's Forum Archives - General

Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )

This scares me!(18 posts)

This scares me!4bykn
May 16, 2003 12:43 PM
An exerpt from my local bike club's email:

b Be alert in the Danvers area. We have heard that Dry Grove Township is going to put up signs saying that their roads are not authorized for bicycles. I have been trying to contact the road commissioner and I have sent an email to the Mclean County Commissioners that are on the Transportation Committee.

This township has some of the better roads for riding, some hills, and even some curves! I think this may be related to Illinois's "Boub legislation"

Ride in Peace, Mike
You all laughed at me, but it's startingcyclinseth
May 16, 2003 12:52 PM
A few months ago I posted with the title:

When bicycling is outlawed, only outlaws will ride bicycles.

And then went into what many of you described as a paranoid, government conspiracy rant.

In Hawaii you already have to have a licence, and a licence plate to ride a bicycle.

You all keep laughing. But in a few years you'll be riding rollers year round.
I'm still laughingmickey-mac
May 18, 2003 5:14 AM
And you still sound paranoid.
Not to worryMR_GRUMPY
May 16, 2003 1:01 PM
I live in Illinois, and know all about the incident that you refer to. The township is just trying to cover their ass. Some idiot might hit a pothole and sue the township for damages. What happened in Illinois was that there was an old plank bridge on a small road, that was perfectly safe for cars. Some Tri-guy comes flying across the bridge, and had a wheel go between the boards. Guy was really F'd up. Law-suit says that since bikes are intended users of the road, Township is liable for damages.
To prevent total chaos, judges say that bikes are not intended users of the road. Result= No difference
Well, ain't that a slice of irony?TNSquared
May 16, 2003 1:54 PM
From what you've said, I agree, township is doing c.y.a. and nothing really has changed. Except all the motorists who see those signs will be just that much more tempted to snarl at anyone on a bike, and if they complain enough to the local cops a ticket might even be handed out. All because some guy didn't use any sense on the bike in the first place.
Don't blame the rider.theBreeze
May 17, 2003 2:27 PM
Jon Boub was riding a route he was familiar with. Earlier in the day a construction crew had removed the asphalt paving between the wooden floorboards of the covered bridge as part of a renovation project. Then they left POSTING NO WARNING SIGNS, cones or anything and leaving the gaps between the boards. The cyclist had no warning that the surface conditions inside the covered bridge had changed. All the highway department had to have done was to leave the caution signs in place; a horrible accident would have been avaided and thousands and thousands of dollars in court fees could have been saved.
Not my intentionTNSquared
May 17, 2003 4:52 PM
I didn't really intend to comment on Mr. Boub or his actions. Sounds like it was a very unfortunate accident, and I hope that Mr. Boub was not injured too seriously.

Prior to this thread I had not heard of this incident, and I posted when knowing only part of the story. So I apologize for and retract my statement that Mr. Boub was cycling "with no sense." I misinterpreted the earlier reference to him flying over the bridge as carelessness. Given that it was a course he was familiar with, I can't say I would have done any differently.

However, the only point I was tyring to make is simply that it appears this municipality is overreacting to the lawsuit and trying to make sure it closes the door on any potential liability for similar accidents by posting what amounts to "no biking" signs. If a bunch of other municipalities follow suit (not saying they will) then this starts to suck for us. Even though the sign language sounds more like a public notice than anything they intend to enforce, it's just fuel on the fire for cycling hating motorists (which fortunately are few in my neck of the woods.)

Again, sorry that I spoke out of line.
S'ok, I'm sure it wasn'ttheBreeze
May 17, 2003 6:57 PM
And I agree with you that this could give motorists even more of an incentive to hassel cyclists. Would it really cost the municipality all that much more to pave a wider shoulder or plan a dedicated bike lane than to stick up a bunch of signs and hope they don't have to defend themselves in court?

