took.
    But, given the turn (with or without a bike lane) a truck that size is almost never going to be able to make that turn - possibly by coming from the other direction and crossing the traffic. Which means that first off it's the wrong vehicle to be delivering to that location, which places fault with the trucking company even before the driver (who is also clearly at fault for not noticing he passed a bike, and then checking where the bike was before committing to the turn).
  • RooKRooK Admin Emeritus
    edited July 2018
    Not to muss up the refined contemplation of logistics architecture, but...

    1. Locations for gas stations are not always able to be modified to optimize ingress of tractor-trailers.
    2. Fuel delivery tractor-trailers are not standardized, but also not under the control of the station asking for a fuel delivery.
    3. The test fleet I work with (of the large truck manufacturing company is work for) has a standardized review of "curb check" force inputs - because it's really, really common.
  • Dave WDave W Shipmate
    Dave W wrote: »
    He's turning in to make a delivery at a gas station, like this - here's Street View (from August 2017, apparently before the bike lane was added and Mobil took over the station.) I don't think there's any better way in than the one he took.
    But, given the turn (with or without a bike lane) a truck that size is almost never going to be able to make that turn - possibly by coming from the other direction and crossing the traffic.
    Uh, no.
    Which means that first off it's the wrong vehicle to be delivering to that location, which places fault with the trucking company
    This is starting to get ridiculous. I hardly think it's reasonable to expect Mobil to route special trucks to avoid such a minor scrub against a curb.
    even before the driver (who is also clearly at fault for not noticing he passed a bike, and then checking where the bike was before committing to the turn).
    I agree that the driver was at fault.

    I regularly drive through a tight intersection shared by large trucks making difficult turns. But the truck drivers go slow enough and pay sufficient attention so that if it looks like there's a problem, they can stop and everyone has a chance to move over a bit. Had this driver behaved similarly, the cyclist could have simply rolled back a few feet.

  • The right of way is for the truck driver to stop and let the cyclist go through. Not so?
  • Dave W wrote: »
    Dave W wrote: »
    He's turning in to make a delivery at a gas station, like this - here's Street View (from August 2017, apparently before the bike lane was added and Mobil took over the station.) I don't think there's any better way in than the one he took.
    But, given the turn (with or without a bike lane) a truck that size is almost never going to be able to make that turn - possibly by coming from the other direction and crossing the traffic.
    Uh, no.
    OK, so there's a central curb that would need to be removed to allow a left turn into the station. It wouldn't be that big a job to make the entrance more suitable for trucks that size if the gas station owners/truck company feel it's necessary to use a truck that big. Although, it seems likely that there would be lots of places in an urban setting where trucks that size would struggle to make turns. We don't have any trucks that size in the UK (or at least, if we do they're rare enough I've never seen one), but it's common for large vehicles doing a left turn (equivalent to that one for countries where we drive on the left) to move into the right hand lane first, and cut across the left lane to avoid going over the curb - which of course requires both the truck driver and other road users to be aware of what is going on.
  • Dave WDave W Shipmate
    Knowing there was a bike lane on the right, I would have thought it was the driver's responsibility to make sure it was clear before turning across it.

    I can understand that visibility is probably a lot worse for a large truck than for a car, but trucks have the same blind spots on the highway and still generally manage to avoid colliding with cars running next to them.
  • You couldn't make this crap up. Pedestrians, flags, friendly wave and WTF.

    Does this sort of madness exist near any shipmates?
  • The flags are very common in Japan, where they are used by school children crossing roads. I never saw an adult use them (except teachers/other adults accompanying said groups of children).
  • To my mind the flag is saying to drivers "hang your heads in shame: we have to use these because you are so crap at driving". But they won't necessarily get the point. And if they did literally hang their heads they wouldn't be able to see so well anyway.
  • You couldn't make this crap up. Pedestrians, flags, friendly wave and WTF.

    Does this sort of madness exist near any shipmates?

    I've never seen that sort of thing, but during the long nights of winter when you get people in barely-visible dark clothes crossing the road in front of you I think they'd be an excellent idea. The sooner you see someone, the sooner you can start braking for them.
  • balaambalaam Shipmate
    The dark clothing is because shops sell little else.
  • The first instruction is "Push button for lights". If the drivers ignore the red light why should they pay attention to a yellow flag, or am I misunderstanding something?
  • When I'm being a pedestrian or am on a bicycle, the only relevant information obtained from traffic lights is how car drivers are going to react. The lights are basically suggestions for drivers unless there is another car stopped in front of them. Yellow lights mean race through the intersection. Red means stop unless they are watching the cross traffic light which means they start going through intersections before it changes to green.

