posted November 7, 2009
Roy Exum recently wrote "there are some motorists who apparently cannot understand cyclists have as much of a right to the roadway as automobiles." Although many cyclists in Chattanooga clearly share Mr. Exum's view, it is a ridiculous one.
First of all, automobile owners pay taxes that help keep the roads and streets repaired...bicycle owners do not (except as automobile owners).
Second, even Lance Armstrong can't pedal a bicycle more than about 35 to 40 mph, and area cyclists usually cruise at about 10 to 15. Why should automobiles have to slow to those speeds simply because some self-centered, inconsiderate cyclist thinks it's his/her 'right' to hold up the world while he/she enjoys their past-time?
To me, "share the road" means that if I'm driving an automobile I'll look out for cyclists and swerve over in my lane so as to give them as much clearance as possible (just in case they can't control their bike as well as they should).
Over a decade ago, when I regularly rode my bicycle on Chattanooga's streets, I read in Cycling magazine: "If you can't keep your bike on or very near that four-inch stripe on the edge of the street/road, then you have no business riding on public streets." Sounds like good advice to me. Try the battlefield, or the Riverwalk, etc.
If cyclists exercised as much consideration for motorists as they want motorists to show for them, this wouldn't be an issue, would it?
Paul E. Scates
Chattanooga
* * *
How many more cyclists have to be injured or killed before the law is changed and it prohibits them from riding on the same roads as motorized vehicles? No matter which vehicle is at fault when an automobile/bicycle accident occurs, the outcome will be the same, the cyclist will loose every time.
When most of us were growing up, our parents always told us not to ride our bikes on the roads. In today's world, there are 50 to 100 times (or greater) the amount of automobile traffic on the roads than there was then. What in the world would make cyclists think that it's safer on the roads now just because they are legally allowed and they're wearing spandex and a flimsy helmet?
If changes aren't made, the accidents will keep happening and cyclists will continue to be injured or die. All we need is some common sense.
I am not quite sure who made the following quote but it seems appropriate. "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Tom Donelson
Hixson
* * *
As a motorist, pedestrian, and cyclist, I have seen plenty of
misbehavior from all three camps and no single party should be blamed
more than others. I see cyclists who weave through lanes and don't
wear helmets, motorists who don't signal or drive too fast for
conditions and pedestrians who jaywalk or ignore crosswalk signals.
Further, your callous disregard for the facts makes your assertions
laughably fallacious.
First, your claim that drivers have a priority over bikes because they
"pay taxes" is simply ridiculous. Everyone pays taxes in one way or
another. Automobile-related taxes are not necessarily set aside for
roadway maintenance. These taxes, like nearly all others, are simply
deposited into the state's general fund and apportioned by the
legislature for the following fiscal year (see Tennessee Code
9-4-301).
Second, your arguments about "sharing the road" are also erroneous. For many people I know, cycling isn't just a pastime, it's also a
means of conveyance to work, school, or necessary errands. A fortiori, the state's vehicle code says that autos and bikes have equal rights to use the public streets together (see TCA 55-8-172).
And to Mr. Donelson: if bikes were to be banished from public streets,
I suppose you would want them relegated to the sidewalk, which is an
utterly inappropriate place. Aside from the presence of pedestrians
creating narrow clearances, sidewalks are simply not designed with
wheeled traffic in mind. Hence the term "walk" in the final syllable. Their surfaces are also prone to cracking or spalling due to tree
roots underneath and road salt from above. These can destroy the
smoothness of the surface and makes bicycle riding on the sidewalk
impractical. The presence of shattered glass and grooves--usually for drainage or aesthetics--present further hazards to cyclists on
sidewalks, which is why many states' bicycle laws discourage the use
of such vehicles on sidewalks.
Lucas S. McNeeley, UTC Graduate Student in Public Administration.
* * *
I've held off making any comment about cyclists on our roads, but the leaders of Chattanooga, with 'common sense', needs to step forward and offer alternatives. If cyclists continue to assume that the rules of the road belong to them then we will continue see accidents involving cyclists and cars...not a good choice.
