Colorado: new bicycle bill passes - Page 2 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

02-28-2005, 11:14 AM

Jobst asks:

> So? How about some details. What does the "Bicycle Bill" provide?

Current law in Colorado requires bicyclists to ride single file when an
automobile is within 300 feet of the cyclists, even if the car is in
the approaching lane and even if you're riding in a 10 foot shoulder.
The proposed law requires only that bicyclists ride single file if they
would otherwise impede motor vehicle traffic.

Current law requires using only the left arm to signal. New law will
allow use of right arm.

Current law gives sidewalk cyclists all the rights and duties of
pedestrians, with the additional proviso that cyclists must dismount at
all crosswalks. Currently, it's an automatic ticket for the
pedestrian-on-bike, no matter how careless the motorist is. I'm a road
cyclist, but it's still a rotten situation. New law will remove the
dismount requirement, requiring only the sidewalk cyclists not dart in
front of traffic -- same as pedestrians.

More details at [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

The people who voted against the bill did so because it would require
motorists to -- get this -- actually look where they're going when they
turn across an intersection. Strange concept, I know.

RFM

02-28-2005, 07:57 PM

mark wrote:

> I've always felt that I
> was better off letting other vehicle operators think I was going straight
> through an intersection.

That's rude. Why hold the vehicle operator's up when it's unnecessary?
It will only make them dislike bicyclists, which can hardly be helpful
for us.

Rich

02-28-2005, 07:57 PM

mark wrote:

> I've always felt that I
> was better off letting other vehicle operators think I was going straight
> through an intersection.

That's rude. Why hold the vehicle operator's up when it's unnecessary?
It will only make them dislike bicyclists, which can hardly be helpful
for us.

Rich

02-28-2005, 08:03 PM

mark wrote:
>
> I've never in my life signalled a right turn with either arm while
cycling
> (except for two brief trips to the UK and Ireland). I've always felt
that I
> was better off letting other vehicle operators think I was going
straight
> through an intersection. How is this new law going to make my life
any
> better?

I frequently signal right turns. I figure it just lubricates the
traffic machinery, so to speak. In particular, I'll _always_ signal my
right turn if there's a motorist sitting at the right stop sign, who
could get out sooner if he knew I was turning. Why not help him out?

And I like the right arm signal, especially in that situation. The
"left arm crooked upward" signal for a right turn is much less clear -
and is even worse when viewed from the front. (Although I'll use the
old style signal if communicating with a car who's more likely to see
my left arm.)

02-28-2005, 08:03 PM

mark wrote:
>
> I've never in my life signalled a right turn with either arm while
cycling
> (except for two brief trips to the UK and Ireland). I've always felt
that I
> was better off letting other vehicle operators think I was going
straight
> through an intersection. How is this new law going to make my life
any
> better?

I frequently signal right turns. I figure it just lubricates the
traffic machinery, so to speak. In particular, I'll _always_ signal my
right turn if there's a motorist sitting at the right stop sign, who
could get out sooner if he knew I was turning. Why not help him out?

And I like the right arm signal, especially in that situation. The
"left arm crooked upward" signal for a right turn is much less clear -
and is even worse when viewed from the front. (Although I'll use the
old style signal if communicating with a car who's more likely to see
my left arm.)

02-28-2005, 08:14 PM

28 Feb 2005 20:03:40 -0800,
<1109649820.061795.213640@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups .com>,
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] wrote:

>I frequently signal right turns. I figure it just lubricates the
>traffic machinery, so to speak. In particular, I'll _always_ signal my
>right turn if there's a motorist sitting at the right stop sign, who
>could get out sooner if he knew I was turning. Why not help him out?
>
>And I like the right arm signal, especially in that situation.
\snip

Yep, and a head signal encourages them and helps get the message
across. It does expedite matters and drivers seem to appreciate it.
--
zk

02-28-2005, 08:14 PM

28 Feb 2005 20:03:40 -0800,
<1109649820.061795.213640@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups .com>,
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] wrote:

>I frequently signal right turns. I figure it just lubricates the
>traffic machinery, so to speak. In particular, I'll _always_ signal my
>right turn if there's a motorist sitting at the right stop sign, who
>could get out sooner if he knew I was turning. Why not help him out?
>
>And I like the right arm signal, especially in that situation.
\snip

Yep, and a head signal encourages them and helps get the message
across. It does expedite matters and drivers seem to appreciate it.
--
zk

02-28-2005, 09:20 PM

"Zoot Katz" wrote ,
> ,
> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] wrote:
>
> >I frequently signal right turns. I figure it just lubricates the
> >traffic machinery, so to speak. In particular, I'll _always_ signal my
> >right turn if there's a motorist sitting at the right stop sign, who
> >could get out sooner if he knew I was turning. Why not help him out?
> >
> >And I like the right arm signal, especially in that situation.
> \snip
>
> Yep, and a head signal encourages them and helps get the message
> across. It does expedite matters and drivers seem to appreciate it.
> --
> zk

Sounds like I need to reconsider my position on right turn signals.
--
mark

02-28-2005, 09:20 PM

"Zoot Katz" wrote ,
> ,
> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] wrote:
>
> >I frequently signal right turns. I figure it just lubricates the
> >traffic machinery, so to speak. In particular, I'll _always_ signal my
> >right turn if there's a motorist sitting at the right stop sign, who
> >could get out sooner if he knew I was turning. Why not help him out?
> >
> >And I like the right arm signal, especially in that situation.
> \snip
>
> Yep, and a head signal encourages them and helps get the message
> across. It does expedite matters and drivers seem to appreciate it.
> --
> zk

Sounds like I need to reconsider my position on right turn signals.
--
mark

03-01-2005, 06:16 AM

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 05:20:56 GMT, "mark" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
>"Zoot Katz" wrote ,
>> ,
>> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] wrote:
>>
>> >I frequently signal right turns. I figure it just lubricates the
>> >traffic machinery, so to speak. In particular, I'll _always_ signal my
>> >right turn if there's a motorist sitting at the right stop sign, who
>> >could get out sooner if he knew I was turning. Why not help him out?
>> >
>> >And I like the right arm signal, especially in that situation.
>> \snip
>>
>> Yep, and a head signal encourages them and helps get the message
>> across. It does expedite matters and drivers seem to appreciate it.
>> --
>> zk
>
>Sounds like I need to reconsider my position on right turn signals.

I thought I read that you can omit a signal if it's unsafe to remove both
hands from the h/b.

jj