Difference between pedestrians and cyclists?
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 2,324
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Difference between pedestrians and cyclists?
Hi all,
Was just thinking today that cyclists get a lot of hassle for jumping lights, not fully obeying the road laws etc. but what is it that makes us so different from pedestrians? We are both vulnerable, we are not motorised, etc. But it seems that pedestrians can cross the road at red lights when no cars are coming, they can cross the road without crossings and quite often they hold up cars and cause them to stop / slow down because they are standing in the middle of the road trying to cross.
It can't be an issue of numbers and there are WAY more pedestrians than cyclists. So what is it?
One argument can be that cyclists use the road, but really we get only the same rights on the road as a pedestrian and our licensing is similar to that of pedestrians - non-existent.
Also what about people on skateboards or rollerblades using the road. One can argue they are similar to bicycles but they probably wouldn't get the same hassle that we do. We all know that road laws are not specific enough for cyclists and we are simply tacked on to the existing laws.
One can argue though that cyclists are more wary when "breaking" the law than pedestrians as cyclists have a day-to-day experience of being in close proximity of cars, so should theoretically be safer.
Pedestrians are also rarely honked if causing a hold up compared to cyclists who are honked just for the sake of it sometimes.
So why are we treated so differently to pedestrians? Is it because everyone has experience of being a pedestrian? If so, is this not an argument for making sure motorists ride a bicycle / scooter / motorcycle before becoming licensed?
Thanks
Daven
Was just thinking today that cyclists get a lot of hassle for jumping lights, not fully obeying the road laws etc. but what is it that makes us so different from pedestrians? We are both vulnerable, we are not motorised, etc. But it seems that pedestrians can cross the road at red lights when no cars are coming, they can cross the road without crossings and quite often they hold up cars and cause them to stop / slow down because they are standing in the middle of the road trying to cross.
It can't be an issue of numbers and there are WAY more pedestrians than cyclists. So what is it?
One argument can be that cyclists use the road, but really we get only the same rights on the road as a pedestrian and our licensing is similar to that of pedestrians - non-existent.
Also what about people on skateboards or rollerblades using the road. One can argue they are similar to bicycles but they probably wouldn't get the same hassle that we do. We all know that road laws are not specific enough for cyclists and we are simply tacked on to the existing laws.
One can argue though that cyclists are more wary when "breaking" the law than pedestrians as cyclists have a day-to-day experience of being in close proximity of cars, so should theoretically be safer.
Pedestrians are also rarely honked if causing a hold up compared to cyclists who are honked just for the sake of it sometimes.
So why are we treated so differently to pedestrians? Is it because everyone has experience of being a pedestrian? If so, is this not an argument for making sure motorists ride a bicycle / scooter / motorcycle before becoming licensed?
Thanks
Daven
#2
Senior Member
No one should be hollier than thou.. This cyclist always stops at stop lights and often watches pedestrians cross against green lights or cars fail to stop at red lights.
We are all people. I suspect the same percentages of cyclists, pedestrians and motorists are unlawful.
We are all people. I suspect the same percentages of cyclists, pedestrians and motorists are unlawful.
__________________
Pray for the Dead and Fight like Hell for the Living
^ Since January 1, 2012
Pray for the Dead and Fight like Hell for the Living
^ Since January 1, 2012
#3
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 2,324
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
No one should be hollier than thou.. This cyclist always stops at stop lights and often watches pedestrians cross against green lights or cars fail to stop at red lights.
We are all people. I suspect the same percentages of cyclists, pedestrians and motorists are unlawful.
We are all people. I suspect the same percentages of cyclists, pedestrians and motorists are unlawful.
#4
Senior Member
Kill Cyclists.. and not pedestrians .?.....The reason for so many signs in L.A. saying "No Turn on Red."
Couple years ago, motorists killed pedestrians in mass, because they were so careless with the turn on red rule..
Now, if a motorists turns on red and the pedestrian has not completely crossed the road( all the way.) you will be ticketed.. And the Los Angeles police love to enforce this 233 dollar fine..
Don't get me wrong Cyclists and pedestrians are both fair game in L.A.
Couple years ago, motorists killed pedestrians in mass, because they were so careless with the turn on red rule..
Now, if a motorists turns on red and the pedestrian has not completely crossed the road( all the way.) you will be ticketed.. And the Los Angeles police love to enforce this 233 dollar fine..
Don't get me wrong Cyclists and pedestrians are both fair game in L.A.