    I'd like to replace the flags with something else. Maybe light sabres?
  • balaam wrote: »
    The dark clothing is because shops sell little else.

    Hi-viz vests can be had for under a fiver, and jackets for about ten quid. Mind you I sometimes think that there are pedestrians and cyclists who believe that drivers who can’t see them cannot hit them either.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    The Rogue wrote: »
    To my mind the flag is saying to drivers "hang your heads in shame: we have to use these because you are so crap at driving". But they won't necessarily get the point. And if they did literally hang their heads they wouldn't be able to see so well anyway.

    This. Drivers need to understand they are guests on the road, allowed only when insured and under the control of a person who has passed a compet
    sionisais wrote: »
    balaam wrote: »
    The dark clothing is because shops sell little else.

    Hi-viz vests can be had for under a fiver, and jackets for about ten quid. Mind you I sometimes think that there are pedestrians and cyclists who believe that drivers who can’t see them cannot hit them either.

    I have these things called "headlamps". They're really good for sporting things that don't or can't wear hi-viz, like fallen branches, sheep, road furniture, pedestrians. Really if we think people need to wear personal protection equipment just to go for a walk we're letting motorists set the agenda far too far.
  • More than half of drivers don't look before turning right (that'd be left in the UK and Australia). Can't trust them. Which is probably why the tanker drunk demolished the bicycle.
  • What KarlLB said. Drivers should be actively LOOKING for road hazards and other users.
  • RossweisseRossweisse Shipmate, Hell Host
    What KarlLB said. Drivers should be actively LOOKING for road hazards and other users.

    So should bicyclists. So should anyone who uses the road - or the sidewalk.


  • Rossweisse wrote: »
    What KarlLB said. Drivers should be actively LOOKING for road hazards and other users.

    So should bicyclists. So should anyone who uses the road - or the sidewalk.

    I get told passive aggressive things all the time when I'm on a bicycle, things like "thanks for stopping" or asking about whether I'm activity looking for hazards. I usually ignore such things, but lately, I say "thank YOU for stopping". Because there's a huge power and lethality imbalance when a cyclist is dealing with cars. And because there's huge power and lethality imbalance, cyclists, where they are forced to ride among cars ALWAYS DO scan and actively look for hazards unless their suicidal or doing meth. Because they are scared if the cars, and they can seriously injure and kill. In a car, you're the bull in the china shop, and you're asking a lot for cyclists to deal with you. Which is why I get really upset when a car blocks the cycling lane or path "just for a minute", totally unacceptable because it forces me either into traffic or on to the sidewalk. Danger and risk.

    So if someone does something dangerous in a car, it's almost always much worse than what a cyclist might do and what a pedestrian might do.

    Pedestrians - when the infrastructure forces cyclists to mix with them, "shared pathways", we know how vulnerable they are, because as cyclists we're pedestrians too as soon as we get off a bicycle. I am as cautious and respectful as possible. There is a ped problem at times, which is the pedestrian trying to dodge the cyclist by moving to one side and then the other. The only thing I do when this dance begins is to stop, and tell them what is better to do, which is to be predictable and stay on course, allowing the cyclist to navigate around them. It doesn't happen much because I go barely faster than walking when there's a vulnerable pedestrian. The key thing for a pedestrian is to be predictable and stay on course, allowing the cyclist to navigate around them. But there are people who try to pat others' dogs without asking too and sometimes they get bitten because of it.
  • RossweisseRossweisse Shipmate, Hell Host
    I try to keep to the right and be predictable as a pedestrian. Too many cyclists just don’t care.
  • edited August 2018
    deleted

  • You have had exactly how many bad experiences with cyclists as a pedestrian? I get you've got a "thing" about cyclists and consider them terrible people. But there are quite a large number of links about the relative risks, example from which I quote:
    That means for every mile you walk, you are 60 times more likely to be killed or seriously injured by a driver than a cyclist.

  • RooKRooK Admin Emeritus
    I get you've got a "thing" about cyclists and consider them terrible people.