Take for example on Tuesdays on Reeds Lake Road off Mountain Creek. You could see well over 20 and most times more cyclists coming off the hill onto Reeds Lake all grouped-up and flying around the curve at the golf course. All it would take is for one cyclists to wreck, and it would be like the domino effect. Mix a car with the accident; well, you've got the picture. It's not the Tour.
However it doesn't compare to the cyclists flying down the W Road in the mornings. We used to live on Signal, and I'd leave early in the mornings to beat the traffic. During the summer there would be anywhere from 5 - 10 cyclists flying down the W. Could you give them the three feet clearance? No, not on the W. If you got too close at the bottom, you got the finger, real classy. Basically anywhere on the mountain at that time most cyclists were total jerks and didn't obey any laws.
We live most of the year in Gulf Shores and Chattanooga in the summer. The leaders of Gulf Shores and Orange Beach have developed bike paths and trails. Before on Hwy 180 or Fort Morgan Road it was littered with crosses of cyclists that tempted the tourists to hit them. Guess who lost? The paths work, and the trails are great. I ride everyday knowing that no car is after my rear asset.
Yes, it cost money, and yes, it takes leadership to force both sides to come together. But look at the consequences if you don't. I really don't think you can ride a bike if you're six feet under. And I don't think you want to be the one who hits a cyclist. Come on Chattanooga get it together. Look at what Portland, OR did.
Michael McClure
Gulf Shores, AL
* * *
I have the "right" to use a horse drawn carriage on a public road. TCA 55-9-401. But that doesn't mean I should take it up Lookout Mountain, Signal Mountain Cagle Mountain or the W road where drivers of motor vehicles would suddenly encounter me around a curve going very slowly as my horse tries to climb the mountain (he's a little old) or suddenly run up on me as I meander down (taking in the sights). Oh, but I have the right, so I can and will.
It's too bad if I hold up traffic or cause vehicles to have to dangerously try to pass me on a double yellow curve endangering me and them. They can just keep behind me til we get to the top. What's the rush? I have the right. Exercise your right with discretion and courtesy as to where you ride your bicycle or take your horse drawn carriage.
John Don Cooter Smithson
* * *
Mr. Lucas S. McNeeley,
Perhaps you could cite the section and page in the Tennessee driver's handbook that states when a slow moving vehicle has three vehicles backed up behind it, it is to pull over and let those pass. Perhaps you could also find it in the Tennesse code and cite that for us, as well.
Macel Holloway
Mother of teens who have recently studied for their learners permits and drivers licenses
* * *
I remember when I would ask my flight instructor if something was legal in flying. If it was legal but also fool hardy he would say, “You can do it legally but you might wind up legally dead if you do.” I think this logic applies to some of the discussion here. Just because you can do something legally doesn’t mean you should.
However, I believe legally the bikes can be on the road as many on this site have pointed out. I really enjoy watching the Chattanooga Bike Club riders pass in front of my house. The road I live on is semi-rural and a good place to ride. My complaint is that many of the riders I encounter don’t follow basic traffic laws. For example, at the end of my road there is a stop sign, and I very rarely see bike riders stop for this sign (they just make their turn onto the other road). Is this a given if they don’t see traffic on the other street? Just asking.
Also, I believe all vehicles on the road should be taxed and should have to display a license tag. We make owners of all sorts of vehicles do this, and I don’t see a reason for exempting people who legally enjoy the road.
Linda McDonald
* * *
There is a very simple answer to the bike situation. Charge the bike riders a fee to operate their bikes on the highways. It doesn't matter whether they pay taxes for their cars; this has nothing to do with riding a bicyle. Does a fellow that pays taxes to drive his car on the highways have the right to drive a motorcycle without paying a fee? Absolutely not.
This way the fees from the bicycles can be used to make and create bike trails, and all this arguing would be over. But no. Most of the people that ride the bikes are too special to be made to pay like everyone else does.
The bike riders not agreeing to this only proves they aren't interested in riding where it is safe. It proves they are only interested in harrassing the drivers on the roads that do pay to drive.
Bud Mansel
Bud9391@wmconnect.com
* * *
Those who rest on their rights forfeit them.
