[1SweetRide]

These idiots in Alberta were breaking two laws. The one about riding on freeways and the other way about riding side by side. So what is their argument? They want to make two across riding (taking about 5 feet of space plus the mandatory 3 feet buffer for cars) legal. Their argument? It makes cyclists more visible. Yes, that worked so well in this case.

The problem is that 5 + 3 ft is 8 feet. A motorist could not legally pass two cyclists riding together unless they went completely into the other lane. Not feasible in many urban areas.

Calls for legal side-by-side cycling after pickup truck crash hurts five

I don't know about the rest of you but they already have the run of the city here in Ottawa.

 

[hollowbody]

Cycling on the freeway is not illegal. It might be a bad idea, but it's not illegal. Riding two-abreast is illegal, and it's stupid that it is. They were riding in the centre lane, which is a bad idea, but it's unclear why they were there. I'll go into the centre lane often if I'm between an offramp and onramp, because it's just safer there as I'm not in the way of cars coming off the highway and still going 80km/h.

I can't tell you how many times cars pass me well under the required 3 feet of space.

It's incredible how many people are so ready to vent their frustrations over cyclists who might delay them by 5 seconds rather than condemn the driving who was, by all accounts, guilty of distracted driving.

In most cases, cyclists are more than willing to accommodate drivers - it's in our best interests as even the slightest contact with a car can lead to serious injury or death. All we ask is for drivers to keep an eye out, give us space, and not try to kill us to save a few seconds.

 

[1SweetRide]

Cycling on the freeway is not illegal. It might be a bad idea, but it's not illegal. Riding two-abreast is illegal, and it's stupid that it is. They were riding in the centre lane, which is a bad idea, but it's unclear why they were there. I'll go into the centre lane often if I'm between an offramp and onramp, because it's just safer there as I'm not in the way of cars coming off the highway and still going 80km/h.

I can't tell you how many times cars pass me well under the required 3 feet of space.

It's incredible how many people are so ready to vent their frustrations over cyclists who might delay them by 5 seconds rather than condemn the driving who was, by all accounts, guilty of distracted driving.

In most cases, cyclists are more than willing to accommodate drivers - it's in our best interests as even the slightest contact with a car can lead to serious injury or death. All we ask is for drivers to keep an eye out, give us space, and not try to kill us to save a few seconds.

Thoughtful response. The article mentions they were breaking the law by being on the freeway. In Ottawa, cyclists want respect but they don’t offer it back. Ie. fast riding couriers on the sidewalks, not respecting one-way streets or stop signs, riding down the middle of a two lane street for miles at 15 km/h and motorists lined up for many blocks behind them.

 

[Mooh]

I wonder how many accidents are cause by drivers swerving around cyclists, into the opposing lane, forcing oncoming traffic off the road. Happened to me again this morning. Not the cyclist's fault.

 

[JBFairthorne]

In Ontario they have no cycling/pedestrian signs at several freeway entrances. So I'm pretty sure it's illegal here.

 

[1SweetRide]

I wonder how many accidents are cause by drivers swerving around cyclists, into the opposing lane, forcing oncoming traffic off the road. Happened to me again this morning. Not the cyclist's fault.

That happens even without cyclists.

 

[cboutilier]

Cycling on the freeway is not illegal. It might be a bad idea, but it's not illegal. Riding two-abreast is illegal, and it's stupid that it is. They were riding in the centre lane, which is a bad idea, but it's unclear why they were there. I'll go into the centre lane often if I'm between an offramp and onramp, because it's just safer there as I'm not in the way of cars coming off the highway and still going 80km/h.

I can't tell you how many times cars pass me well under the required 3 feet of space.

It's incredible how many people are so ready to vent their frustrations over cyclists who might delay them by 5 seconds rather than condemn the driving who was, by all accounts, guilty of distracted driving.

In most cases, cyclists are more than willing to accommodate drivers - it's in our best interests as even the slightest contact with a car can lead to serious injury or death. All we ask is for drivers to keep an eye out, give us space, and not try to kill us to save a few seconds.

It's illegal in NS for sure. All the 100 series highways here are closed to slow moving vehicles and pedestrians. No bikes, no tractors, no backhoes, etc.

