I spoke with Mr. Norman - nice, thoughtful guy. He provided me with the following information:
-his office did not originate this legislation -he has heard that the legislation eminated from complaints about cycling groups, there were some terrible examples -his office is in favor of cyclists rights -they are concerned about the language, particurally how to interperate the last sentence -the language of the bill is still under consideration see this site: http://www.ncdot.gov/bikeped/ Jeffrey On May 27, 1:36 pm, Jeffrey <[email protected]> wrote: > Great discussion. Wise thoughts about not inviting the media when > meeting with Sen. Hunt. That would put him off and show distrust - he > is, of course meeting us early Sat morning - credit to him. > > One difficulty with this issue is that the majority of people would > probably rather not have any cyclists on the road. Most people do not > cycle, much less cycle in traffic. I suspect that a majority of > motorists would want to restrict riding times, main roads, etc. > > I am interested in the possiblity of a written position on this law > representing the feelings of NC cycling groups. Perhaps someone is > aware of such an effort already? It would be very good to show > alignment on this law. > > For me, I humbly suggest that the problem with this bill is the > wording that cyclists seem to bear responsibility for being overtaken > by faster moving vehicles. The passing vehical is responsible for > picking a safe moment to pass in my view. Limiting to 2 abreast and > riding single file on busy roads is something we already do as a > matter of safety and courteousy. This may be going out on a limb, but > was cycling not recently recognized as an important form of > transprotation?http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bikeped/ > > I will contact our NC cyling coordinator and post whether he is > familiar with this bill: > > NORTH CAROLINA > Web:http://www.ncdot.org/transit/bicycle/ > Tom Norman, Director > Division of Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation > North Carolina Department of Transportation > 1552 Mail Service Center > Raleigh, NC 27699-1552 > 919-807-0771; Fax 919-715-4422 > E-mail: [email protected] > > On May 26, 3:50 pm, Dave Rollins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I say we plan some group rides in the home towns of the 4 > > Representatives who introduce this piece of legislation; Reidsville, > > Wilmington, Belmont and Asheville. You can also e-mail them with your > > personal opinions at: > > > [email protected] > > [email protected] > > [email protected] > > [email protected] > > > Dave > > > On May 26, 3:20 pm, "Itchn2go - Ed" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > This also prevents double pace lines since we will be 3 or 4 abreast when > > > the puller is getting off and moving to the back. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > > > > Of > > > > 53x11 > > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 3:08 PM > > > > To: North Raleigh Cyclists (Gyros) > > > > Subject: [Gyros: 15502] Re: Meeting W/ Senator Hunt Confirmed... > > > > > You are correct. I'm not an attorney, but this Bill, if passed, will > > > > relegate cyclists to the status of second class citizens. The > > > > responsibility of "Safe Passage" for motor vehicles (that is > > > > ridiculous) will be placed entirely on the cyclists. The Bill does not > > > > mention any modification of behavior for motorists, only cyclists. > > > > South Carolina Law mandates motor vehicles to give "Safe Passage" to > > > > cyclists and they also have an cyclist anti-harassment law. > > > > > If you as a cyclist get hit by a motor vehicle (no matter who is at > > > > fault) the motorist only has to utter these magic words to get off, > > > > "He/she/they did not move over as stipulated by NC Motor Vehicle law." > > > > You also will not be able to collect damages for your injuries or > > > > bike. In fact, you as a cyclist could be sued if the motorist or motor > > > > vehicle suffers injuries. > > > > > Do you really think motorists will wait patiently for a double pace > > > > line to merge into a single file to pass? Cyclists will be forced by > > > > law to compromise. But what will motorists be required to give up? > > > > NOTHING! Just my 2 cents. > > > > > > One question for any of our lawyers in the group - when the law states > > > > > that 'Persons riding two abreast shall move into a single fil > > > > > formation as quikcly as is practibcable when being overtaken from the > > > > > rear by a faster moving vehicle.", does that put the 2 abreast > > > > > cyclists at fault when a car has a brush up passing a double line? > > > > > > I want to be practical and respectful and ride reasonably so cars can > > > > > pass when it is safe to do so, but it seems that some liability may be > > > > > moving from the passing motorist to the cyclist. Am I reading too > > > > > much into this? > > > > > -- > > > > 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] > > > > Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- 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]
