Rant about <stupid> cyclists

[firelight]

Note: I do cycle to work and back and love cycling. So this is NOT a rant about all cyclists. Just the stupid ones that don't follow any rules and end up giving all cyclists a bad name.
<rant>
Today, I was in a car and would've hit a cyclist if I hadn't been careful. I was coming along the road when the cyclist who was on the right most side of road suddenly veered to the left most side WITHOUT any hand signals or prior indication. Since I was going slow, I saw this happen and stopped my car as I wasn't sure what he was up to. I honked him (asking what his idea was) and was given the flip. I hadn't been threatening, there was a lot of gap between my car and his cycle and he was clearly in the wrong for not giving any indication of changing lanes or going from one side of the road to another. Yet, he acted as if I was in the wrong. I thought maybe I missed the indication (if any) from him and asked my front seat passenger if he saw anything. Nope! That cyclist had just veered off suddenly.

Second incident, my husband was driving and we were waiting for a light to turn green. The two lanes on either side were packed and all of us were waiting at the signal. The signal turned green and the cars started moving. A cyclist crossed the two lanes super fast from one side to another (horizontally to all the cars). Not sure if he didn't realize if the signal had turned green or if he knew and STILL thought he can go by super fast. But he barely missed being hit by a truck and got yelled at by the truck driver who had to do a sudden stop. As a result, every car behind the truck driver jammed their brakes and two of them almost hit each other. The cyclist also almost hit a pedestrian lady that was waiting to cross the road and swerved at the last minute.

I've also seen some cyclists cycling in the highways even though its clearly illegal.

Why, oh why, are some cyclists like this? Why can't they cycle safely? Is waiting/slowing down or giving the right signals not expected if you are a cyclist? We share the road with everyone, including pedestrians. Just because cycling is badass, it doesn't mean we have to be stupid enough to risk our safety and that of others. No wonder there is skepticism about biking - some bad cyclists give everyone a bad name increasing hostility to us.
</rant>

[Willbrewer]

Just like auto drivers, some cyclists are either totally ignorant of the intracies of "sharing the road", or are just plain self centered dicks. People are people, no matter what their modes of passage.

And some cyclist may have rode

[Primm]

Note: I do drive to work and back and love driving. So this is NOT a rant about all drivers. Just the stupid ones that don't follow any rules and end up giving all drivers a bad name.
<rant>
Today, I was in a car and would've hit a driver if I hadn't been careful. I was coming along the road when the driver who was on the right most side of road suddenly veered to the left most side WITHOUT any hand signals or prior indication. Since I was going slow, I saw this happen and stopped my car as I wasn't sure what he was up to. I honked him (asking what his idea was) and was given the flip. I hadn't been threatening, there was a lot of gap between my car and his car and he was clearly in the wrong for not giving any indication of changing lanes or going from one side of the road to another. Yet, he acted as if I was in the wrong. I thought maybe I missed the indication (if any) from him and asked my front seat passenger if he saw anything. Nope! That driver had just veered off suddenly.

Second incident, my husband was driving and we were waiting for a light to turn green. The two lanes on either side were packed and all of us were waiting at the signal. The signal turned green and the cars started moving. A driver crossed the two lanes super fast from one side to another (horizontally to all the cars). Not sure if he didn't realize if the signal had turned green or if he knew and STILL thought he can go by super fast. But he barely missed being hit by a truck and got yelled at by the truck driver who had to do a sudden stop. As a result, every car behind the truck driver jammed their brakes and two of them almost hit each other. The driver also almost hit a pedestrian lady that was waiting to cross the road and swerved at the last minute.
 
<deleted>
 
Why, oh why, are some drivers like this? Why can't they drive safely? Is waiting/slowing down or giving the right signals not expected if you are a driver? We share the road with everyone, including pedestrians. Just because driving is badass, it doesn't mean we have to be stupid enough to risk our safety and that of others. No wonder there is skepticism about driving - some bad drivers give everyone a bad name increasing hostility to us.
</rant>

Why oh why don't we ever see rants like this? Nearly every day I see drivers doing stupid shit and running red lights on my way to work, but it gets ignored, yet on a daily basis in social media and elsewhere on the internet I see a rant like this. See how it works the other way too, replacing stupid drivers with stupid cyclists?

Also, notice how all these start with "I'm a cyclist but...". Is that the 2014 version of "I'm not a racist, but..."?

[philby85]

Why oh why don't we ever see rants like this? Nearly every day I see drivers doing stupid shit and running red lights on my way to work, but it gets ignored, yet on a daily basis in social media and elsewhere on the internet I see a rant like this. See how it works the other way too, replacing stupid drivers with stupid cyclists?

I see people ranting about bad drivers all the time on various forums I frequent. The rants often end up in consolidated “rant” threads so probably don’t draw as much attention. Riding a bicycle and ignoring road rules while living in total ignorance to 1500kg missiles on wheels is a special kind of stupid. Of course this will draw more attention.

Also, notice how all these start with "I'm a cyclist but...". Is that the 2014 version of "I'm not a racist, but..."?

They are not even the same thing. The OP was establishing that he (unlike many drivers) literally puts himself in the shoes of cyclists.

The sooner people are forced to register their bicycles and take a basic road rules course the better.  Make cyclists pay for the roads they use and give them proper riding lanes to ride in. This would solve many of the road rage incidents we see and a number plate would make them identifiable which would in turn hopefully make them think twice before blatantly breaking the rules. 

[FIREman2036]

I cycle often for commuting and pleasure and occasionally break the rules for safety reasons. Not saying this was the case in the above incidents but i would say cyclist should have a knowledge of the highway code (UK) but also the experience to know when to act in a manner which is safest for all road users. Examples would include cycling the wrong way down quiet and wide one way streets to avoid problem junctions or going straight on from a pavement side turning lane to keep you from having to cycle a the centre lane and have cars undertaking.

Not sure about the US but the UK and Netherlands cycle rules have a disclaimer that bikes can break the rules if it is reasonably deemed to be the safest option.

[fallstoclimb]

Why, oh why, are some cyclists like this? Why can't they cycle safely? Is waiting/slowing down or giving the right signals not expected if you are a cyclist? We share the road with everyone, including pedestrians. Just because cycling is badass, it doesn't mean we have to be stupid enough to risk our safety and that of others. No wonder there is skepticism about biking - some bad cyclists give everyone a bad name increasing hostility to us.
</rant>

Can you please explain why this makes you/others more angry than drivers behaving terribly?  Drivers are certainly more dangerous to everyone involved.