__________________
Pray for the Dead and Fight like Hell for the Living
^ Since January 1, 2012
Pray for the Dead and Fight like Hell for the Living
^ Since January 1, 2012
#5
Senior Member
I can't speak for everywhere, but in Michigan pedestrians have the right-of-way at all marked and unmarked crosswalks, an unmarked crosswalk being anyplace it would be logical for pedestrians to cross, i.e. a parking lot directly across the street from a big building, etc. Lights are for their safety, not to enforce when or where they can cross.
OTOH, bikes are given all the rights and responsibilities of vehicles. Vehicles are not pedestrians, and that's where the problem comes in: too many cyclists consider themselves 'pedestrians on wheels' rather than 'human powered vehicles.'
OTOH, bikes are given all the rights and responsibilities of vehicles. Vehicles are not pedestrians, and that's where the problem comes in: too many cyclists consider themselves 'pedestrians on wheels' rather than 'human powered vehicles.'
#6
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 2,324
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
I can't speak for everywhere, but in Michigan pedestrians have the right-of-way at all marked and unmarked crosswalks, an unmarked crosswalk being anyplace it would be logical for pedestrians to cross, i.e. a parking lot directly across the street from a big building, etc. Lights are for their safety, not to enforce when or where they can cross.
OTOH, bikes are given all the rights and responsibilities of vehicles. Vehicles are not pedestrians, and that's where the problem comes in: too many cyclists consider themselves 'pedestrians on wheels' rather than 'human powered vehicles.'
OTOH, bikes are given all the rights and responsibilities of vehicles. Vehicles are not pedestrians, and that's where the problem comes in: too many cyclists consider themselves 'pedestrians on wheels' rather than 'human powered vehicles.'
#7
Bianchi Goddess
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Shady Pines Retirement Fort Wayne, In
Posts: 27,868
Bikes: Too many to list here check my signature.
Mentioned: 194 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2938 Post(s)
Liked 2,934 Times
in
1,497 Posts
I agree with Blazing. the big pronblem is general lack of curtesy between humanbeings wether walking, bicycling or driving. also most ignorant motorist assume that a cyclist is a pedestrain and should follow those laws. most all states still conside a bicycle a vehicle and as such they must obey the law. and interestingly enough, in Massachuetts even a rollerblader, skateboarder, or rollerskater is consider and subject to vehicle laws.
__________________
“One morning you wake up, the girl is gone, the bikes are gone, all that's left behind is a pair of old tires and a tube of tubular glue, all squeezed out"
Sugar "Kane" Kowalczyk
“One morning you wake up, the girl is gone, the bikes are gone, all that's left behind is a pair of old tires and a tube of tubular glue, all squeezed out"
Sugar "Kane" Kowalczyk
#8
Bike ≠ Car ≠ Ped.
The thing is, bikes are neither pedestrians nor motor vehicles. They're too fast to mix safely with pedestrians, and too slow for most motor traffic. Their flexibility -- where bikes can fit if necessary -- also rates between both peds and cars.
The most painless treatment of bikes I've seen yet is when bikes, cars, and peds get separate facilities, not only in terms of lanes or sidewalk markings, but also with separate signal lights at intersections and separate routes through large, multi-street intersections.
In lieu of separate facilities and signals, I'll go when it's safe, even if it's against a light. I'd rather do that than share an intersection with drivers next to me who have just gotten the green light and are accelerating, turning, and going wherever else they need to go.
#9
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 2,324
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Ye I agree Barracks, I did think that actually if cyclists were given a law of their own instead of being lumped in with motor vehicles then fewer cyclists would feel the need to break the law. I admit that I do, on occasion, jump lights etc. but I feel the problem doesn't come from the breaking of the law but the unpredictability of which laws will be broken.
For example if cyclists were given the option to jump red lights, but in return had to carry some form of insurance. I think this would make cyclists safer and more predictable.
I don't think the UK is ready to invest in separate facilities at junctions!
For me the problem comes from the fact that I am neither a car or a pedestrian but I am just lumped in with motorists because it is the easy way out. I feel there are specific laws which cyclists can safely break and we should therefore get our own highway code section!
Daven
For example if cyclists were given the option to jump red lights, but in return had to carry some form of insurance. I think this would make cyclists safer and more predictable.
I don't think the UK is ready to invest in separate facilities at junctions!
For me the problem comes from the fact that I am neither a car or a pedestrian but I am just lumped in with motorists because it is the easy way out. I feel there are specific laws which cyclists can safely break and we should therefore get our own highway code section!
