A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Bicyclists: Help Pass AB1408



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 1st 03, 04:11 AM
bikerider7
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bicyclists: Help Pass AB1408

Subject: Bicyclists: Statewide Call to Action on AB1408!

It is NOW or NEVER for AB1408, and if the California Highway Patrol has
their way this bill will be defeated and cyclists' right to the roadway
will remain unclear. Please help us contact key Senators in support of
AB1408 before July 8th hearing!

Assembly Bill 1408 (Wolk), sponsored by the California Bicycle Coalition,
would clarify bicyclists' rights and responsibilities and, in the future,
serve as a solid foundation for educational campaigns aimed at both
motorists and bicyclists.

We need your help TODAY to ensure the Senate Transportation Committee
hears from hundreds of cyclists statewide before the hearing on AB1408
onTuesday July 8th.

*Letters to Transportation Committee members are the most important way
you can help our effort. If your Senator is not a committee member (see
list below), please send a letter to the Senate Transportation Committee
Chair as well as to your Senator.

*Statewide Call-In Day for AB1408: Monday July 7th

*Attend the July 8th hearing in Sacramento; to participate contact Sarah
Syed at:

Sample letters, contact info for Senators, FAQ on AB1408, and more is
available at:
http://www.calbike.org/bikebill.htm and is also included
below.

A huge THANK YOU to those who have already helped!

Senate Transportation Committee Members:
Senator Kevin Murray (Chair)
Senator Tom McClintock (Vice-Chair)
Senator Roy Ashburn
Senator James Brulte
Senator Liz Figueroa
Senator Dean Florez
Senator Betty Karnette
Senator Bill Morrow
Senator Don Perata
Senator Jack Scott
Senator Jack Scott
Senator Nell Soto
Senator Jackie Speier
Senator Tom Torlakson

Senator contact info is available online at (need Senator name for
look-up): http://www.sen.ca.gov/~newsen/senators/senators.htp

If you don't know the name of your Senator, don't feel bad- most people
don't, you can find that out at: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/yourleg.html

Here's a sample letter (also available on our website at:
http://www.calbike.org/bikebill.htm) for you to cut and paste and send
ASAP. Letters sent via snail mail and fax are much more effective than
emails. Please insert personal details to make your letter more
convincing.

DATE

The Honorable FIRST NAME LAST NAME
California State Senate
California State Senate
State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 95814

AB1408(Wolk) SUPPORT

Dear Senator LAST NAME:

Please vote yes when AB1408 is heard by the Senate Transportation
Committee on July 8. As noted by the Legislative Counsel, the bill makes
"technical, nonsubstantive changes in existing law."

This bill updates technologically obsolete provisions of the vehicle code
pertaining to brakes, reflectors and lights that bicyclists are required
to use and clarifies language pertaining to where bicyclists should ride
on the roadway that has confused bicyclists and motorists since it was
enacted several decades ago. AB1408 would make clear that people riding
bikes may ride outside of the deadly door zone adjacent to parked cars,
where doors opened carelessly by people in cars injure and kill many
bicyclists each year. AB1408 will also add a definition of the term "door
zone" to the vehicle code to reduce misinterpretation.

AB1408 will help motorists, bicyclists and law enforcement personnel
better understand and apply state law, thus improving roadway safety for
all users.

Sincerely,

YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS

**You can see the current version of AB1408 he
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/a...0030624_amende
d_sen.html

Once again, the CHP is hostile to the interests of cyclists.
The CHP has refused to even acknowledge that the current
vehicle code language needs any refinement and is so far staunchly
opposing the bill. The CHP's written and verbal comments on the
legislation are quite alarming. For example, the CHP has recommended that
bicyclists ride in the dangerous door zone adjacent to parked cars;
bicyclists know they need to leave some space in between themselves and
parked cars in order to avoid collisions caused when people inside cars
open doors without looking.

Read the CHP's analysis of the June 4th version of the bill on our
website at: http://www.calbike.org/cpoa.doc.
Ads
  #2  
Old July 1st 03, 07:31 AM
effi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bicyclists: Help Pass AB1408

"bikerider7" wrote in message
om...
This bill updates technologically obsolete provisions of the vehicle code
pertaining to brakes, reflectors and lights that bicyclists are required
to use and clarifies language pertaining to where bicyclists should ride
on the roadway that has confused bicyclists and motorists since it was
enacted several decades ago. AB1408 would make clear that people riding
bikes may ride outside of the deadly door zone adjacent to parked cars,
where doors opened carelessly by people in cars injure and kill many
bicyclists each year.


would riding the bicycle against car traffic reduce this?
(i.e. on the "wrong" side of the road)


  #3  
Old July 1st 03, 05:30 PM
bfd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bicyclists: Help Pass AB1408

"effi" wrote in message ...
"bikerider7" wrote in message
om...
This bill updates technologically obsolete provisions of the vehicle code
pertaining to brakes, reflectors and lights that bicyclists are required
to use and clarifies language pertaining to where bicyclists should ride
on the roadway that has confused bicyclists and motorists since it was
enacted several decades ago. AB1408 would make clear that people riding
bikes may ride outside of the deadly door zone adjacent to parked cars,
where doors opened carelessly by people in cars injure and kill many
bicyclists each year.


would riding the bicycle against car traffic reduce this?
(i.e. on the "wrong" side of the road)


No, all that would do is have these inattentive drivers open the door
in front of you...
  #4  
Old July 1st 03, 06:47 PM
Daniel Connelly
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bicyclists: Help Pass AB1408



bfd wrote:

No, all that would do is have these inattentive drivers open the door
in front of you...


Since counterflow cyclists would be visible through the windshield,
rather than requiring a careful backward check, my guess is the
dooring problem would be reduced if counterflow cycling was
the standard.