[Angie55]

I was driving once on a two lane one-way road downtown. A cyclist was riding between the two lanes the opposite way during rush hour. The next road over goes the opposite direction and has a bike lane.

Obviously he was on something or wasted. Most dangerous cyclist I've seen! Not worth complaining about since it was so out of the norm.

[hybrid]

Why, oh why, are some cyclists like this? Why can't they cycle safely? Is waiting/slowing down or giving the right signals not expected if you are a cyclist? We share the road with everyone, including pedestrians. Just because cycling is badass, it doesn't mean we have to be stupid enough to risk our safety and that of others. No wonder there is skepticism about biking - some bad cyclists give everyone a bad name increasing hostility to us.
</rant>

Can you please explain why this makes you/others more angry than drivers behaving terribly?  Drivers are certainly more dangerous to everyone involved.

I'll take a crack at it. Yes indeed, drivers do stupid things all the time as well, and they are behind 3,000 pound projectiles hurtling down the road at much faster speeds. The simple reality is that while plenty of drivers do stupid things, proportionally speaking they are a small minority of drivers. Cyclists on the other hand? I would venture that well over half the cyclists I see daily are riding in a way that is quite hazardous. This morning I was walking into my office building and watching a cyclist own the lane just like he was supposed to, what a shame he was riding the wrong way on a one way street during rush hour. This sort of crap happens way too often where I live, as in every single day, especially with the bike couriers.

I cycle commute, and I have to share the road with drivers who have to deal with little ol' 15 MPH me in the middle of downtown. I definitely feel like the asshole cyclists, of which there are entirely too many, poison the well for guys like me that are playing by the rules. I know a lot of drivers who resent cyclists in general because too many of their dealings are with the guy who rides the wrong way on a one way street.

[firelight]

Fallstoclimb, there are definitely bad drivers out there.... They are a constant source of frustration too. However, the reason bad cyclists are more visible is that they end up getting hurt badly for even minor transgressions of rules. If another car hit your car, unless its at high speed, the max you get is a bumped up car. The same with other driver. If a cyclist hit your car, you get a bumped up car while the cyclist faces a life threatening situation. Are all the rule flaunting worth this risk? And all for a few minutes of saved time?

[NoraLenderbee]

I really hate <careless> drivers. They don't look where they are going and they endanger other people.  I know for a fact that the drivers I notice are definitely at least 50% of all drivers on the road.

I really hate <stupid> dog lovers. Their darn dogs bark all night and they poop on my lawn. At least half the dog owners I see are irresponsible gits. I know for a fact that the irresponsible dog owners I notice are definitely at least 50% of all dog owners.

I really hate <stupid> cat owners. At least half the cat owners I know are irresponsible gits. I know for a fact that the irresponsible cat owners I notice are definitely at least 50% of all cat owners.

 . . .

This is the third cyclist rant I've seen here in less than a month. Can't we at least keep them all in one thread?

[DoubleDown]

I have noticed one behavior that is mostly unique to cyclists in spandex, as observed in this rant. And that is that after doing the dangerous/stupid act in question, and they're honked at, they respond with giving the finger. This is the double offense that makes them even more dichkead-ish and escalates the situation even further. I don't usually see that kind of response from car drivers, it's pretty rare in my experience. I've seen it more often with cyclists, I'm not sure what it is about the act of being on a bike that makes some so indignant and self-righteous.

[Jack]

Why oh why don't we ever see rants like this? Nearly every day I see drivers doing stupid shit and running red lights on my way to work, but it gets ignored, yet on a daily basis in social media and elsewhere on the internet I see a rant like this. See how it works the other way too, replacing stupid drivers with stupid cyclists?

It's because there are so damn many shitty drivers that we've all become inured to their screwups.

For every person killed while biking, there were about fifty who were killed while riding in a car. But the news reports on the one cyclist instead of the fifty motorists precisely because motorists getting killed is so normal that it's boring, but cyclists getting killed is unusual!

Similarly, for every story people tell about how some cyclist was being stupid, they honked, then the cyclist gave the finger, there are certainly dozens of times that they experienced some driver being stupid, didn't bother to honk, and then forgot about the incident because it wasn't unusual enough to be memorable.

This morning on my way to work I experienced literally hundreds of drivers speeding, tailgating,  changing lanes without signalling, and/or being distracted by their cellphones -- just like every other Thursday. Whoop-de-fucking-do.

[firelight]

I've posted in a reply before and I'll post it again: I agree there are bad drivers, way more than bad cyclists...

But the risk and loss for a bad cyclist is way higher even at slower speeds and safer areas (residential) than for a bad driver in the same condition. The max that a bad driver causes at slow speeds is car damage while the max that a bad cyclist causes is life damage, esp to himself. Hence the rant!! I'm a cyclist and don't want a fellow one being hurt badly for reasons that can be avoided.

[Ashyukun]

I've always kind of wondered what the drivers around me when I commute to work on my bike think about me. I follow traffic laws as best I can, only bending the ones that every car does in the exact same way (not coming to a complete stop at a 4-way stop sign where you can see there are no other vehicles- but still slowing down enough that I can stop on a dime if someone is coming and might not stop) but obviously my being there causes some inconvenience for the drivers.

Like the intersection where I cross the city's main 'loop'- it has a bike lane that ends at that intersection, and is on the right of the right turn lane. So when the light turns green, the cars are supposed to wait for me to go before turning across my path across the intersection. Generally this is just a split-second delay since I'm pretty quick off the line and trying to be as curteous as possible, and will stay back enough so that they can turn right on the red while waiting for the light, but I'm sure it annoys some of them to have to wait that split second. And from that point on, there are no bike lanes so the cars have to go around me on the 2-lane roads into downtown. I generally only 'take the lane' on a few turns where I need more room to take them at speed or am turning left, but there are rarely cars behind me that this interferes with.

It DOES annoy me when I see others on bicycles behaving stupidly- like riding on the sidewalk and then switching over to the road and then back again with no seeming logic and not even really slowing down to stop at a red light. The most common place I've seen this is patently ridiculous since it's on a downhill slope so it takes a lot less energy to get going than usual. But, I also see lots of stupid behavior from drivers too- I've twice in the last week almost ended up hitting the back quarter of a car that turned in front of me, once right across my bike lane into a bank, the other they were turning left into a shopping center across my bike lane, because they were either oblivious to my presence (I don't exactly wear 'subdued' colors when on the bike...), distracted (the guy turning left was on his cell phone...), or just plain assholes or idiots. The drivers tend to annoy ME more because the stupid cyclists are primarily putting themselves in danger and making drivers more annoyed with other cyclists (like myself), but the drivers are putting ME into dangerous situations where they'll likely suffer almost no ill effects but it could seriously injure me.

