"Safe Cycling - Share the Responsibility" campaign results

Nearly as many cyclists as drivers had their day ruined by the cops. How many cyclists have killed someone this year? How many drivers? How much safer do you feel after our 'finest's' version of a safety campaign?

Unless I'm reading this wrong, the tickets to drivers counting in this campaign were for offences specifically related to safe cycling:

"3,691 tickets were issued to motorists for offences such as opening vehicle doors improperly, and failing to yield to cyclists"

So, other motorists offences not specfic to cycling (say, following another car too closely) are not included in this tally, though I strongly suspect the police continued to write many such tickets during the period.

If my read is correct, that's a pretty good stat -- it means that police wrote 3691 tickets for exactly the things we all complain about: cars in bike lanes, people swinging open doors without looking, etc.

Time for the law about having as bell to be revisited. Fumbling for a bell in a situation that calls for a warning sound to be issued by the bike is in my opinion, dangerous.

I can call out a warning MUCH more rapidly, loudly and in a more targeted fashion (all without compromising my grip on the controls) than by using even the most expensive bell. Almost every cyclist can. Time to strike the bell law from the books.

Nice to see the police campaign appears to have attempted balance.

Here's a good example:

"I did not see ONE motorist or cyclist being stopped by the police. I wish they would hold this sort of thing more often..."

... oh right. Just checked the author.

Regarding the bell requirement -- I agree that in an emergency situation I yell. Humans respond pretty quickly to a person yelling at them! Particularly if they sound angry and threatening :-)

But I use my bell all the time to head off situations so I don't need to yell. When I'm riding along a set of parked cars and I see someone in the driver's seat, I ring my bell. When I see a pedestrian that looks like they might just step out in front of me, I ring my bell. It's useful for catching someone's attention in a more non-agressive way.

I find I only have to occassionally yell at folks using this method.

Besides, the last bell I bought was about $5 ... hardly a hardship!!

I have to ask this ... have you guys put some consideration on where to put your bell? It should be close enough to the grips that all you need to do is flick your thumb over, without even moving the position of your hand on the bar.

(of course, some bikes have a poor "dashboard" set up and such a bell placement isn't possible - so maybe that's the case with you guys)

First of all $110 fine for not having a $5 bell is unreasonable. If bells are required by law then bike stores should have to equip the bike with one before it goes out the door. On bikes with drop bars its hard to find a good place for one that is accessible without interfering with hand positions.

I use a bell a lot to TRY to head off situations like Tone, but I don't actually find it useful. Many times drivers seem to think ding-a-ling means OPEN their car door to see what the noise is. Much better to avoid the door zone completely even if it means riding between streetcar tracks. It also tends to do nothing to wake up stray pedestrians. I like "HEADS UP" in a loud voice better though that is often ineffective too for the most inattentive.

I think its far less aggressive too to say HEADS UP than to ring a bell as pedestrians get used to mad bell ringing by idiots-on-bicycles that think they have the right-of-way on MUPs and sidewalks and whatnot that actually are going high speed and expect the ped that has the right of way to move for them.

The bell is indeed useless during an emergency because our hands will be occupied in steering the bike.

But it is useful during other times, such as:

1. Alerting jaywalking pedestrians to watch for incoming traffic.
2. Telling the cyclist in front that you want to pass in the bike lane.(When the right car lane is packed)
3. Alerting drivers when I pass them slowly on the right side to filter to the front of the lights.
4. Alerting others when entering a blind-turn.
5. Participating in the Bells on Bloor events.

If I have to yell to do any of the above, I would run out of breath before I even reach 30km/h.

wy29 pointed out two useful scenarios for a bell which are actually not things that he should be doing at all:

2. Telling the cyclist in front that you want to pass in the bike lane.(When the right car lane is packed)

- The bike lanes are not generally wide enough for passing within the lane. Dinging a bell and expecting a slower cyclist to move into the gutter? About as rude as if you were in a car and honking to get people to move out of your way because you think you are more important
- Wait for a gap in traffic and move over properly to pass. No gap? TOO BAD.
- If there is room but its tight - "on your left" is more specific and polite than the bell.

3. Alerting drivers when I pass them slowly on the right side to filter to the front of the lights.

- What makes you think this is a good thing to do? If there is barely room to squeeze by them on the right side it means they have no room to move forward when the light turns green without potentially bumping your shoulder. RUDE RUDE RUDE. Wait yer turn!
- If you want to pass them because they are all right turning for instance pass them on the left, yeah okay even if it means filtering two lanes.
- If there is a stopped car up ahead that means everybody has to get out of the lane you are in, obviously there is room for the bike to pass through. So is it practical to wait in line? No. But are drivers going to find it freakin' obnoxious of you to filter pass them? YES. And is ringing your bell going to increase your safety or just PISS them off?

Yes I realize the practicalities of the bike and traffic congestion but I see too many RUDE cyclists squeeze up to the curb at the light next to ONE stopped car instead of in the lane behind them, and it makes it really difficult for the car to know what the hell to do. You people are training drivers to get way the hell too close to cyclists.