BTW, Jon Boub's helmet was split in two by his impact with the road. He was in a rural county and used his bike as a crutch to walk to the nearest house. His list of injuries include a concussion, 3 herniated discs, a fractured hip, torn ligaments in his left foot, a dislocted shoulder and a crushed hip joint. I don't know what his state of recovery was.
This Could Be ItTarantula
May 16, 2003 2:10 PM
Maybe I'm in agreement that they are after all of us. We are like gangs. We hang out together, talk our own language, and wear colors. Somebody must think we are radically on the edge. Pretty soon more towns will outlaw us and our 'rides'. We will have to go underground. We will need to ride in groups for protection. Soon, cyclist will have to own composite, stealth like bicycles so that we can sneak through town without radar detection. Street camo clothing from Voler is next so that we may blend with 'normal' people. Weapons in the disguise of frame pumps to fend off attacks (pump pegs on composite bikes?).
I'll be ready. How about you?
Frame pumphandle shotgunSpoiler
May 16, 2003 4:28 PM
Man, that would be the coolest! You've got to admit that the Zefal HP looks EXACTLY like a shotgun. Imagine, all these people worried about rednecks saying they're going to carry cell phones so they can call out their distress signal. Others think about carrying a folding knife.


Deposit a round of bird shot into Bubbas beer gut and you'll never catch any guff again.
I allready have one on my bike!the bull
May 16, 2003 5:55 PM
This one here can be fired with out even removing off the frame! just pull the trigger and it will blow out the rear windows and tail lights of the car or truck that just ran you off the road!
I allready have one on my bike!CrankYanker
May 16, 2003 8:11 PM
That's certainly a deterrant, very visable. Very Terminator. But if you want to get all James Bond about it, you could just have a bike built with a stainless rifled top tube, using the headtube to house a silencer. You could use a downtube shifter for the front chainring, enabling you to use a left Ergoshifter as a cable actuated cocking/firing mechanism. You'd never get accurage aiming, but that's not really the point. It could be done. mmmmmmmmmm
That is AWESOME!Matno
May 17, 2003 3:30 AM
I love the carbon/ti/polymer/blued steel combo... :^)

Do you have to cover the barrel with something (like electrician's tape) to keep it from whistling?
re: This scares me!cjwill
May 16, 2003 2:28 PM
Then Why are they called "Road Bikes" and not sidwalk bikes?????
re: This scares me!4bykn
May 16, 2003 5:38 PM
I emailed LIB (League of Illinois Bicyclists) and he thinks it's most likely a case of CYA, but we will check into it a bit further.
Like I saidMR_GRUMPY
May 16, 2003 6:51 PM
The Tri-Guy was F'd up , Big time. He needed money for lifetime care, so his lawyer went after the deepest pockets.
I think it's a big mistake for the township to post a sign like they did. There is always a moron out there that will take it as a licence to kill.
Ps. I crossed the bridge many times when it was still a plank bridge. You just had to slow down and stay on one 12" plank so the you didn't wreck a tire.
Question for you Illinois residents....russw19
May 17, 2003 7:53 PM
How are bicycles classified in Illinois? In Florida they are fully classified as motor vehicles. The reason is so that you are required to stop at stop signs and pedestrian crosswalks and such. The fortunate consequense for us is that we are also protected under the law against the type of thing you all are talking about. If you follow the letter of the law in Florida, it is actually illegal to ride on a sidewalk. Bike paths are legal, sidewalks are not. But I have never heard of someone getting a ticket for riding on the sidewalk. By law, if you are riding down a two lane road on a bike, you are allowed to take up as much of the lane as you want... the passing motorist has to change lanes to pass you... but that, like riding on sidewalks, is never enforced. But if your DMV classifies bicycles as motor vehicles, and most states do, then you will have a nice class action discrimination lawsuit on your hands.

Just curious how you all are classified.

Question for you Illinois residents....4bykn
May 18, 2003 4:43 AM
I don't think bikes are classified as vehicles here, but our
i Rules of the Road
states that bikes are entitled to the same priviliges and have the same rights as motor vehicles, and are also required to follow the same laws as motor vehicles. Motor vehicles are required to treat bikes as if they(the bikes) were motor vehicles. However, in the real world we all know that doesnt happen.