[frugalnacho]

Yesterday I was riding home and ended up behind some douchebag cyclist.  He was in the road, but he was swerving left and right.  He almost hit a couple cars, and they almost hit him.  I could see them getting frustrated that he was riding about 8 feet from the curb with no parked cars...then 12 feet....then 8 feet again, then 14 feet, then 6.  He was all over the road, and he was going slow.  I thought I had enough room to pass on the right, but because he was so erratic I didn't want to try it for fear he would suddendly veer back to the right as I passed him.  I wanted to pass him on the left but there were several cars already trying to pass on his left, and they all had to slow down because he was all over.  It was almost like he was veering out to the left anytime a car tried to pass just so he could slow them down, but he had no mirrors and never looked over his shoulder, so I think he just didn't know what he was doing.  Once the traffic cleared I pulled out into the middle of the road and passed him promptly.  He said something as I passed but I couldn't make it out exactly.  I think he was yelling at me for passing him or something.  It was frustrating and I wanted to kick him over as I went past.   [/rant]

[fallstoclimb]

Why oh why don't we ever see rants like this? Nearly every day I see drivers doing stupid shit and running red lights on my way to work, but it gets ignored, yet on a daily basis in social media and elsewhere on the internet I see a rant like this. See how it works the other way too, replacing stupid drivers with stupid cyclists?

It's because there are so damn many shitty drivers that we've all become inured to their screwups.

+1

I think this is what's really going on here.

And as to those who say drivers driving badly don't endanger anyone -- are you serious?  30,000 people in the US die every year in motor vehicle accidents.  ~600-800 cyclists die.  YES OBVIOUSLY there's a difference in denominators as there are many more drivers than cyclists, but if you see a fatal accident on the roads, odds are cyclists weren't involved.  PLUS cyclists are only risking their own lives out there - yeah, they could endanger others if people swerve around them etc - but the much bigger risk is drivers who can hit cyclists and only get a $1500 fine, or run up on the sidewalk and kill pedestrians, or ram into each other on the street WHILE using up limited natural resources.

Stop projecting the actions of just a few cyclists to ALL cyclists, and read this:  http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/09/cyclists_are_annoying_why_you_think_they_re_a_menace_on_two_wheels_.html

Plus I don't believe drivers are in a good position to effectively judge the safety-related decisions cyclists make.  You're just not thinking of the same things we are.  I had a truck run up on me honking the other day.  I imagine he was enranged because there was a bike lane directly next to us that we weren't in - but we weren't in it because of legitimate safety reasons.  He just assumed we were choosing to ruin his day for fun. 

I'm getting really sick of all the cyclist hating on this site. 

[AH013]

Inconsiderate bicyclists are easy to train.  Much easier than inconsiderate drivers.

I walk the last part of the way to my work, crossing a few busy city intersections, and without fail at least twice a week some idiot on 2 wheels will completely disregard that their lane of traffic has now been subject to a red light (aka, legal obligation to stop) since before they even reached the intersection and will zoom through that intersection as a herd of pedestrians who have been waiting for the blinking man (aka, legal right to cross) are a good 1/2 way through the cross, bicyclist slicing through them as if it's their birthright because they are green gods and that all the pedestrians should make way for their holiness.

I ignore these inconsiderate degenerates, and if their path should collide with me (I won't purposely try), so be it.  The mild sting of being hit by a bike is a small price to pay to see their dopey a$$ fly off their bikes at 10mph, fall hard to the unforgiving pavement, seriously mess up their 2 wheeled chariot, and be left with a discouraging look from a large group of people who couldn't care less about their well-being but are concerned for mine.  Sometimes this class of bicyclist realize what they did was their fault and apologize.  Sometimes they legitimately think I was wrong for being hit by them in a crosswalk as they ran a red light, because "that rule doesn't apply to me" before they walk their broken bike away in a huff.  I don't know if it's because these people don't have a real license and don't know that if it doesn't fly when you're in a car, it doesn't fly when you're on a bike either, or whether it's because bicyclist infractions are met with a slap on the hand (seriously:  my city had cops stake out at city intersections and pulled over bicyclists who ran reds, etc. and gave them helmets and rear lights...that's right, you broke the law, so we'll give you a nice reward that law-abiding bicyclists would love, instead of the huge fine you deserve.  talk about nuts!).

Out of 5 hits, I've seen 3 of the cyclists stop running a red when I've seen them again (2 of them I know were habitual offenders since before I took my anti-avoidance stand).  Progress.

You just need to remember in the game of rock / paper / scissor with bikes, car beats bike, truck beats bike, and even pedestrian beats bike.

[Beric01]

OP, I fully agree with you - see my thread from last week which got a lot of attention.

The thing is, this won't change until we get fewer arrogant cyclists who think they are above the law. It seems there's plenty of arrogant cyclists even on these forums though, so I'm not that hopeful of things changing.

[NoraLenderbee]

  The mild sting of being hit by a bike is a small price to pay to see their dopey a$$ fly off their bikes at 10mph 

Charming. . . not.

[Jack]

Make cyclists pay for the roads they use...

Sure thing!

The amount of wear and tear a vehicle puts on the road is proportional to (weight per axle)^4. So, if you compare a 3,000 lb sedan and a 150 lb bike and rider (with 2 axles each), then the sedan owner should be paying a mere ((3000 / 2) / (150 / 2)) ^ 4 = 20^4 = 160,000 times more than the bike owner.

If we set the bicycle registration fee at a "reasonable" $20/year, that means the fees and taxes for your car should be an equally "reasonable" $3.2 million/year.

Fair is fair, right?

(Conversely, if we assume that the vehicle owner pays the average of $97.52 in federal gas tax + $114.64 in state gas tax and enough vehicle registration taxes and fees (assumed instead of cited; sorry) such that their total contribution to the highway budget is $500/year, then the fair amount for the bicycle owner to pay is about $.003 (three tenths of a cent).)

[fallstoclimb]

  The mild sting of being hit by a bike is a small price to pay to see their dopey a$$ fly off their bikes at 10mph 

Charming. . . not.

Also sort of oddly optimistic about how collisions work.

LOL this made me laugh (after the original comment got my blood boiling).  Thanks for that.

I still don't fundamentally understand why people hate cyclists, who almost never kill anyone else, more than drivers, who kill other people all the fricking time. 