 

[boyscout]

In most cases, cyclists are more than willing to accommodate drivers - it's in our best interests as even the slightest contact with a car can lead to serious injury or death. All we ask is for drivers to keep an eye out, give us space, and not try to kill us to save a few seconds.

Like most drivers I've had experiences to suggest otherwise. It's my sense that a fair number of cyclists feel an entitlement to the road, not just to safely sharing the road with other vehicles. I'm fairly sure - my own assumption - that some cyclists feel themselves superior to those driving carbon-burning cars and enjoy strutting it.

Once saw a cyclist heading in the opposite direction to mine, very heavy traffic in Toronto, traveling in the middle of the lane, arm raised high with finger extended, followed by about fifteen cars, a third of them leaning on their horns. He'd certainly been doing that for a while.

Once encountered a cyclist myself, quiet country two-lane paved road with plenty of paved space to the right of the solid line defining the lane. Cyclist was again driving in the center of the lane, well below the speed limit, and I had a double line so could not pull out to pass him. My horn got me his one-finger salute too.

Riders riding in the driving lane - though not in the middle of it - when there's room for them to ride the white line or even outside the white line is a very, very frequent occurrence. Many times I've seen riders traveling side-by-side in Ontario, many times. I've seen them three-abreast occasionally, again occupying far more than their share of the road.

Then there's the guy I came within inches of hitting last year, at night, dressed in dark clothing without reflectors, no lights, two feet into the driving lane... If there had been another vehicle in the opposite lane preventing me from swerving violently to avoid him...

I'm sure that many cyclists are not like these; maybe even most of them are not. But these are the ones I remember when people are talking about cyclists' rights and restricting arteries for bike lanes and other changes that make driving harder and slower and more expensive while accommodating the small minority of people who even WANT to cycle for anything but recreation.

 

[bw66]

I always thought that 2-abreast riding was legal already. In Ontario, bicycles are not allowed on controlled-access highways, i.e. 400-series, DVP, QEW.

I rarely cycle outside of town on the roads anymore. I used to do a lot of touring and road cycling, now it's just rail trails and mountain biking for me except for short errands in town - and even those are getting precarious - so many people driving with their heads up their asses.

One of my pet peeves in bicycles on the sidewalk, but it's harder and harder to blame them with so many distracted drivers. My friends who work in EMS tell me that it is still more dangerous to ride on the sidewalk than on the roads - they should know, they clean up the mess.

 

[Wardo]

I saw a bicycle laying on the side of the 401 yesterday. It was flattened and looked like it had been run over a few times. Most likely it fell off a car rack but I couldn’t help thinking that some SJW cyclist had attempted to take back the 401 and that the exercise had not gone well for him.

 

[johnnyshaka]

I live a few minutes away from the stretch of freeway where the accident occurred and they were in the middle lane because the right lane is an on-ramp from a highway that eventually turns into an off-ramp.

I'm not sure what the solution is for cyclists because out in my neck of the woods they are often riding on the range roads that have no shoulders with 80km speed limits and plenty of blind turns or hills where you can't see what's on the other side. I've shit my pants more than once coming over a specific hill to suddenly see a dozen spandex-clad asses right in front of me taking up my entire lane and I have to slam on my brakes to avoid them.

 

[capnjim]

If you ask me, these idiot cyclists are a menace. As soon as you buy a pair of bike shorts, you become a dooshbag. In quebec we pay almost 300$ for our plate for a car. So as a matter of fact, I do own the road and you morons on your stupid bikes with your ridiculous attires better move the f*&k over.

 

[jdto]

If you ask me, these idiot cyclists are a menace. As soon as you buy a pair of bike shorts, you become a dooshbag. In quebec we pay almost 300$ for our plate for a car. So as a matter of fact, I do own the road and you morons on your stupid bikes with your ridiculous attires better move the f*&k over.

Road rage alert!

 

[jb welder]

Freeway? That doesn't sound like the place for cyclists to me. Whether it was legal or not it's time for a rethink. We need to get over the illusion that cyclists can share high speed roadways safely.
Set minimum speeds for higher speed roadways. We have roads where mopeds and smart cars that can't do certain minimums are not allowed. Bicycles should be the same. Or have bike lanes for them.
Would we be having this same discussion if the casualties were on horseback? Or pedestrians on the roadway?