Daven
#10
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,980
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,538 Times
in
1,047 Posts
My experience has been that cyclists get few hassles from anybody for jumping lights or anything else, legal or not, as long as it isn't directly affecting a motorist's forward progress. If a motorist feels that his progress is being impeded by a bicyclist's actions, it may be immaterial if the cyclist is legal or within his rights, and a hassle is initiated. Maybe the UK is different.
#11
Two H's!!! TWO!!!!!
My experience has been that cyclists get few hassles from anybody for jumping lights or anything else, legal or not, as long as it isn't directly affecting a motorist's forward progress. If a motorist feels that his progress is being impeded by a bicyclist's actions, it may be immaterial if the cyclist is legal or within his rights, and a hassle is initiated.
#12
Senior Member
My experience has been that cyclists get few hassles from anybody for jumping lights or anything else, legal or not, as long as it isn't directly affecting a motorist's forward progress. If a motorist feels that his progress is being impeded by a bicyclist's actions, it may be immaterial if the cyclist is legal or within his rights, and a hassle is initiated. Maybe the UK is different.
- BP (LAB Road I Certified)
#13
Gear Hub fan
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 2,829
Bikes: Civia Hyland Rohloff, Swobo Dixon, Colnago, Univega
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
On the contrary, I find that most motorists will grudgingly put up with bikes - until one breaks a law and as a result impedes them more than they think should have happened. Such as the guy who has to pass a bike six times because the biker filters to the front at every red light, then runs it. I'm amazed at how many people who call themselves serious cyclists can rationalize breaking any law they don't like. I consider it a lack of skills and training.
- BP (LAB Road I Certified)
- BP (LAB Road I Certified)
People have ALWAYS broken laws that they did not like as shown by the multi thousand year history of smuggling, the American attempt at prohibition and the current total failure of laws to stop the drug trade or prostitution. Why should traffic laws be any different?
__________________
Gear Hubs Owned: Rohloff disc brake, SRAM iM9 disc brake, SRAM P5 freewheel, Sachs Torpedo 3 speed freewheel, NuVinci CVT, Shimano Alfine SG S-501, Sturmey Archer S5-2 Alloy. Other: 83 Colnago Super Record, Univega Via De Oro
Visit and join the Yahoo Geared Hub Bikes group for support and links.
https://groups.yahoo.com/group/Geared_hub_bikes/
Gear Hubs Owned: Rohloff disc brake, SRAM iM9 disc brake, SRAM P5 freewheel, Sachs Torpedo 3 speed freewheel, NuVinci CVT, Shimano Alfine SG S-501, Sturmey Archer S5-2 Alloy. Other: 83 Colnago Super Record, Univega Via De Oro
Visit and join the Yahoo Geared Hub Bikes group for support and links.
https://groups.yahoo.com/group/Geared_hub_bikes/
#14
Every lane is a bike lane
My experience has been that cyclists get few hassles from anybody for jumping lights or anything else, legal or not, as long as it isn't directly affecting a motorist's forward progress. If a motorist feels that his progress is being impeded by a bicyclist's actions, it may be immaterial if the cyclist is legal or within his rights, and a hassle is initiated. Maybe the UK is different.
(man, that hurt).
Or at least, that's how it pans out in the real world. The media world (often including online BBSes) is different when people get brave behind a keyboard and decide to whine about cyclists breaking the same laws that everyone else breaks. I suspect that happens because cyclists are a minority, where motorists and pedestrians are not. Hmmm, so much for being brave behind a keyboard.
__________________
I am clinically insane. I am proud of it.
That is all.
I am clinically insane. I am proud of it.
That is all.
#15
Every lane is a bike lane
The most painless treatment of bikes I've seen yet is when bikes, cars, and peds get separate facilities, not only in terms of lanes or sidewalk markings, but also with separate signal lights at intersections and separate routes through large, multi-street intersections.
Fact is, if you're gonna get around on a bike, sooner or later you're going to have to share the road with someone else. Get used to it.
__________________
I am clinically insane. I am proud of it.
That is all.
I am clinically insane. I am proud of it.
That is all.
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Kentwood michigan.
Posts: 486
Bikes: too many
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I think the biggest difference between cyclists and pedestrians is that pedestrians know they are pedestrians, and drivers know they are pedestrians.