Regarding cyclists not getting ticketed:  this is, again, more of a problem with drivers.  A driver in my area just got a $1500 fine and some points on her license for killing a cyclist (who was very experience, in a high-visibility area, and following all rules of the road).

Also confused regarding the special-hate towards cyclists in spandex.  In my area, the spandex-wearers are the most experienced cyclists who are least likely to act unpredictably and cause an accident. 

[DoubleDown]

I have noticed one behavior that is mostly unique to cyclists in spandex, as observed in this rant. And that is that after doing the dangerous/stupid act in question, and they're honked at, they respond with giving the finger. This is the double offense that makes them even more dichkead-ish and escalates the situation even further. I don't usually see that kind of response from car drivers, it's pretty rare in my experience. I've seen it more often with cyclists, I'm not sure what it is about the act of being on a bike that makes some so indignant and self-righteous.

"Mostly unique to cyclists in spandex," even though you've seen it from drivers? Not sure what that means, but sounds like selective memory. Whenever I visit my wife's family in NJ, I certainly see a ton if it between drivers.

Perhaps it's that your driving was far more dangerous to the cyclists than to other drivers, and that some of the "cyclists in spandex" spend enough time on the road that they see a huge amount of dangerous driving every year, and get fed up with it. And to them you're just another dangerous driver doing stupid things.

Yes, I've seen it in car drivers, but I see it far more often from cyclists, particularly given their smaller representation on the roads. Could be just my experience, but I think not. /shrug

I wasn't referring to my own driving, though I figured someone would jump on that assumption. I've seen cyclists blow through stop signs at 20mph, the car ahead of me with the right of way slams on their brakes and honks, and cyclist gives them the finger as they go by. There's no justification for that, and it has nothing to do with that car driver (or me) being bad drivers. That's one example, I won't bother to cite others.

Like I said in another thread, stereotypes almost never just pop up out of nowhere. There's truth in them that then gets overgeneralized to a larger group. But that kernel of truth comes from somewhere. It's not by accident that "Jeff The Cyclist" is the spandex-wearing, indignant, self-righteous, cyclist object of humor in the comic strip Pearls Before Swine. He represents an exaggerated and comical but close to real experience many people have with cyclists. "It's funny because it's true!"

[MrFancypants]

I like how all the cyclists here turned on the guy who was trying to do a small part in making the cyclist community better.

"Hey guys, I saw a guy riding poorly.  Please be safe and know that others are judging you when you ride like a tool."

"OH YEAH, WELL CAR DRIVERS BLAAAAARARRHGHGHG RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!!"

[Beric01]

I like how all the cyclists here turned on the guy who was trying to do a small part in making the cyclist community better.

"Hey guys, I saw a guy riding poorly.  Please be safe and know that others are judging you when you ride like a tool."

"OH YEAH, WELL CAR DRIVERS BLAAAAARARRHGHGHG RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!!"

And this proves precisely what is wrong with the cyclist community. This isn't going to change unless we get more reasonable cyclists to join. The problem is, these self-destructive, elitist cyclists are exactly what is discouraging more decent people to join. And then, when people do start cycling, and they see so many cyclists breaking the law right in front of them, and it leaves an impression.

Just yesterday I was waiting at a red light in the bike lane. A cyclist barrels past me, running the red, and makes a left turn from the bike lane across the entire intersection! I see these blatant types of lawbreaking when I ride my bike every single day, on my 2-mile route to work, or my 3-mile trip to the grocery store.. I don't see this type of blatant lawbreaking activity by motorists, and yet drivers are a disproportionate number of people on the road.

[Eric]

I like how all the cyclists here turned on the guy who was trying to do a small part in making the cyclist community better.

If that's how rants work, I need to start ranting more often!  :)

[Beric01]

I like how all the cyclists here turned on the guy who was trying to do a small part in making the cyclist community better.

"Hey guys, I saw a guy riding poorly.  Please be safe and know that others are judging you when you ride like a tool."

"OH YEAH, WELL CAR DRIVERS BLAAAAARARRHGHGHG RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!!"

And this proves precisely what is wrong with the cyclist community. This isn't going to change unless we get more reasonable cyclists to join. The problem is, these self-destructive, elitist cyclists are exactly what is discouraging more decent people to join. And then, when people do start cycling, and they see so many cyclists breaking the law right in front of them, and it leaves an impression.

Just yesterday I was waiting at a red light in the bike lane. A cyclist barrels past me, running the red, and makes a left turn from the bike lane across the entire intersection! I see these blatant types of lawbreaking when I ride my bike every single day, on my 2-mile route to work, or my 3-mile trip to the grocery store.. I don't see this type of blatant lawbreaking activity by motorists, and yet drivers are a disproportionate number of people on the road.

No, you and other apologists trying to fault a "community" on the basis of behavior by individual "members" is exactly what's wrong with the critic community.

The group I'm specifically faulting is the "lawbreaking community", which you yourself has admitted to being a member of. When I see a cyclist break the law, they are part of that "community" (for lack of a better term).

So yes, I think it's perfectly reasonable to judge lawbreakers based on the actions of lawbreakers.

[AH013]

  The mild sting of being hit by a bike is a small price to pay to see their dopey a$$ fly off their bikes at 10mph 

Charming. . . not.

Also sort of oddly optimistic about how collisions work.

LOL this made me laugh (after the original comment got my blood boiling).  Thanks for that.

I still don't fundamentally understand why people hate cyclists, who almost never kill anyone else, more than drivers, who kill other people all the fricking time. 

Regarding cyclists not getting ticketed:  this is, again, more of a problem with drivers.  A driver in my area just got a $1500 fine and some points on her license for killing a cyclist (who was very experience, in a high-visibility area, and following all rules of the road).

Also confused regarding the special-hate towards cyclists in spandex.  In my area, the spandex-wearers are the most experienced cyclists who are least likely to act unpredictably and cause an accident.

I don't understand the anger.  The point isn't to inflict harm to random cyclists for fun.  It's about taking back my right (and everyone else's) to feel safe during our commute and not be afraid that some clown is going to pull some major douchbaggery that threatens public safety, whether they be on 2 feet, 2 wheels or 4 wheels.