 

[jb welder]

And another article that does not say it's illegal for them to be on the highway, but that they were "100% not at fault" and yet another article that says there was no indication of distracted driving.
So a fair bit of confusion on this one.
Cyclists not at fault in Sherwood Park freeway collision, RCMP say, driver under investigation
'Bikes were all over the ground': Highway collision heightens cyclist's fear of vehicles | CBC News

 

[1SweetRide]

If you ask me, these idiot cyclists are a menace. As soon as you buy a pair of bike shorts, you become a dooshbag. In quebec we pay almost 300$ for our plate for a car. So as a matter of fact, I do own the road and you morons on your stupid bikes with your ridiculous attires better move the f*&k over.

Lol, tell us how you really feel

 

[1SweetRide]

I live a few minutes away from the stretch of freeway where the accident occurred and they were in the middle lane because the right lane is an on-ramp from a highway that eventually turns into an off-ramp.

I'm not sure what the solution is for cyclists because out in my neck of the woods they are often riding on the range roads that have no shoulders with 80km speed limits and plenty of blind turns or hills where you can't see what's on the other side. I've shit my pants more than once coming over a specific hill to suddenly see a dozen spandex-clad asses right in front of me taking up my entire lane and I have to slam on my brakes to avoid them.

I find that many cyclists riding alone are fine on the roads. They tend to be respectful and provide as much space for cars as possible. It’s the groups on the roadways (not the busy city streets) riding two or three abreast that are putting their lives and the lives of other motorists at risk. The idiots in the city are more of a nuisance than a danger to others.

 

[brucew]

Can understand urban commuting on a bicycle, can also understand the desire for a camping road trip to an avid cyclist. That being said, see them on the highways in summer; some paying attention, others an accident/direct cause of an accident in waiting.
Suspect the two are the same; riding all day, getting tired, a momentary lapse of attention from the 3' shoulder and you're a grill ornament.

The rare times I can't avoid going to a city I see very, very few cyclists obeying the basic traffic laws. Most just do what they want and assume you'll avoid them.
Human nature to become lax, and that's where accidents are bred.

 

[Mooh]

I love bicycles, but I happen to believe that there's no place for them on 400 series highways and highways without paved bike lanes as part of the shoulder. I don't make exceptions for myself, not even riding on the four lanes of 21 and 8 that cut through town...I use the sidewalks along the highways in town. I don't belong on the sidewalk but I'll risk a ticket there (as if the fuzz care) rather than risk my life on the road...and I give pedestrians the whole sidewalk, either taking the grass or stopping for them. My preferred ride is gravel roads near the family cottage, nearly abandoned roads, sections of the Bruce Trail and other trails, and 2 lane streets in town.

Bicycles should be better respected by automobiles, but right or wrong, cyclists should think as if they bear the burden of responsibility in protecting themselves as they're always the slower, least protected by machine, least visible, most erratic, and therefore most vulnerable. Being a defiant cyclist got me nowhere when I was a young man and in many ways I'm lucky to be alive.

 

[boyscout]

Freeway? That doesn't sound like the place for cyclists to me. Whether it was legal or not it's time for a rethink. We need to get over the illusion that cyclists can share high speed roadways safely.
Set minimum speeds for higher speed roadways. We have roads where mopeds and smart cars that can't do certain minimums are not allowed. Bicycles should be the same. Or have bike lanes for them.
Would we be having this same discussion if the casualties were on horseback? Or pedestrians on the roadway?

I used to help support an annual cross-Canada charity bike ride. A journey like that just can't be practically completed without travel on busy highways. It's dangerous of course but there are ways to mitigate the risk. I would not like to see bikes banned from all those roads as they are from many controlled-access highways.

The planners of this event did their best to use highways with wide paved shoulders. Even then I or someone would often be following the riders (group of 15 or so) in a vehicle with a tow-truck flashing light on it. When wide shoulders were not available we'd be impeding (not blocking, but slowing) traffic to protect the riders with a very-visible vehicle and the lead rider would use whatever he/she could to pull right and allow traffic past whenever possible. We never had an injury or incident, and drivers were generally tolerant and polite because we did our best not to impede them except when there was no other way to continue the journey. There are safe ways to do it, and respecting the other vehicle drivers' right to use the road is a BIG part of safety. Pissing off drivers is stupid, and unsafe.