While I agree with wy29 I have to say I am often reluctant to ring my bell when passing another cyclist. Way too often I've done that and the rider thinks I'm trying to rush them and they start pedaling harder than they really should for their fitness level. But I disagree with Anonymous that it's so rude to ring, I'm just reluctant because not all cyclists know that convention.

Nice to see it. I still think 'the law is a ass' (sic) though. As for yelling at people, the word I use most to warn others of my approach is 'Hello' (or 'Bike Coming') said loud enough to catch attention and promote eye contact.

Bells can be useful in low noise, bike to bike or bike to pedestrian communication but they are no less provocative (in my opinion) than saying 'Hello, hello' in a none threatening way. Once communication is established between the two parties, 'Thank you' seems to help as well. I find myself touching my visor with my (index) finger as well.

The appreciation gesture comes AFTER a potential collision situation as well. THAT strikes me as an appropriate use for a bell .

Bell positioning? Is it not something of a no-brainer? Even with optimal positioning, ringing a bell still compromises (even momentarily) control inputs. I think the law should be revisited and stricken.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/transportation/1019518,CST-NWS-ride23a.article

I'm pretty sure I saw at least 113 cars parked in bike lanes on my way to work this morning! About a week ago, I saw a fat cop park in a bike lane outside Diamond Corner at Coxwell and Cosburn while he went inside to get some poutine.

For the most part, I think cops are pretty useless. As I write this, there are SIX of them standing around outside my office at Bay & Richmond waiting for people to make right turns so they can ticket them. Meanwhile, there are about six cars parked illegally and countless cyclists riding by on the sidewalk going eastbound. (Richmond is a one-way street that runs west)

I really question the validity of these blitzes. Mostly, they are cash grabs. What this city really needs is constant enforcement and ongoing education for both motorists and cyclists on how to behave appropriately on the roads.

I spoke with a cyclist this morning who witnessed cops parked on Augusta handing out tickets to cyclists who were coming out of the Bikes on Wheels bike shop doing a test ride of their potentially new wheels ... well, well.

I have personally challenged the cops at a now defunct TCCC meeting a few years back about this crap, and they admitted they are just going through the motions.
"It's on the annual police calendar. So, we do it."

Well, let's see:

'“highway” includes a common and public highway, street, avenue, parkway, driveway, square, place, bridge, viaduct or trestle, any part of which is intended for or used by the general public for the passage of vehicles and includes the area between the lateral property lines thereof;'

So a highway is basically a public right-of-way that includes a part "intended for or used by the general public for the passage of vehicles". Since bicycles are vehicles, any public right-of-way that includes a part intended for the use of bicycles would fit.

Now for roadways.

'“roadway” means the part of the highway that is improved, designed or ordinarily used for vehicular traffic, but does not include the shoulder, and, where a highway includes two or more separate roadways, the term “roadway” refers to any one roadway separately and not to all of the roadways collectively;'

A pathway intended for the use of bicycles, especially those that are paved or otherwise improved, fits the definition of a roadway so long as it is within something that can be considered a highway. For paths that are built alongside roads within the road allowance, or are built on former railway corridors, the definitions are pretty clear. It's a bit more grey for pathways built through parks, but the definition of a highway includes a parkway (the earliest parkways were built to exclude cars/motor vehicles and were intended for equestrians, bicyclists and pedestrians) so they're included too.

In Ottawa, we also have another interesting twist on the definition: we have busways that are roadways intended for the exclusive use by buses. It's hard to believe that the HTA doesn't apply on busways to manage the interactions between bus drivers, even though the busway fails the test of being a "common and public highway".

And you can always apply the common sense test: if the HTA doesn't govern the operation of vehicles on a pathway, then what does? Can you ride your bicycle down the lefthand side of a pathway, hit and permanently paralyze someone coming the other way and expect to be held blameless? What else could you be charged with if not under the HTA? Negligence causing bodily harm? But for what? If there's no law requiring riding to the right on a pathway, then it can't be negligent to ride on the left. It can't be assault unless there was intent to harm. The HTA simply has to apply.

I have a bell on my bike, but people who say that they are useless are totally right. I ride with a whistle in my mouth, and use it as an alternative to shouting. It works well - people look to see where the sound is coming from...

I've seem people riding with the whistle and I've always wondered two things:

First -- isn't it harder to breathe when you really get going? Or are you riding at a more sedate pace?

Second -- if you get in an accident, aren't you worried that the whistle will end up chipping a tooth, or worse, getting lodged in your throat? Or do you feel like it would be a very natural reaction to spit it out as you went down?

The Fox40s are really louder ... louder than I can shout ... but those two factors have kept me from every trying this approach.

Since I ride Bay St and often after the 19:00h cutoff (of the Diamond right of way), I have considered (recommended as well) petitioning for an extension of the Diamond lane hours.

They are presently 07:00h to 19:00h.

Your thoughts? Tx.

Sorry, I have to disagree. The attitude that until a segment of a group (be it sex, race, or vehicular preference) changes their behaviour the entire group isn't going to be respected is tired and old. It gets trotted out every time any marginalized group asks for change as an excuse why change isn't happening.

Sure, I want bad cyclists and drivers off the roads (or better yet just shape up already!) But this gives nobody the right to disrespect the entire group.