I shouldn't have to worry that someone from a generally well-behaving cyclist community (that I also happen to be a part of) who falls into the "I own the road, deal with me" sub-set is going to blow through an intersection / stop sign with utter disregard for everyone else's well being, any more than I should have the same worry that some car driver is going to blow through the same intersection in the same manner.  If a car ran through a red light at 20mph and expected cars in the cross traffic to just slam on their brakes and pedestrians to scurry out of the way while pushing their baby carriages like some action movie, all while the driver flips them all the bird, it would be so bizarre that everyone would be looking for whether it was 5 or 6 police cars that were chasing the driver that must have just robbed a bank.  But society operates under a mantra that it has just become something we have to accept with 1 out of 100 bicyclists, that some people on bikes ride them probably because their driver's license has been suspended/revoked and we just have to deal with their continued ridiculous driving behavior, just on 2 wheels instead of 4, elevated to the Nth degree because you can't financially/criminally punish a bicyclist like you can a car driver.  And then when we offer no penalty and just accept this behavior or even reward it, it encourages other normal bicyclists who would otherwise follow the rules of the road to also run reds, change lanes without signaling, etc. and the ratio grows from 1 in 100 to 1 in 50, etc.

If accidentally colliding with my foot and getting a minor scrape or owwie because I refuse to recognize and adapt to their perceived right to do whatever the F they please gets them to realize the consequences of their actions, then great, because maybe it prevents them colliding with a car and having something much worse to deal with then a busted wheel and a scraped elbow.  And if I ever ride my bike in the same gross disregard for society, you can feel free to teach me that lesson, the same as if I jaywalked across a busy highway or sped down the road at 120mph or any other idiotic, inconsiderate transit behavior.

I'm pro-bicyclists.  I'm anti-DB regardless of what method of transportation you're using.

[Travis]

When I see drivers, bicyclists, or pedestrians acting dangerously it bothers me in different ways.  A reckless driver may cause an accident and potentially injure someone or themselves.  If one of those parties is walking or riding, they're at the mercy of physics whether it's their fault or not.  At least when two cars are involved there's several thousand pounds of metal, cushions, and technology to mitigate the impact.  I think I get more upset with the non-driving offenders because 1) it's a serious lack of self-preservation I can't comprehend and 2) if the walker/rider's recklessness leads to them getting hit, there's a good chance they just turned someone else into a killer and that pisses me off.  My college roommate hit a pedestrian who was walking across a dark highway at 1am.  We never learned who he was or why he would do such a thing.  The man went through the windshield head first and before his upper body exploded all over the back seat enough of him was intact to hit my friend and break his arm in three places.  That man's actions forced my friend into being part of a gory horror movie with a couple surgeries to rebuild his arm.  I've had close calls with pedestrians while behind the wheel or on a bicycle where a jaywalker looked at me with entitled contempt for nearly hitting them when they never even bothered to check for traffic.  It happens often where I work with people jumping out from between rows of parked cars to cross the street.  Even at crosswalks there's little warning on that road.

On the flip side as a bicyclist I've encountered cars that don't understand how to share the road and think they own every inch of it.  There is a stretch of road on my way to work that can potentially kill me every day, but only if the drivers are being idiots.  It's a small tunnel that is as deep as a 4-lane highway is wide and the bike lane disappears in the tunnel (2 lane road).  The speed limit is 25mph, and oncoming traffic cannot see if someone is coming from the other direction due to an immediate curve after the tunnel. Nevertheless, when a car should be slowing down for those few seconds to wait for me to clear the tunnel, most of them try to go around me into the other lane.  Almost every single time they do that they nearly hit oncoming traffic.  I don't worry so much about the 25mph head-on they might have, but if they collide in the tunnel, one of those cars is likely to take me with them.

[hybrid]

Stop projecting the actions of just a few cyclists to ALL cyclists, and read this:  http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/09/cyclists_are_annoying_why_you_think_they_re_a_menace_on_two_wheels_.html

.......

I'm getting really sick of all the cyclist hating on this site.

I feel just the opposite. I'm growing weary of the cycling apologists on this site. Cyclists are not above legitimate criticism, and when they are being legitimately criticized it would be nice to stick to the topic without the constant "Oh yeah, what about car drivers!" that seems to immediately follow (start a different thread I say). Too many overly sensitive cyclists it seems. I find the proportion of asshole cyclists in my area disturbing, and we should be able to discuss that without derailing into a conversation about automobile drivers. In Richmond a local street is being considered as a cycling boulevard and critics have pointed out, fairly, how entirely too many cyclists simply won't obey the rules of the road. They have a point. I think the nation will become friendlier to cyclists in general when the cycling community cleans up its collective act.

[Travis]

Stop projecting the actions of just a few cyclists to ALL cyclists, and read this:  http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/09/cyclists_are_annoying_why_you_think_they_re_a_menace_on_two_wheels_.html

.......

I'm getting really sick of all the cyclist hating on this site.

I feel just the opposite. I'm growing weary of the cycling apologists on this site. Cyclists are not above legitimate criticism, and when they are being legitimately criticized it would be nice to stick to the topic without the constant "Oh yeah, what about car drivers!" that seems to immediately follow (start a different thread I say). Too many overly sensitive cyclists it seems. I find the proportion of asshole cyclists in my area disturbing, and we should be able to discuss that without derailing into a conversation about automobile drivers. In Richmond a local street is being considered as a cycling boulevard and critics have pointed out, fairly, how entirely too many cyclists simply won't obey the rules of the road. They have a point. I think the nation will become friendlier to cyclists in general when the cycling community cleans up its collective act.

The university I attended and the town surrounding it are insanely bike friendly.  The streets are small, everything is within walking distance, and the campus is large enough that you need a bike to make it to class on time.  While it and the town are designed to be accommodating to bikes and inconvenient to cars, they're very strict about the laws.  The police often ride bikes too and both them and patrol cars are not above pulling over a cyclist and handing out tickets.  The DMV and University rulebooks includes how a bicyclist is supposed to behave and they hold everyone to the same standard.

[Beric01]

Stop projecting the actions of just a few cyclists to ALL cyclists, and read this:  http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/09/cyclists_are_annoying_why_you_think_they_re_a_menace_on_two_wheels_.html

.......

I'm getting really sick of all the cyclist hating on this site.

I feel just the opposite. I'm growing weary of the cycling apologists on this site. Cyclists are not above legitimate criticism, and when they are being legitimately criticized it would be nice to stick to the topic without the constant "Oh yeah, what about car drivers!" that seems to immediately follow (start a different thread I say). Too many overly sensitive cyclists it seems. I find the proportion of asshole cyclists in my area disturbing, and we should be able to discuss that without derailing into a conversation about automobile drivers. In Richmond a local street is being considered as a cycling boulevard and critics have pointed out, fairly, how entirely too many cyclists simply won't obey the rules of the road. They have a point. I think the nation will become friendlier to cyclists in general when the cycling community cleans up its collective act.