    I get that you project your own meanings onto other people's words and are terrible at considering alternative possible tones. But I can hardly wait for Rossweisse to correct your herself.
  • RuthRuth Admin Emeritus
    I've had enough bad experiences with cyclists whizzing by me on the sidewalk instead of using the separated bike lane that I gave up walking the 1.8 miles to work and drive instead. It's too aggravating and too frightening; since I have mal de debarquement syndrome, my ability to keep my balance is challenged enough without the cyclists on the sidewalk.
  • Jane RJane R Shipmate
    The first instruction is "Push button for lights". If the drivers ignore the red light why should they pay attention to a yellow flag, or am I misunderstanding something?

    Because of the way the human eye works. It's not particularly good at picking out details (except for a very small part of the retina called the foveal area) but it is highly efficient at detecting movement.

    I actually logged on to ask if anyone else has seen the trailer for the latest 'Johnny English' film, which takes hostility to cyclists to a new level... I thought that particular gag was in very poor taste, even for Rowan Atkinson.
  • Which is why I get really upset when a car blocks the cycling lane or path "just for a minute", totally unacceptable because it forces me either into traffic or on to the sidewalk.
    I'm sure you can justify passing the car leaving the maximum space for the regular users of which ever part of the road you choose (pedestrians on the sidewalk, cars on the other side), even if that results in you hitting a wing mirror or leaving a scratch down the side of the car.

  • Ruth wrote: »
    I've had enough bad experiences with cyclists whizzing by me on the sidewalk instead of using the separated bike lane that I gave up walking the 1.8 miles to work and drive instead.
    As has been said, cyclists will use suitable dedicated cycle routes (excluding a few who will insist on their right to be on the road with other wheeled road users). When they ride on the sidewalk this almost always indicates that the dedicated bike lanes are not suitable - that maybe simply not going where the cyclist needs to go, but more often that they are inadequately maintained (too much rubbish, pot holes), blocked by parked cars, or ignored by drivers so that they are very dangerous places to be. Pedestrians simply complaining about cyclists in their safe space does nothing, what is needed are pedestrians joining the cyclists in campaigning for proper infrastructure for cyclists - whether that means provision of new bike lanes, maintenance of existing bike lanes or enforcement of restrictions on vehicle access to bike lanes. This isn't something that affects cyclists only, as you note when the only option cyclists have is to mix with pedestrians or motor traffic this affects everyone.

  • We found ourselves sharing a convential road, one lane in each direction, clear centre markings, with an oncomiing motorcycle who was eighteen inches over the line and probably travelling at 80mph (20 mph over the limit) . He wasn't slowing down or pulling in for anyone, so if we hadn't moved over a foot or two he would have been a statistic and it wouldn't have done us any good either.

    <expletive deleted>
  • RossweisseRossweisse Shipmate, Hell Host
    You have had exactly how many bad experiences with cyclists as a pedestrian? I get you've got a "thing" about cyclists and consider them terrible people. ...

    Hardly. As I have noted here on several occasions, I used to be a bicycle commuter myself. Of course, I was always well aware of the laws of physics, and I even obeyed stop signs and other traffic laws because it’s the right thing to do. I never tried to share a sidewalk with pedestrians, because it’s (a) illegal, and (b) dangerous.

    For the last few years, I’ve had Stage IV breast cancer; it’s metastasized to my spine and pelvis, and I’m no longer able to safely ride a bicycle. I walk when I can, using a cane, and drive when I must. I’m discouraged by the number of cyclists who thumb their noses at both common courtesy and common sense. (And yes, I know there are many terrible drivers. That’s not what we’re talking about right now.)

    I’ve had many close calls with cyclists while walking on sidewalks: around the United States, in Britain, in France, and in Japan. All it would take would be for one of them to knock me over to cripple me for life and send me to assisted living.

    All I’m asking from cyclists is the same courtesy I show them when I’m behind the wheel. Sadly, it seems to be a rare trait.

  • It's "rare trait" I'm asking about. There are people who misbehave in every crowd, however the statistics show that cyclists as a general group follow the rules about as much as car drivers do. With studies showing that cyclists disobey rules and laws when mixing with cars if they perceive a safety risk for themselves, and that they feel that the risks for themselves as cyclists are much more significant than someone inside a several thousand pound metal box. I've thought a problem with driving is that it is inherently frustrating to feel delayed and that driving in traffic is by its nature unpleasant, that cycling is often not taken seriously as a commuting method by many drivers: "sure I'm blocking the bike land, but I'll only be a minute".

