>From all the chatter I've read in the last few days from different google >groups, it sounds as though this has been pulled before going to vote - for >now. ----- Original Message ----- From: Keil Wurl To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 3:42 AM Subject: Re: [Gyros: 15341] FW: [jlows] Fwd: Proposed NC law to restrict/kill group rides
Here's a link to NC House Bill 1451 filed back in April 2009 named Bicycle Protection Act. I don't think this is law (yet) ??? It has a paragraph indicating riders can not ride more than two abreast. http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2009%20%20&BillID=h1451 As a bill passes through it various stages, where does a citizen find the proposed (edits) to a bill? It seems that the email thread below is discussing proposed edits to the original bill ? Sam Quattrocchi wrote: There was an article in the N&O this morning regarding this topic, but it didn't sound so onerous. Sam Quattrocchi ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of mary dorsey Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 9:44 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [Gyros: 15339] FW: [jlows] Fwd: Proposed NC law to restrict/kill group rides Have any of you all heard of this piece of legislation? I haven't but wanted to forward it on. Perhaps someone knows more than I. mary ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Proposed NC law to restrict/kill group rides Matt's mention of the Tuesday ride prompts me to note that fans of that ride, as well as the P ride or just about any group ride should have their eye on a piece of legislation that just got proposed in the NC house. You can read the text of the proposed amendment here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/crosstown/legislation-would-boost-motorists-leverage-with-tow-truckers-and-with-bicyclists?storylink=misearch#ixzz0naAfLMgg This law would kill most group rides. It makes it illegal for cyclists to: - ride more than two abreast, even temporarily (like dropping off the front) and even if the road is totally empty - ride more than one abreast when there is faster car traffic on the road. If you're on the front, you're there for good, and if fast cyclists encounter slow cyclists, they *can't* pass, so that cars *can* - "impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic," thereby letting us know what the bill's authors think of bike traffic -- we're unnormal and unreasonable For the first time *ever* in NC vehicle law, the amendment would: - create a special sub-class of vehicle users, namely cyclists, with more limited rights than other classes. The rest of the vehicle code treats all road users the same, with the same rights and responsibilities. - revoke cyclists' rights to the full lane when needed, with no qualifications mentioned for safety, lane conditions, whether we're about to take a left turn, or any of the other nuances in similar parts of the vehicle code. - place the responsibility to ensure that a pass is safe on the overtaken vehicle (the cyclist) rather than the overtaking one - penalize vehicle operators (cyclists) for their behavior as a group rather than individuals: cars aren't required to make sure that other cars follow the speed limits, but cyclists would be required to make sure that other riders move over, or the entire group is punished Some of the things the amendment outlines are, indeed, examples of good road courtesy on the part of cyclists, but there's a reason we don't usually try to legislate courtesy -- legislation is too heavy-handed a tool for this application. What we're really seeing, it seems to me, is an ignorance on behalf of the bill's author (a retired auto dealer) to acknowledge that two- or even three-abreast often *is* the safest and easiest way -- for cars as well as cyclists -- to co-exist on the road. Instead of trying to understand that by entering into the cyclists' position on the road, they're trying to legislate us off the road. Fuming -- Adam Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1) Recent Activity: <!--[if !supportLists]-->ยท <!--[endif]-->New Members 6 Visit Your Group Safety Notice: No lifeguard on duty! Swim at your own risk. If you are new to open water swimming, or feel at all uncomfortable, ask someone to be your swim buddy BEFORE you start swimming. Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest . Unsubscribe . Terms of Use . __,_._,___ -- You received this message because you subscribed to the Gyro email group. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected] To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected] -- You received this message because you subscribed to the Gyro email group. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected] To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected] -- You received this message because you subscribed to the Gyro email group. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected] To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected] -- You received this message because you subscribed to the Gyro email group. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected] To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected]