I think when you see so many cycling apologists being so defensive, it proves you've really struck home. Excellent post.

[marblejane]

I dispute the following points that are made, repeatedly, WITHOUT SUPPORTING EVIDENCE:

1. The cyclist population is more likely to break the law than other groups. Show me the evidence for this claim. NO ONE has demonstrated that cyclists somehow break the law more frequently than the general population. Instead, it devolves into an anecdotal bitch session about cyclists.

2. Laws and infrastructure are designed for the safety of cyclists. This is the point that gets completely ignored. Or, the claim is made that "it's law, it should be followed." I fundamentally disagree with this claim. It is COMPLETELY INSUFFICIENT to argue that traffic laws (really any laws) should be followed because they are laws.

[Beric01]

Stop projecting the actions of just a few cyclists to ALL cyclists, and read this:  http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/09/cyclists_are_annoying_why_you_think_they_re_a_menace_on_two_wheels_.html

.......

I'm getting really sick of all the cyclist hating on this site.

I feel just the opposite. I'm growing weary of the cycling apologists on this site. Cyclists are not above legitimate criticism, and when they are being legitimately criticized it would be nice to stick to the topic without the constant "Oh yeah, what about car drivers!" that seems to immediately follow (start a different thread I say). Too many overly sensitive cyclists it seems. I find the proportion of asshole cyclists in my area disturbing, and we should be able to discuss that without derailing into a conversation about automobile drivers. In Richmond a local street is being considered as a cycling boulevard and critics have pointed out, fairly, how entirely too many cyclists simply won't obey the rules of the road. They have a point. I think the nation will become friendlier to cyclists in general when the cycling community cleans up its collective act.

The problem is that criticizing the group based on limited observations of individuals is unreasonable. Legitimate criticism is directed at individuals, or some true cohort, not such an otherwise disparate group, with no common commitment or organization. I think the response to compare it to automobile drivers is generally to show the absurdity of the complaint. Also see the Slate article somebody else already linked.

The problem with your posts is that every single one of them is trying to avoid the topic, distract from the discussion, or put the blame on anything else than the true issue: cyclists are breaking the law. That's what this thread is about: lawbreaking cyclists. That you can't even seem to acknowledge the topic being discussed is the real problem here.

And I think that's also the problem with these cyclists: they can't even conceive of the possibility that whatever they're doing might be wrong, let alone take responsibility for their actions.

[NoraLenderbee]

Stop projecting the actions of just a few cyclists to ALL cyclists, and read this:  http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/09/cyclists_are_annoying_why_you_think_they_re_a_menace_on_two_wheels_.html

.......

I'm getting really sick of all the cyclist hating on this site.

I feel just the opposite. I'm growing weary of the cycling apologists on this site. Cyclists are not above legitimate criticism,

I see little legitimate criticism and a whole lot of "Other cyclists are jerks!"  The OP even said his post was a rant. Ranting is OK in its place, but it is different from legitimate criticism.

I find the proportion of asshole cyclists in my area disturbing, and we should be able to discuss that without derailing into a conversation about automobile drivers.

Then go out and make a difference in your community, instead of berating masses of people online.

[marblejane]

Stop projecting the actions of just a few cyclists to ALL cyclists, and read this:  http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/09/cyclists_are_annoying_why_you_think_they_re_a_menace_on_two_wheels_.html

.......

I'm getting really sick of all the cyclist hating on this site.

I feel just the opposite. I'm growing weary of the cycling apologists on this site. Cyclists are not above legitimate criticism, and when they are being legitimately criticized it would be nice to stick to the topic without the constant "Oh yeah, what about car drivers!" that seems to immediately follow (start a different thread I say). Too many overly sensitive cyclists it seems. I find the proportion of asshole cyclists in my area disturbing, and we should be able to discuss that without derailing into a conversation about automobile drivers. In Richmond a local street is being considered as a cycling boulevard and critics have pointed out, fairly, how entirely too many cyclists simply won't obey the rules of the road. They have a point. I think the nation will become friendlier to cyclists in general when the cycling community cleans up its collective act.

The problem is that criticizing the group based on limited observations of individuals is unreasonable. Legitimate criticism is directed at individuals, or some true cohort, not such an otherwise disparate group, with no common commitment or organization. I think the response to compare it to automobile drivers is generally to show the absurdity of the complaint. Also see the Slate article somebody else already linked.

The problem with your posts is that every single one of them is trying to avoid the topic, distract from the discussion, or put the blame on anything else than the true issue: cyclists are breaking the law. That's what this thread is about: lawbreaking cyclists. That you can't even seem to acknowledge the topic being discussed is the real problem here.

And I think that's also the problem with these cyclists: they can't even conceive of the possibility that whatever they're doing might be wrong, let alone take responsibility for their actions.

Beric01, you have failed to provide any REAL evidence that lawbreaking cyclists are a real thing or even an issue. Please stop trolling this forum.

[philby85]

I already pay for the roads, so maybe just let me use them without presuming I'm infringing on some right of drivers, thanks. Maybe rationalize the rules that apply to bicycles (which wouldn't be unique, of course---there are particular differences in the laws that apply to motorcycles and heavy trucks, for example).

In my state, non-interstate roads are funded overwhelmingly by county municipal property taxes and state income taxes. I'm fairly sure the more than $35k I pay in those taxes every year covers the wear and tear my bike inflicts (plus the fewer than 2,000 miles I drive). Solving road rage is most easily achieved by people (all around) just displaying some maturity.

I guess it largely depends on the country you live in as to how roads are funded. Point taken that other tax revenues often go towards paying for roads. At the very least bikes should be registered (allowing riders to be identified) and the registration fee should cover the cost of processing the registration.

I agree that rules should be rationalised for bicycles, but I'm sure we can agree that many of the rules some cyclists break are applicable to all modes of transport that share the road.

Sure thing!

The amount of wear and tear a vehicle puts on the road is proportional to (weight per axle)^4. So, if you compare a 3,000 lb sedan and a 150 lb bike and rider (with 2 axles each), then the sedan owner should be paying a mere ((3000 / 2) / (150 / 2)) ^ 4 = 20^4 = 160,000 times more than the bike owner.

If we set the bicycle registration fee at a "reasonable" $20/year, that means the fees and taxes for your car should be an equally "reasonable" $3.2 million/year.

Fair is fair, right?

