Cycling in Waterloo Region

[Bob_McBob]

All they are saying is they don't think they are likely to obtain a conviction on any charge because the defence can raise the issues of dark clothing and a missing streetlight. Would that ever be an acceptable defence if a driver hit another car? "Your honour, I didn't notice that parked car because it was painted black and the streetlight was out. Too bad I killed someone inside it."

[KevinL]

A new advocacy group: http://cyclewr.ca/

Nice, an alternate to the other group?

Who’s behind this one?

Names and faces are at the bottom of the page. There is some overlap with TriTAG.

[plam]

Nice, an alternate to the other group?

Who’s behind this one?

Names and faces are at the bottom of the page. There is some overlap with TriTAG.

cyclewr was at the transportation fest at Kitchener City Hall on Sunday, and said something like they're a TriTAG subgroup.

Cars: The problem is that criminal liability while driving a car seems to be extraordinarily hard to establish. You could be civilly liable and forced to pay money, but not criminally liable. And if you hit another car, the other car is relatively well protected, so the more serious charges would tend to come up less often.

[ijmorlan]

Names and faces are at the bottom of the page. There is some overlap with TriTAG.

cyclewr was at the transportation fest at Kitchener City Hall on Sunday, and said something like they're a TriTAG subgroup.

Cars: The problem is that criminal liability while driving a car seems to be extraordinarily hard to establish. You could be civilly liable and forced to pay money, but not criminally liable. And if you hit another car, the other car is relatively well protected, so the more serious charges would tend to come up less often.

Which in turn basically invalidates the whole premise of bicycle lanes. This is saying that, legally, we need bicycle lanes to be separated from motorized traffic by Jersey barriers or bollards. Unless drivers are legally required to drive carefully and avoid hitting non-motorized users of the road, the only thing they’ll understand is large immoveable lumps of concrete.

[plam]

Cars: The problem is that criminal liability while driving a car seems to be extraordinarily hard to establish. You could be civilly liable and forced to pay money, but not criminally liable. And if you hit another car, the other car is relatively well protected, so the more serious charges would tend to come up less often.

Which in turn basically invalidates the whole premise of bicycle lanes. This is saying that, legally, we need bicycle lanes to be separated from motorized traffic by Jersey barriers or bollards. Unless drivers are legally required to drive carefully and avoid hitting non-motorized users of the road, the only thing they’ll understand is large immoveable lumps of concrete.

If you give me a choice between enforcing something through physics or through laws, I'll choose physics any day.

Having said that, even flexibollards probably have an effect, through both safety-in-numbers and reducing the risk that drivers infringe.

[Canard]

The argument I never get: People* instantly blame "drivers", without evaluating the circumstances at all, any time someone on a bike or on foot gets hit and injured/killed.

It's tragic, absolutely. Loss of life is horrible. But do we blame subway drivers when people jump in front of their trains, and they cannot stop?

* - the fringe folks

[timc]

The argument I never get:  People* instantly blame "drivers", without evaluating the circumstances at all, any time someone on a bike or on foot gets hit and injured/killed.

It's tragic, absolutely.  Loss of life is horrible.  But do we blame subway drivers when people jump in front of their trains, and they cannot stop?

* - the fringe folks

The thing is, most people instantly blame cyclists. So the rest of us "fringe folks" rush to defend cyclists, often by what may seem like motorist-blaming.

[Canard]

LETS JUST BLAME EVERYONE WHO IS NOT US

[Bob_McBob]

You are getting that impression because you hang out with other cyclists so much. The vast majority of the public automatically blames cyclists and pedestrians for everything unless the victim is a child. Just look at Facebook comments from the usual regulars on CTV and The Record any time a cyclist or pedestrian is struck. The most notable local jackass has been triumphantly victim blaming Robert Linsley all day with made-up facts, and congratulating the courts for "finally getting it right".

[danbrotherston]

@Canard, it is possible that it does happen in general. I do not believe that is happening in this case, the evidence, such as we have, is pretty clear. Even if this does not meet the burden of proof required by the courts, the driver should have been able to avoid this collision, and I am of the opinion that they should be held accountable for not doing so.

The other point here is right, the public at large will absolve drivers of all responsibility 9 times out of 10 when hitting a cyclist.

Also, apparently I was wrong, the parking barriers I saw uptown were reserving the bike lane for parking a giant bus.

What the actual f***.

[ijmorlan]

The argument I never get:  People* instantly blame "drivers", without evaluating the circumstances at all, any time someone on a bike or on foot gets hit and injured/killed.

It's tragic, absolutely.  Loss of life is horrible.  But do we blame subway drivers when people jump in front of their trains, and they cannot stop?

* - the fringe folks

??? Ok, around this discussion board you could reasonably, without reading too carefully, get the impression that we instantly blame drivers, although a more careful reading will reveal that most of us actually are interested in the circumstances and do understand the unavoidable limitations that apply to drivers. But out in the wider world people definitely do not usually instantly blame drivers but instead the cyclists and pedestrians.

[Canard]

I love Miguel's channel on YouTube (One Cyclist in Lisbon), and his latest video has some tips about how to cycle around tram tracks!



I think my least favourite two places on our line are:

• Cycling Northbound on King, at Allen
  
• Cycling Southbound on Charles, at Benton
  
• Cycling Northbound on Charles, at Borden
  

For the first, I generally watch over my shoulder, signal left, take the lane, and then make sure I can safely cross really perpendicular and then move as far to the right as I can after crossing the intersection. I also wave at the car that was behind me as a "thanks". I tend to do the same for the third.

[Canard]

Today I went on a fun ride and explored a bunch of MUT's I haven't been on before.

En route, I discovered this gem, traveling Eastbound on Lexington, at Davenport:

   

What exactly is it I am supposed to do, here?  

The light was green going the direction I was... so after dismounting, looking around, seeing no other traffic, I just did a big S-curve across the intersection to get to the far side.

   

Dumb.

[KevinL]

The sign seems to be saying 'dismount and walk your bike'.

[timc]

I don't think anyone understands that part.

It's like where you're biking along in a bike lane and it just comes to an end. But in this case, it comes to an end and dumps you on the wrong side of the road.