    I'm a driver too, and I see risky behaviour whatever my transport is mode (cyclist, pedestrian, driver, passenger). The risks toward the most vulnerable excite me the most.
  • RossweisseRossweisse Shipmate, Hell Host
    I guess I shouldn’t have expected anything but more what-about-ery in this thread. Based on observation, most cyclists disobey traffic laws whenever they feel like it. (“It slows me down to stop for signs!”) And people like me are in fact “the most vulnerable.” But go ahead and play the victim.
  • MMMMMM Shipmate
    I've said on these boards before that it's a real problem in London that a significant number of cyclists do not stop at red lights. I don't have any mobility issues but it is scary sometimes trying to cross the road even on a pedestrian light. And - not frequently but not that rarely- cyclists will cycle on the wrong side of a central reservation (there is one road I cross on the way to work where this seems to be a particular problem, although it might just seem that way because I cross that road frequently).

    Do bicycles have to be taxed and insured and cyclists have to undergo a test before being allowed on the road? And if not, what's the reason?

    MMM
  • RossweisseRossweisse Shipmate, Hell Host
    No, there are no taxes, insurance, or tests required to cycle anywhere one cares to venture.
  • MMM wrote: »
    Do bicycles have to be taxed and insured and cyclists have to undergo a test before being allowed on the road? And if not, what's the reason?

    MMM

    They tried licensing bicycles here, more than once. As soon as this is done, then we have issues of costs to run the licensing program, insurance than theft recovery. So it was run from a small licence fee and from general city revenue. This caused no end of upset as people said they didn't want to subsidize the program, the police found it a headache to enforce, and it also became a social justice problem. Notwithstanding that the subsidies to car driving are immense via externalizing and other environmental infrastructure costs.

    There's three main groups of cyclists here. Recreational cyclists, people with no other means of transport, people who have made a choice. It became clear that charging for licenses discriminated against the poor who can't afford any other means. The recreationalists and employed people who choose to cycle can afford the licences and they comply well with the programs. But the poor with no other choice don't. These are a diverse group, but they cycle because they cannot afford buses, and the bus system isn't efficient which is another motivation. So the police - who have been working quite well at engagement with various sub-groups in this community for about a decade - created a free registration service which is kept in a database, and they use this voluntary service to help with theft, less so with enforcement. Interviews with the police have indicated that, yes, they do have some traffic offences with cyclists, but the dominant offenders are drivers, related to speed, distracted driving and alcohol. That's our local story.

    The licencing for enforcement is a problem, with, as noted the poor not going to be able to afford the licences, traffic fines, which start at $300 for disobeying traffic signals, and they lose their jobs if jailed in lieu of paying. We have a bike co-op which has an agreement with the police and the garbage service that bicycles are refurbished and given away or sold if the person can afford. Last week 29 bicycles. Mixed inner city poor and New Canadians. Not enough to meet demand.

    Re testing, this was also tried through schools some decades ago. It was found that children could be trained and examined about safe riding, but it wasn't something that could be enforced.

    Re testing of adults, almost all adults have had drivers' education in schools which entitles them to get a learner licence one year before they would if they didn't take the course. So we know that adult cyclists know the car rules.

    One of the big disconnects with cycling is that there is a failure to understand in many jurisdictions that streets are car-dominated such that some of the ways to control traffic for cars make streets unsafe for cyclists. And road design causes people who might cycle to decide it is too dangerous to do so. Here, when they have car speed problems in residential neighbourhoods, they will put in stop signs at alternating blocks, such that ever 2nd block cars must stop and yield. For bicycles, coming to a full stop versus rolling slowly at walking pace requires 30% more energy to get going again. Which means that full stops are avoided when possible. Because there is resistance to legislate this (the Idaho stop), it means that cyclists vary in how well they manage this. Bicycles don't need to fully stop with foot down to be safe, and foot down impeded other road users. There is judgement required.

    We have to decide if we think people are basically going to take every advantage or are going to try to live well with others. We've understood that about 1 in 5 will do it wrong, and with encouragement and education we might bring it down to 1 in 10. So the membership in the cycling and walking advocacy groups is free here and funded by sponsorships and donation to the free bike valet parking (leave your bike like you would at a coat check, with a claim stub to get it back) at community events. All we can do is try to help.
  • RossweisseRossweisse Shipmate, Hell Host
    ...and any pedestrian who gets knocked over by a cyclist who feels entitled to take over the sidewalk is on her own.
  • jbohnjbohn Shipmate
    They tried licensing bicycles here, more than once. As soon as this is done, then we have issues of costs to run the licensing program, insurance than theft recovery. So it was run from a small licence fee and from general city revenue. This caused no end of upset as people said they didn't want to subsidize the program, the police found it a headache to enforce, and it also became a social justice problem. Notwithstanding that the subsidies to car driving are immense via externalizing and other environmental infrastructure costs.