Anna Scholze
* * *
This past Saturday at 12 p.m. two cyclist, wearing what appeared to be black Krystal corporate Spandex uniforms with a big Krystal logo on the back, were riding side by side and blocking the right lane on Dayton Blvd. south. They "snubbed" their noses at automobiles blowing their horns and trying to get around them.
I sincerely hope that these two were not associated with Krystal as this would not be good for their public image. I have made two calls to Krystal and have received no response yet. I can't imagine why cyclist wonder why many of us have a bad attitude toward them.
Bob Bogart
quasi17@comcast.net
* * *
I am a fanatic cyclist. I ride my bike wherever I choose. Sometimes rural. But most times in the city and toward downtown. I ride in a lawful manner. When I am riding upon the roadway and it appears I am holding up traffic, I pull to the right side of the road to let folks pass just like any other slow mover should do. I abide by traffic laws and indicate direction change with clear hand signals. I ride to the right side of my lane as long as it is safe for me to do so. I am always on the look out for pedestrians, motorists and other bikes. I generally wear a bright colored jersey. I use head and tail lamps in low light.
I ride my bike for recreation, exercise, work and to run errands. In spite of being as careful as I can and courteous as I can, some folks just don't want to see me on the road.
I'm also a motorist, and driving was part of my profession for many years.
I have been a witness to cyclists who break traffic laws and do stupid dangerous things. But I'm an excellent driver, and I deal with it without getting upset. I've seen much more irrational, stupid reckless behavior committed by motorists. But I'm an excellent driver so I don't get bent out of shape.
A lot of the "concerned motorists" that write these foolish opinion articles are in fact just selfish motorists who have that same dangerous arrogance we've all dealt with while descending Monteagle Mountain on I-24. Everyone has a story of trying to come off the mountain in the rain and having some arrogant idiot driving an 18 wheeler about 1 foot off your rear bumper while you're going as fast as you can safely go. You've got the family in the car, and this fool won't back off cause he has weight and gravity on his side and he's in a hurry to get nowhere. Remember him the next time you're approaching a cyclist and you get all bent out of shape because you've got the horse power and weight, and you're running late for cocktails or church or whatever and that darn cyclist is on your road and in your way.
Bicycles ain't going away folks. They're becoming more popular and necessary every day. Actually they've been around a lot longer than your gas guzzlers.
Fact Check:
The very first automobile crash recorded in the U.S. was in New York City in 1896. A car collided with a bicycle. Who would have thought?
Nationwide the highest number of cyclists killed in a year was 1,003 in 1975.
In 2008 there were 716 cyclists killed in the United States which was 1.9 % of 37,261 total traffic deaths.
There were 4 cyclists killed in Alabama, 20 in Georgia and 7 in Tennessee.
In addition to cyclists killed in 2008, there were 4,378 pedestrians killed by motorists. Darn pedestrians got no business being outside.
The source for this is the National Center for Statistics and Analysis National Highway Transportation Safety Administration.
The Bottom Line:
Can you get injured or killed riding a bicycle in Chattanooga? Sure you can. So be careful. Can you get injured or killed as a pedestrian in Chattanooga? Absolutely. So be careful. Can you get injured or killed as a motorist in Chattanooga? Very much so. So be careful.
Can you kill or injure others as a motorist in Chattanooga? Tragically yes. So be more careful.
Is Chattanooga a bicycle friendly city? No, but I'm going to ride my bicycle anyway.
Kelley G. Miller
milkel4@hotmail.com
* * *
Apparently information about the role of bicycles in this car dominated community has not been received by our community at large. Any time any bicycle topic comes up the very same arguments come up. It has happened quite a few times right here on the Chattanoogan. Is anybody listening?
The argument of taxes has been refuted many, many times as one of the above responders did so well. This should be laid to rest and never be mentioned again. If you have a problem with bicycles, come up with other gripes; this one doesn't play. Roads are paid mostly by general funds by taxpayers. Owners of cars must pay more in taxes (at the gas pump) and registration because of the immense cost that taxpayers must incur to subsidize their use. Bicycle users are not expected to share in the cost because cost of cycling is nominal, and the savings are immense. Put more people on bikes, and the cost of road maintenance will go down. The cost of the effects of air pollution goes down. The cost of our nation securing our oil supply goes down. The cost of health care goes down. Bikers are saving taxpayers money in many, many ways. When the numbers increase, the benefits will become more and more obvious.
