02-19-2005, 10:08 AM
|
#15 (permalink)
|
| | Re: Bad bicycle reporting on Channel 5 in Kansas City
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 10:36:45 -0800, Chris Neary <diabloridr@comcast.net >
wrote:
>>> Equally surprising, the Online version of Missouri Drivers Guide makes no
>>> mention of this either (http://www.dor.mo.gov/mvdl/drivers/dlguide/)
>>
>> From that link:
>>
>>"WHERE TO RIDE MOPEDS AND BICYCLES
>>
>>On public streets and highways, you have the same rights and
>>responsibilities as a motor vehicle operator. Always ride with traffic,
>>never against it. When operating at less than the posted speed or
>>traffic flow, generally ride as near to the right side of the roadway as
>>safe."
>>
>>If they were two abreast, one was NOT riding as near to the right side
>>of the roadway as safe.
>
>Thanks for the ref, my brain must have zoned out when originally reading the
>page.
>
>Actually, the initial post contains a link with VC references:
>http://mobikefed.org/files/biketips_bikelaws.pdf
>
>VC section 307.190 is the relevant cite. Note that riding two abreast is
>specifically permitted in Missouri "when not impeding other vehicles".
>
>Based on the accounts in news article, the riders were not at fault for
>riding two abreast, but would be at fault for not "singling up" once they
>were aware a vehicle was behind them.
What's interesting to me is that there's no provision for how long the
riders have to 'single up'. If you take two relatively uncoordinated riders
who have not to this point practiced this, it could take quite a while.
First one rider has to be aware of the vehicle, then the other rider, then
they have to communicate to each other there's a car there. Then they have
to ascertain if it's safe for the car to pass so as not to be squeezed off
the road should the driver passing encounter a car coming the other way
around the bend.
Finally they have to decide who is going to speed up and who is going to
slow down and get behind. Allowing for a couple brief mistakes in who goes
behind whom and you have nearly 15-20 seconds, or more. Obviously a
well-coordinated team of riders could single up in 3-5 seconds after
sensing a car following, and a responsible team, both having mirrors would
be able to anticipate the car coming up from quite a way.
However, to my knowledge the law does not address this. In fact, in
allowing the two abreast riding, this allows for two cyclists to be almost
totally oblivious to what's behind them - there's no requirement for
cyclists to have mirrors to my knowledge - making it completely the
driver's responsibility to signal without causing undue alarm to the riders
and then pass when it's safe. (now having said this it's pretty obvious
that cyclists being aware of their vulnerablility would take steps to
anticipate and practice these maneuvers but this is not, to my knowledge,
part of the law).
So it seems to me that it's almost a given drivers are going to be
significantly delayed in passing two unaware, uncoordinated cyclists.
Obviously the people who wrote the law had to realize that once they allow
two-abreast riding they've got to take into account not the
well-coordinated team, but the least possible coordinated team.
So how do you judge when the riders are 'at fault' for not singling up.
Perhaps they just took too long for this impatient driver. In that case the
burden for passing safely has to be on the larger faster vehicle - yes even
if it takes a minute to get coordinated and allow a safe pass.
>The vehicle would be at fault for unsafe passing.
In addition what about the law about hitting someone from behind? Clearly
if you're passing another car and clip them in passing, you have hit them
from behind and thus have failed to pass safely. I think the driver should
also be cited for reckless driving - sounds like he was trying to 'scare'
the cyclists.
jj
>
>Chris Neary
>diabloridr@comcast.net
>
>"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could
>you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I
>loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh
|
|
|  |