    If there is a system for registering/licensing/etc. cars and those who drive them, why can't said system simply be extended to bicycles? From the technical perspective - no reason at all. Which leaves us with political will to do so. Of course there will be added costs, but those can be made up with license fees, as they are in the system as is..
    The licencing for enforcement is a problem, with, as noted the poor not going to be able to afford the licences, traffic fines, which start at $300 for disobeying traffic signals, and they lose their jobs if jailed in lieu of paying. We have a bike co-op which has an agreement with the police and the garbage service that bicycles are refurbished and given away or sold if the person can afford. Last week 29 bicycles. Mixed inner city poor and New Canadians. Not enough to meet demand.

    Again, how is this any different than for the poor who drive?
    One of the big disconnects with cycling is that there is a failure to understand in many jurisdictions that streets are car-dominated such that some of the ways to control traffic for cars make streets unsafe for cyclists. And road design causes people who might cycle to decide it is too dangerous to do so. Here, when they have car speed problems in residential neighbourhoods, they will put in stop signs at alternating blocks, such that ever 2nd block cars must stop and yield. For bicycles, coming to a full stop versus rolling slowly at walking pace requires 30% more energy to get going again. Which means that full stops are avoided when possible. Because there is resistance to legislate this (the Idaho stop), it means that cyclists vary in how well they manage this. Bicycles don't need to fully stop with foot down to be safe, and foot down impeded other road users. There is judgement required.

    The extra energy to start from a full stop is a cost of choosing that mode of transportation, just as the cost of gas is for motorists, or bus fare is for those on the bus. If that extra energy is cost-prohibitive, perhaps another mods of transport is a better idea.

  • jbohn wrote: »
    If there is a system for registering/licensing/etc. cars and those who drive them, why can't said system simply be extended to bicycles? From the technical perspective - no reason at all. Which leaves us with political will to do so. Of course there will be added costs, but those can be made up with license fees, as they are in the system as is..

    Cars are large, expensive objects that cost typically thousands or tens of thousands of dollars. Bicycles are small, and cost tens or hundreds of dollars.
  • RossweisseRossweisse Shipmate, Hell Host
    In a city in which I used to live, which does license bicycles, the cost was accordingly negligible - it's probably up to $10 by now. There was an additional benefit to registering, in that stolen or lost bikes were more easily reunited with their owners.
  • Rossweisse wrote: »
    In a city in which I used to live, which does license bicycles, the cost was accordingly negligible - it's probably up to $10 by now. There was an additional benefit to registering, in that stolen or lost bikes were more easily reunited with their owners.

    I've never had a whole bike stolen, although I've had pieces of several bikes stolen. And I suspect that if I drank enough to be capable of losing a bicycle, then I've drunk far too much to be attempting to use the bicycle at all. But perhaps some would consider that "benefit" worthwhile.
  • RossweisseRossweisse Shipmate, Hell Host
    Many of those who benefited from lost-bike assistance were children.
  • We have thousands of bicycles stolen here. The free "get my bike back" registration run by the police through an online portal is good if you can access the internet and have a bike with clear brandname and serial, and can take pictures of it. This does not work with all. But the kicker is that after this program was initiated, bikes were no longer being resold, they were being chopped into parts, and the metal sold as scrap by weight. A $100 or $2000 bicycle is worth $5 to $20 as scrap, so there is an industry of harvesting lots of bikes. The addictions to drugs feed the it. They've caught a few here and there. I always carry two u-locks and a cable, sometimes 3 u-locks, though I put a bike locker in at my main office so completely secure there.

    Don't know how injury insurance works elsewhere for bicycles. The road insurance here is gov't organized, mandatory, and all drivers, cyclists and peds are covered for injury and wages, and lawsuits are illegal. No fault insurance. It's paid out of vehicle insurance which is part of licensing a car. The proportion of injury caused by cars is almost all, and the peds and cyclists caused very little, so not worth even considering.
Sign In or Register to comment.