I-Like-To-Bike

IAW the A&S Legal Scholarship Grand Dragon it must be the fault of all dem gol dang b-crats; everything else is, ain't it?

jimrich

First of all, thank you for posting these links to codes which I would assume EVERY cyclist does or should know. I know the vehicle codes!
I am happy to read the L.A. city bicycles code (to any interested bikers reading this post = look it up for your self if you're even interested) and, even though I, as a pedestrian, am not expected to know bicycle codes, it is worth it to realize that I no longer need to question or confront folks riding a bike on the sidewalk near here UNLESS they are "riding in a willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property". I have seen a few of those but, generally the riders are careful so, even though most of them have never heard of such codes, at least I know what the law says so I am quite relieved even though I disagree with the code. LOL, perhaps others will read this and become significantly informed. The one cyclist I talk with did not give a rat's ass about any code or laws and treated me very badly but it would have gone much better if he has simply quoted the city code for my education and then we might have parted as happy friends instead of angry hostiles.
Thanks again for the info,
jim

jimrich

DUH - learn the laws and codes that apply to your vehicle!

daihard 

Did anything make you assume we don't know the traffic laws and codes related to bicycles?

no1mad 

No need to thank me as I merely followed a link provided by another and then mistakenly clicked on Torrance instead of Tarzana (which doesn't have a link).

Daniel4

Jimrich: You would make an excellent advocate for bicycle lanes and infrastructure. As a taxpayer you would not want the bloated bureaucracy and expenses of bicycle licensing. Bicycle lanes are much cheaper and cost effective. As a pedestrian, you want to get cyclists off the sidewalks. As a motorist, you don't want another vehicle in your way. Put them in bike lanes and let the other cyclists worry about the reskless and ingorant riders. As a motorist and a pedestrian, but not a cyclist, you would give the authorities a fresh perpective on the need for a comprehensive infrastructure for cyclists.

CliffordK

Don't forget to add dogs and cats to the licensing and insurance... well, many places require a license, but don't have very stringent requirements to acquire them.

At what age do you wish to license bikers?

3 yrs old?
5 yrs old?

Don't forget that many adult cyclists actually do have valid drivers licenses, although, in some cases, it has been taken away by the government.

A lack of insurance doesn't dismiss liability for one's actions. If I run into a legally parked car, and damage the car, I would be liable for the damages. Likewise if I run down a pedestrian, I would be liable for that. And, the person being harmed could come after my retirement and every asset I own. Of course an 18 yr old may not have a lot of assets, but they do have a lifetime worth of earning potential.

The biggest issue is that bikes are often at the receiving end of accidents, and are harmed much more by cars than they harm the cars. Even things like "being doored" is usually considered the fault of the person in the car.

Bicycle Safety Training certainly is important, and I would encourage all schools to incorporate it in their curriculum, as well as having safety training exhibits at fairs and other places where kids congregate. Perhaps also snag some newbie adults.

SkyDog75

What code are you referring to? Point me to one that contradicts or supersedes Los Angeles Municipal Code §56.15, which allows riding on sidewalks unless it's done "with a willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property".

prathmann

I'll admit to not being intimately familiar with the myriad municipal codes regarding bicycle use on sidewalks and town-specific parking rules. I may go through 20 or more municipalities in a given day, each of which has their own set of codes, incl. many that are hard to find with a casual search. I depend instead on the California Vehicle Code as it relates to road operation of bicycles and insures a degree of uniformity throughout the state (and by virtue of most state codes being similar to the national Uniform Vehicle Code there is at least some level of similarity across state lines). Operating a bicycle on a sidewalk strikes me as needlessly dangerous except in relatively rare circumstances and then only when done with extreme care.

But I'd expect someone (like Jim) who goes around accosting others for their supposed code violations to at least have gone to the trouble of looking them up for his own community so as not to make false accusations.

bikecrate

One thread would be sufficient. It's a bit annoying and diffuses your own effort have all these cross post.