Ridiculous. Why base it on the weight of the vehicle? Seems kind of silly when the problem bikes introduce is the space they take up on the road. Roads do no need to be modified to handle the extra weight of the bikes, but bikes do take up valuable road space and slow the flow of traffic (when there is no dedicated bike lane).

[Eric]

At the very least bikes should be registered (allowing riders to be identified) and the registration fee should cover the cost of processing the registration.

For what purpose?  And to what end?  Should we register skateboards and (non-motorized) scooters as well?  What about strollers or wagons?

[Beric01]

For what purpose?  And to what end?  Should we register skateboards and (non-motorized) scooters as well?  What about strollers or wagons?

Why stop with bikes? Shouldn't everyone who chooses to occupy public space at any time be required to display an easily observed identifying numberplate? After all, sometimes people who are neither in a car nor on a bike do things that demand accountability.

You both are making excellent arguments as to why we shouldn't have to register cars (which I agree with).

[ChrisLansing]

Stop projecting the actions of just a few cyclists to ALL cyclists, and read this:  http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/09/cyclists_are_annoying_why_you_think_they_re_a_menace_on_two_wheels_.html

.......

I'm getting really sick of all the cyclist hating on this site.

I feel just the opposite. I'm growing weary of the cycling apologists on this site. Cyclists are not above legitimate criticism, and when they are being legitimately criticized it would be nice to stick to the topic without the constant "Oh yeah, what about car drivers!" that seems to immediately follow (start a different thread I say). Too many overly sensitive cyclists it seems. I find the proportion of asshole cyclists in my area disturbing, and we should be able to discuss that without derailing into a conversation about automobile drivers. In Richmond a local street is being considered as a cycling boulevard and critics have pointed out, fairly, how entirely too many cyclists simply won't obey the rules of the road. They have a point. I think the nation will become friendlier to cyclists in general when the cycling community cleans up its collective act.

+ 1

[philby85]

For what purpose?  And to what end?  Should we register skateboards and (non-motorized) scooters as well?  What about strollers or wagons?

The purpose would be to identify riders when they run red lights (for example). Another purpose would be a visual signal to angry drivers that "hey, i've paid to use this space too". It would also allow repeat offenders to be identified so they could be dealt with (I don't mean taken out the back and have their legs broken, but better education). As for skateboards/scooters/strollers/wagons - you are being obtuse.

Why stop with bikes? Shouldn't everyone who chooses to occupy public space at any time be required to display an easily observed identifying numberplate? After all, sometimes people who are neither in a car nor on a bike do things that demand accountability.

Stop being obtuse.

[philby85]

Because there's never been a jaywalker? Because you think people should have to pay to use public roads, but not public sidewalks?

As you already pointed out (and I even acknowledged and agreed with your point) that various tax revenue sources contribute to and pay for the public infrastructure.

The main thrust of my point is to make cyclists more accountable for their actions by making them identifiable. Making them pay is a secondary point which ultimately comes down to fairness. If cars have to pay registration to use the road, why shouldn’t bikes? I think this is why drivers get so angry and we see road rage incidents. Drivers have paid and additional “fee” (registration) for the privilege of using the road, yet drivers have to put up with cyclists that often hinder their ability to use the road. By making cyclists pay a registration fee (this is my opinion) the anger of drivers would then turn to the government for not providing adequate road infrastructure which allows for cyclists. At the moment there is a belief among drivers that cyclists are getting a free ride.

So, we are left with a couple of options. Scrap car registration and fuel taxes and fund roads entirely with other tax revenues (income, sales, housing/land, etc) OR charge cyclists a registration fee too. Personally, I’m all about equal opportunity and support governments spending on public infrastructure, but I also believe that government spending should also be done hand in hand with those that use the public service provided which is why I think registration is a good thing.

What is your suggestion for resolving the situation?

[philby85]

If you think this payment issue is significant, my resolution, in the US, would be to get drivers educated on how insignificant their registration fees generally are as a portion of road funding. Then they can drop this absurd argument.

Who will pay for your driver education? How much will it cost? Why is it only the drivers that need education? Shouldn't the cyclists receive education too?

How do you propose solving the issue of cyclists impeding the flow of traffic?

How much is registration in America? In Australia registration costs cover about 7% of the annual road budget. Then there are taxes like fuel tax (which cyclists obviously do not pay) which contributes an additional 30% of road expenditure. I'd hardly call 37% peanuts. Add in the CTP insurance component, and you have yourself another 23% of road expenditure.

Figures can be found here.
http://www.ptua.org.au/myths/petroltax.shtml

Another point (again, this is in Australia. I am unsure about the states), car registration also includes compulsory CTP insurance. Given that cyclists are at such a high risk of injury, shouldn't they also be making CTP insurance contributions?

[philby85]

There should be a large fine levied against every idiotic driver who angrily claims that their road fees cover the costs of the roads. Then those fines can be used to pay to educate the other uninformed drivers. Or we could just ignore complaints made from ignorance. Seems easier. But, yes, let's educate the cyclists that drivers' "get off the road" complaints are unfounded.

For whatever reason, you are missing the point that both sides need education. Different education yes, but they both need educating. Teaching drivers that cyclists have an equal right to the road is not going to resolve instances of flagrant behavior by cyclists (as outlined in the OP). As for fining people and directing the revenue into education, i'm all for that.

Of course, bikes are traffic, even if your view that they "impede" it suggests you don't think so. Factually, I've got no idea what impact cyclists have on the duration of auto drivers' trips. I suspect it's overall insignificant, though.

I have NFI how you got the idea that I don't think bikes are traffic. It isn't just slowing traffic flow (and hence increased car travel times) that is a problem, it is introduces an additional danger of a slow moving vehicle on the road.

Most US states don't require CTP (or what we call uninsured motorist/driver coverage). Even if they did, I'm not sure what it has to do with anything. We have no meaningful universal healthcare system, so if someone gets injured riding their bike in a collision with an uninsured driver and doesn't have their own health insurance, that's just their tough luck, as with any other injury.

Great! The expenditure of your government on roads should be lower then!, making registration a larger slice of the overall pie.

I also see the numbers differently than you do. Even at 50%, are autos even covering the costs of repair and maintenance that arise from use by autos? Even if they were, I wouldn't see a system that says "let's pay to build it out of general funds, and then charge the maintenance costs to the users that inflict damage" as being one that non-damaging users shouldn't be permitted to use. Regardless, it's all irrelevant to me; I think public infrastructure should be paid for from general funds. You know that we have to pay to use the beach in many states in the U.S., right? Australians often find that absurd, in my experience.