There are always two ways of looking at a situation. There is the view, as the car driver noted, that for cyclists to expect motorists to travel around them in a safe and lawful way is self-centerness on the part of the cyclists. But it could be just as easily (and legally) be shown that it is the self-centerness of the driver to expect to be exempted in safe (and lawful) driving practices in considering other road users.
And yes, cyclists have been greatly known at times to be inconsiderate and unlawful. I strongly encourage cyclists that I know to ride safely. But we have to acknowledge that to use a 40 pound (on the heavy side) vehicle that is human powered unsafely is not the same as using a 2000 pound motorized vehicle capable of great speed unsafely. Riding bicycles on the streets is not inherently dangerous. It is the cars that make it dangerous. That puts a greater responsibility on motorists to make sure they are safe.
Car drivers talk about the inconvenience that cyclists cause. Cyclists talk about how their very lives are a stake by unsafe drivers. In Chattanooga, we as a community have not accepted the value of people riding bicycles or these arguments would not even be brought up. Weighing convenience against the very lives of others is absurd.
But the value of bike riding is too great for even the most hard headed car enthusiast to deny forever. Bicycles will become a more and more prominent form of transportation. There is no stopping it. It is part of the solution for many of the issues our community face. We cannot forever deny a cheap, easy solution because of personal ingrained habits of the few individuals.
The only question that remains to be seen is how many lives must be taken, how much blood is to be shed, before we are all accepting of bicycles and become responsible and safe drivers (of cars and bikes).
Colleen Carboni
* * *
Every right comes with responsibilities. Unfortunately, the history of the U.S. the past several decades has been the increasingly shrill and unreasonable claim of 'rights' by those unwilling to shoulder the accompanying responsibilities.
Bicyclists in the 80's and 90's (when I was riding) accepted that the sensible and safe place to ride was on the edge of the road. Amazingly, we still enjoyed riding, and mostly without any encounters with motorized vehicles. I didn't realize that bicyclists today are "unable" to do that.
But then, we attended schools before they taught us we should have a hyper-inflated "self esteem" simply because we took up space and could fog up a mirror. We didn't yet realize that our own pleasurable pursuits could qualify as a noble and heroic 'cause.'
Paul E. Scates
* * *
Mr. Scates,
Please stop painting all bicyclists with your broad bicycle-hating brush. I always ride as far to the right as I can, and most everybody I've ridden with does the same thing. Trouble is, you want to take the dumb (my description) actions of a few and make those exceptions the norm.
The same case could be made for automobile drivers. Almost every week I'm buzzed by someone intent on showing how macho it is to get close to the slow guy on the bike. Still, I figure that when you compare it to all of the courteous drivers that give me a few feet and pass safely, it's only a small minority being stupid.
I commute to work (20 miles round trip) and have arranged it where I can leave the house at 6 a.m. when traffic is non-existent, followed by my commute home which is mostly side roads to inconvenience automobile drivers as little as possible, while keeping me as safe as possible. I commute because it saves gas and because I have a better quality of life from the physical conditioning it provides. I also pay my share of taxes for road upkeep, even though by commuting, my impact on the road is far less than yours. Do I whine and moan about it? No.
Other commuters I've spoken with (and there are quite a few) all realize this town isn't especially bike friendly (although I think it's slowly getting better) and do their best to avoid the high traffic areas. Those few that don't are braver then me.
Neither side is happy with how the other behaves and like I said, it's probably the actions of a only few knuckleheads in each case. Bicycles have to use the road. The law says so. Trucks and cars have to use the road. The law says so. Other communities have successfully shared the road, and the world didn't end. We can do the same.
So remember, if a fat guy moves to the far right so you can go your merry way, it might be me.
Herb Montgomery
| Dining Out | Business | Movies | Focus | About Us |
| Church | Living Well | Memories | Outdoors | Real Estate | Student Scene | Travel |