It's still a bad idea, however, due to an increased problem
with traffic pulling out from side streets and from left-turning
traffic, neither of whom may be expecting counterflow traffic
on roads where cyclists are rare. Also, it substantially increases
(approximately 2-3 times) the relative speed of bikes and cars on the same side
of the road, reducing reaction time.

Dan

  #5  
Old July 1st 03, 08:27 PM
F1
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bicyclists: Help Pass AB1408

That is, unless you've been hit from behind...

Riding on the wrong side of the road is much more dangerous in just
about every other way. And it probably won't help in the door-opening
case -- those who do look before opening the door are only likely to
look back, where traffic (bicycle or otherwise) is likely to be coming
from. It is also not legal to ride on the wrong side of the road.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.



  #6  
Old July 2nd 03, 04:12 AM
Randall R Schulz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bicyclists: Help Pass AB1408

F1,

Such people have worse fortune than the typical cyclist. Collisions
from the rear are relatively less common than others.

Of course, any individual's past history of collisions from the rear
probably has little or no influence on subsequent encounters.


I find it more than a little ironic that so many cyclists ride
unsafely and illegally on the left while so many joggers run illegally
and unsafely on the right.

Randall Schulz


F1 wrote:
That is, unless you've been hit from behind...


Riding on the wrong side of the road is much more dangerous in
just about every other way. And it probably won't help in the
door-opening case -- those who do look before opening the door
are only likely to look back, where traffic (bicycle or
otherwise) is likely to be coming from. It is also not legal to
ride on the wrong side of the road.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee


  #7  
Old July 2nd 03, 05:33 AM
Daniel Connelly
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bicyclists: Help Pass AB1408

The key is to be predictable. One reasons standards exist is to increase
predictability. About the only way to be predictable riding counterflow,
given the convention of pro-flow riding, is to pull over to the side
of the road and unclip (becoming a pedestrian) when any oncoming traffic
is encountered.

Sometimes I do this. But it's really slow.

BTW, if you want to see what's behind you, use a mirror.

For runners, it seems, convention is less clear. 21956(a)
has enough exceptions that there are still common circumstances
where walking on the right would be legal, and in any case
the code specifies "walking" (is running walking?). Fast runners
are faster than slow cyclists. If a runner can assume vehicle-like
behavior, perhaps the right is even better place to be. The key is
to behave vehicularly -- no sudden turns, etc. Be predictable.

Dan

P.S. ref:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/wa...ion=ret rieve


Randall R Schulz wrote:
F1,

Such people have worse fortune than the typical cyclist. Collisions
from the rear are relatively less common than others.

Of course, any individual's past history of collisions from the rear
probably has little or no influence on subsequent encounters.


I find it more than a little ironic that so many cyclists ride
unsafely and illegally on the left while so many joggers run illegally
and unsafely on the right.

Randall Schulz


F1 wrote:

That is, unless you've been hit from behind...


  #8  
Old July 16th 03, 04:51 AM
Bernie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bicyclists: Help Pass AB1408



Scott Marsden wrote:

2. B1408 changes braking requirement to reflect the predominance of hand
brakes over foot brakes.
Section 21201 states that:
(a) No person shall operate a bicycle on a roadway unless it
is equipped with a brake which will enable the operator to make one
braked wheel skid on dry, level, clean pavement.
[Doesn't sound 'foot brake oriented" to me. Maybe mandate minimum stopping
distances? Can a BMXer stop as fast as a tribike?]


The reason why they call such legislation "foot brake oriented" is because
it was written by people familiar with "coaster brakes", the kind of rear
brake that's activated by pedaling backwards. Bikes that have these brakes
usually have them solely. If they can't skid the rear tire, they're
inadequate.

But... only the rear brake of a bike is capable of skidding a tire on dry,
clean, pavement. No matter how good your front brake is, it will never do
it. Now, a working hand-operated front brake is sufficient to stop a bike by
itself. Not only that, it's superior to having only a rear brake. I have
heard that racers in training use only a front brake because of weight
savings, and because it's superior to having only a rear brake. But they'd
be illegal under this law, because you can't have only a front brake,
because a front brake can't skid a tire on dry, clean, pavement. No matter
the fact that they can stop adequately.

Another example... if you had two hand-operated brakes, and the rear ones
failed, you'd be breaking the law. But if only the front ones failed, you'd
be OK, even though you'd be better off in the first situation than the
second.


My front brakes can easily make my front wheel skid on dry pavement. Vee
brakes, 2 years old. 700c x 35 tires. No problem.

What are you using?
Bernie

  #9  
Old July 16th 03, 03:10 PM
Daniel Connelly
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bicyclists: Help Pass AB1408

Skidding is a failure mode. Why require brakes
to fail? For example, you'd be "rewarding" a bike with poor traction.
AB1408 is much more direct. Brakes must stop the bike. This is what
they're supposed to do.

Bernie wrote:
My front brakes can easily make my front wheel skid on dry pavement. Vee
brakes, 2 years old. 700c x 35 tires. No problem.

What are you using?
Bernie


  #10  
Old July 17th 03, 01:54 AM
Bernie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Bicyclists: Help Pass AB1408



Daniel Connelly wrote:

Skidding is a failure mode. Why require brakes
to fail? For example, you'd be "rewarding" a bike with poor traction.
AB1408 is much more direct. Brakes must stop the bike. This is what
they're supposed to do.

Bernie wrote:
My front brakes can easily make my front wheel skid on dry pavement. Vee
brakes, 2 years old. 700c x 35 tires. No problem.

What are you using?
Bernie


You'll get no argument from me. I CAN skid, but I don't skid. It's a loss of
control, unless you're a kid hot dogging with a coaster brake.
Bernie

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.