Well, that was the whole point of the article. I simply used it to point out that car owners DO directly contribute a lot to the costs of the road network to counter your point that "would be to get drivers educated on how insignificant their registration fees generally are as a portion of road funding." Registration (7% of road expenditure) is only part of the story (in Australia anyway). Car owners pay about 38c/litre in a fuel excise which directly goes towards to paying for roads. The more you use the road, the more you (rightfully) pay in excise to fund the infrastructure you use. I don't think it is too much to ask cyclists to pay for registration which would allow better management of the cyclist community.

[marblejane]

I have NFI how you think that bicycles on the road materially impact car travel times.

Huh? Please explain how the US not requiring CTP leads you to the conclusion that our registration fees are a larger source of road funding.

HEY GUESS WHAT? All those car drivers? They necessitate all that spending on roads in the first place.

[philby85]

I have NFI how you think that bicycles on the road materially impact car travel times.

I assume this is directed at me? Maybe I'm missing something, but when someone travels slowly in a lane during peak hour and disrupts the flow of traffic preventing cars from following traffic light timing designed to optimise traffic congestion, how does this not impact car travel times?

Huh? Please explain how the US not requiring CTP leads you to the conclusion that our registration fees are a larger source of road funding.

I see your point and without knowing more about how things work in america retract my statement. But... I would assume if there is an accident ambulances and firetrucks still get called regardless of if the person has CTP insurance or not? I guess my ultimate point was (I admit didn't make it very well) that registration plays an even more important role in covering such costs.

HEY GUESS WHAT? All those car drivers? They necessitate all that spending on roads in the first place.

I'm not suggesting cyclists pay the same as cars to use the road, just pay a contribution that covers their use of the road.

[marblejane]

I have NFI how you think that bicycles on the road materially impact car travel times.

I assume this is directed at me? Maybe I'm missing something, but when someone travels slowly in a lane during peak hour and disrupts the flow of traffic preventing cars from following traffic light timing designed to optimise traffic congestion, how does this not impact car travel times?

Huh? Please explain how the US not requiring CTP leads you to the conclusion that our registration fees are a larger source of road funding.

I see your point and without knowing more about how things work in america retract my statement. But... I would assume if there is an accident ambulances and firetrucks still get called regardless of if the person has CTP insurance or not? I guess my ultimate point was (I admit didn't make it very well) that registration plays an even more important role in covering such costs.

HEY GUESS WHAT? All those car drivers? They necessitate all that spending on roads in the first place.

I'm not suggesting cyclists pay the same as cars to use the road, just pay a contribution that covers their use of the road.

On the first point, yes, I need that one explained to me. Either traffic will be light enough that cars can change lanes to go around a cyclist, or, traffic will be heavy enough (and therefore slow enough) that a bike will travel at the same speed as the cars.

Maybe you just don't understand how public funding works in the US. Car drivers, through registration fees and gas taxes, pay only about 50% of the costs of maintaining the roads. Everything else is paid for through general income taxes or local/state property taxes. So, 1/2 the roads, plus ALL the fire engines, ambulances, etc, are paid for from the latter sources.

If you charged cyclists a registration or license fee based on the cost of their usage of the road, plus the costs of administering a license system for cyclists, 99% of the charge would be the administration portion, and 1% or less would be cyclist wear on the road. It's just expanding government for no reason. It would be far better to focus on trying to get the US gas tax raised so that we could at the very least keep up with our road maintenance (which we currently do not do).

[philby85]

Why? Are cyclists wearing out the road like cars? Even in your example, the public generally is already paying half the road cost. That's not enough to use it in a manner that doesn't impose significant wear?

How much do cyclists "impede" "traffic"?

Do you want a percentage? I'm not sure what you expect of me here. When I lived in Australia, every day I would see cyclists impede the flow of traffic on major arterial roads flowing into and out of the city. Just to be clear, I don't blame them. I blame the government for not providing appropriate infrastructure for them. The fact of the matter is that shit costs money and the money has to come from somewhere.

Still no demonstration from any of the anti-bike posters here of the significance of the impact of the cyclist behaviors under discussion. Lots of focus on other things, but tell me what are the real consequences to others of this horrible behavior? If you don't know, why are you so sure something needs to change?

Just to be clear, i'm not anti-bike. I spent many years riding to university and to work every day. Both bicycles and cars are the problem, so they both have to be part of the solution. I'm dumbfounded that you think nothing needs to change, so i'll just say good day to you sir.

[marblejane]

But cars are disproportionately the problem. By far. It is ridiculous to somehow argue that bicycle riders are equally responsible as car drivers for our transportation infrastructure problems.

Here's some reading on the problem of US transportation funding: http://taxfoundation.org/article/gasoline-taxes-and-tolls-pay-only-third-state-local-road-spending

[philby85]

Maybe you just don't understand how public funding works in the US. Car drivers, through registration fees and gas taxes, pay only about 50% of the costs of maintaining the roads. Everything else is paid for through general income taxes or local/state property taxes. So, 1/2 the roads, plus ALL the fire engines, ambulances, etc, are paid for from the latter sources.

This is one thing that often bugs me about government expenditure. Taxes often go into one big pot and dished out to different projects, making it difficult to track where money actually flows. I'd much rather see taxes broken down into components for the major government expenditure projects (but that is a discussion for another thread).

If you charged cyclists a registration or license fee based on the cost of their usage of the road, plus the costs of administering a license system for cyclists, 99% of the charge would be the administration portion, and 1% or less would be cyclist wear on the road. It's just expanding government for no reason. It would be far better to focus on trying to get the US gas tax raised so that we could at the very least keep up with our road maintenance (which we currently do not do).

One thing that I am proud of the Australian government for (i'm pretty embarrassed by a lot of the things they have been doing of late) is moving to eGovernment which cuts down immensely on paperwork and administration costs. But even if the cost ratio was 99:1 as you suggested I think part of the solution isn't just cost sharing, but making cyclists identifiable on traffic cameras so they can be charged, fined and re-educated when riding dangerously.

[philby85]

But cars are disproportionately the problem. By far. It is ridiculous to somehow argue that bicycle riders are equally responsible as car drivers for our transportation infrastructure problems.

I don't think they are equally responsible, I just think they both have a part to play in the solution.

EDIT: I agree that cars are disproportionately the problem. They outnumber cyclists, they are more dangerous than cyclists, they have poorer visibility than cyclists (especially very large cars and trucks) and they are sometimes more distracted than cyclists (playing with the radio, disciplining the children, smoking, texting, etc).

EDIT2: PS, thanks for the link.