Among cyclists on the other hand, there is no real consensus as to whether we are vehicles with all the rights and subject to ALL the rules of the road, or pedestrians who aren't. A common phrase on BF is "if it's clear, why should I stop for a light/sign" (normally qualified with "it's harder for a bike to get back to speed) which is generally preceeded with or followed by "I have just as much right to use the road"
If you are in the road on a bike, you should expect cars to treat you as they would other cars, not as a pedestrian
If cyclists can't agree if they are pedestrians or vehicles, how could you expect anyone else to know?
Ken.
Among cyclists on the other hand, there is no real consensus as to whether we are vehicles with all the rights and subject to ALL the rules of the road, or pedestrians who aren't. A common phrase on BF is "if it's clear, why should I stop for a light/sign" (normally qualified with "it's harder for a bike to get back to speed) which is generally preceeded with or followed by "I have just as much right to use the road"
If you are in the road on a bike, you should expect cars to treat you as they would other cars, not as a pedestrian
If cyclists can't agree if they are pedestrians or vehicles, how could you expect anyone else to know?
Ken.
#17
Bike ≠ Car ≠ Ped.
#18
Bike ≠ Car ≠ Ped.
That's a nice idea in theory, but the cost of retro-fitting entire cities (or at least creating a transport network large enough that it actually becomes usable) is prohibitive in most places, and most cities don't have the space for such a network anyway. Yes, I know someone will chime in here with a single exception where it's worked for them in some obscure part of the world, but in most places it's just not practical to build it.
Fact is, if you're gonna get around on a bike, sooner or later you're going to have to share the road with someone else. Get used to it.
Fact is, if you're gonna get around on a bike, sooner or later you're going to have to share the road with someone else. Get used to it.
If hacking up a perfectly good street costs too much, might as well do it when rebuilding and repairing them. Repaved streets around here are often getting bike lanes. Not perfect, of course, and having a triathlete mayor isn't exactly fair to other cities , but at least it helps (at some times during the day, it's hard to find a stretch of bike lane that doesn't have a cyclist on it).
#19
Every lane is a bike lane
Among cyclists on the other hand, there is no real consensus as to whether we are vehicles with all the rights and subject to ALL the rules of the road, or pedestrians who aren't. A common phrase on BF is "if it's clear, why should I stop for a light/sign" (normally qualified with "it's harder for a bike to get back to speed) which is generally preceeded with or followed by "I have just as much right to use the road"
If you are in the road on a bike, you should expect cars to treat you as they would other cars, not as a pedestrian
If you are in the road on a bike, you should expect cars to treat you as they would other cars, not as a pedestrian
*Of course, following the same laws as other vehicles might just as often mean breaking the same laws as other vehicles in areas where the police are unable or unwilling to enforce them.
I'm used to it, but not everyone is. If you want to get more cyclists out there, you need to attract the timid and hesitant, not us crazies on BF.
If hacking up a perfectly good street costs too much, might as well do it when rebuilding and repairing them. Repaved streets around here are often getting bike lanes. Not perfect, of course, and having a triathlete mayor isn't exactly fair to other cities , but at least it helps (at some times during the day, it's hard to find a stretch of bike lane that doesn't have a cyclist on it).
If hacking up a perfectly good street costs too much, might as well do it when rebuilding and repairing them. Repaved streets around here are often getting bike lanes. Not perfect, of course, and having a triathlete mayor isn't exactly fair to other cities , but at least it helps (at some times during the day, it's hard to find a stretch of bike lane that doesn't have a cyclist on it).
__________________
I am clinically insane. I am proud of it.
That is all.
I am clinically insane. I am proud of it.
That is all.
#20
Senior Member
#21
Every lane is a bike lane
If all the motorists are running that same red light, then yeah, running it would make you safer and more predictable. There are some lights in this city that motorists regularly run, and it's a braver man than me who stops there if the coast is clear on the crossroad.
__________________
I am clinically insane. I am proud of it.
That is all.
I am clinically insane. I am proud of it.
That is all.
#22
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 2,324
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
I find that cycle lanes do more harm than good, I don't like to ride right by the curb where there is road debris and drain covers and more often than not huge puddles. It makes drivers think you belong only in that second of the road. More money needs to be spent on changing the laws and educating cyclists and drivers instead of "gentrification" of the roads to show that you are doing something, when actually you are not.
#23
Dead Men Assume...
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Singapore
Posts: 852
Bikes: Bike Friday NWT
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
That's a nice idea in theory, but the cost of retro-fitting entire cities (or at least creating a transport network large enough that it actually becomes usable) is prohibitive in most places, and most cities don't have the space for such a network anyway. Yes, I know someone will chime in here with a single exception where it's worked for them in some obscure part of the world, but in most places it's just not practical to build it.