However, your wonderful attitude has totally convinced me of your point...duh!

dynodonn 

Locally, our city officials tried to enact a city wide ban on sidewalk riding, but scaled back to various business districts, due to the expense in manpower needed to enact the ban, or to install standardized bicycle infrastructure with an already tight city budget. The same scenario goes as well in trying to enforce a bicycle insurance/license/registration ordinance, with a large percentage of the cyclists riding a bicycle due to their lack of financing to pay the aforementioned, or any subsequent fines.

alcjphil

They may well be ignorant, but you have no proof that they do not have a driver's permit. Most adult cyclists do

Leebo

OP, how's that working out for you? Getting all up in some ones face and telling them how someone should ride. Maybe one should look where they are walking, for the benefit of all in society. Some states do not require auto insurance, go figure. Just get a bill passed, should be a breeze.

I-Like-To-Bike

That's OK. A&S sometimes gets an unlicensed poster spouting all sorts of ignorant gibberish.

howsteepisit

I'd really like to become "licensed" as a poster. Can you provide a reference and link to the license bureau? Otherwise I fear i will continue to spout ignorant gibberish. OTOH, I like spewing ignorant gibberish.

bikebuddha 

Writing style reminds me of FaceThem.

Daniel4

Here's the link where that came from.
LADOT Bicycle Services - Bicycling in Los Angeles - Bicycles & the Law

Did you scroll two bullet points above where it describes licensing of bicycles? It was repealed!!!

• Bicycle Licenses Required (LAMC 26.01) Ordinance repealed on June 2, 2009. Bicycle licenses are no longer required in the City of Los Angeles. Please carry identification when riding a bicycle and be sure children have identification as well in the form of an identification bracelet, sticker in their helmet, or bicycle registration with a private firm. In addition there are various ways of identifying your bicycle in the event it is stolen, photos and making a note of the serial number as well as including an identifier in the seat tube of the bicycle.

And here's the history of bicycle licensing for Toronto, where I'm from.

Licensing - Cycling and the Law - Cycling | City of Toronto

The issues and reasons are just about the same everywhere.

GP

Most if not all of the California cities that have or had mandatory licensing originally did it as a way of registering the serial number in case of theft. If you search through the municipal codes you'll notice they use similar verbiage. In the past several years people have looked into the licensing as a way to have some sort of governmental control over cyclists but that has been met with strong opposition from advocacy groups.

This article about cyclists being cited for no license is from 2010. Since then, Long Beach has removed it's license requirement. Cyclists cited, bikes impounded in Long Beach Critical Mass ride | L.A. NOW | Los Angeles Times

Chief

Now you're talkin' ! Finally, someone I can relate to!!
For awhile, I thought I was just the only one!!!

(still searching for sarcasm emoticon......)

desconhecido 

It's apparent that with all the dangerous bicyclists on the sidewalks threatening pedestrians right and left, willie and nillie (whoever they are) , that it has become necessary to require NHTSC helmets for all pedestrians. Pedestrians are obviously taking too great a risk and without mandatory insurance are shifting the costs of their risk onto society in general. Either pedestrians should be required to carry no-fault casualty insurance ( after all, how can you sue a 5 y.o.?) to defray the costs of their injuries or they should be required to wear adequate protective equipment to minimize the risk. Mandatory pedestrian licenses should require implied consent to interrogation, search, and identification. Proof of insurance needs to be stapled to the pedestrians forehead in such a manner as it is clearly visible for inspection by law enforcement without the requirement that the pedestrian's protective helmet be removed. After all, removing one's helmet in the presence of law enforcement is wantonly reckless.

Dave Cutter

Urban Dictionary

Troll : One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a forum with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument.

FBinNY 

Don't need one. They either figure it out or they don't. If they don't, they weren't who you were speaking to anyway.

dpeters11

But the problem with bike lanes can be that then drivers assume you must always use it, even if it hasn't been cleared or some other issue like bike lane in the door zone etc.

kickstart

It's NOT a problem with bike lanes, It's a problem with uneducated road users.

ro-monster

Well, since we are talking about California, the drivers would essentially be right; this is a mandatory use state (if a bike lane exists on the street you're on, you are requred by law to ride in it). Fortunately there are enough exceptions listed in the law that it might be difficult to successfully prosecute someone for not using the bike lane, although I don't expect the argument that the door zone constitutes a hazard in the bike lane would work in court.