[Skeezix]

Until cyclists in this city can demonstrate that they're capable of following the rules of the road, they haven't earned the right to ride on our roads and have their own dedicated infrastructure.

That's nonsense. They are citizens, they pay taxes. They are as entitled as anyone.

And, if that were the rule, then the roads would be empty every day, because no group of users would "earn the right" to use them.

 

[Skeezix]

Yesterday, I was walking on Beverly, I pressed the button to cross the street at a signalled crossover. A couple of cars came to a stop and I began crossing. I had seen a cyclist further down and assumed she had slowed or stopped but she was hidden by the hydro pole. No, she actually sped up and blew right through the crosswalk, zooming by in front of my nose as I began crossing. I told her "You're supposed to stop!" She didn't even look.

That's the kind of entitlement that has had me lose all respect and support for the cycling lobby in this city. Until people can demonstrate that they're mature enough to be responsible vehicle operators, they don't deserve the investment and infrastructure.

I agree. I posted in the other thread as to how a shocking number of cyclists do not seem to have any respect for pedestrian signals.

But in the big scheme of things, they are by no different than motorists, or even pedestrians in some respects, in their failure to abide by the rules of the road.

 

[MetroMan]

You can't just paint all cyclists with the same brush because you saw some who didn't obey the law. Some motorists also break the law all the time, so I guess they don't deserve any investment and infrastructure either based on your logic.

If the ratio of red light runners and cyclists who ignore the rules of the road in general to those who follow them were applied to cars, you bet that we'd have a crisis on hand with politicians and the police taking action. There's an actual example of that happening: John Tory launching a blitz against drivers stopping on major streets during rush hour to grab a coffee or drop off a package. These entitled drivers who didn't think that the rules applied to them were targeted by police and city actions.

It's not just "some cyclists". If it were, these sightings wouldn't be so ubiquitous. There's a widespread culture of ignoring the rules because you're on a bike. If you don't believe me, stand on Queens Quay for a few lights and count how many cyclists run reds vs those who actually stop. Stand at a T intersection like the one at Queen West and York and count how many cyclists going westbound actually stop at the red light. Hint: few to none. It's a pity that the few who actually obey the rules are lumped in with everyone else but they too are angry at the majority who flaunt them. Many of them are the ones on the front lines calling out such behaviour.

The cyclists in this city simply have not earned the right to be considered vehicles and as such don't deserve the rights and privileges that come with it.

 

[Skeezix]

Motorists break different rules than cyclists, but just as often. Also, motorists have a heavier onus on them given the damage they can cause to other users.

As a pedestrian who watches cyclists and motorists every day, they both equally do stupid things that put pedestrians at risk of harm.

Cyclists, as citizens and taxpayers, have certainly earned the right to use our road allowances. It isn't up to you to determine who deserves to use public infrastructure. This whole they "don't deserve the rights and privileges" notion is just silly.

 

[LNahid2000]

Stand at a T intersection like the one at Queen West and York and count how many cyclists going westbound actually stop at the red light. Hint: few to none. It's a pity that the few who actually obey the rules are lumped in with everyone else but they too are angry at the majority who flaunt them. Many of them are the ones on the front lines calling out such behaviour.

And count the amount of motorists on Queens Quay who run reds at left turn signals everyday. I could count multiple at every cycle. So again, I guess they shouldn't get any infrastructure either based on your logic?

 

[Skeezix]

And count the amount of motorists on Queens Quay who run reds at left turn signals everyday. I could count multiple at every cycle. So again, I guess they shouldn't get any infrastructure either based on your logic?

Oh no, they don't deserve to use the roads either. Who is going to tell them?

 

[smably]

Wow, this griping about cyclists is sure getting old. I think you made your point the first five times you posted about this. Maybe these rants are better suited for a personal blog at this point?

 

[MetroMan]

Let me rephrase this so you understand my intent:

Cyclists who don't follow the rules — which in this city is a built in part of the cycling culture — don't have the moral authority to demand the benefits and privileges of cycling infrastructure given that they don't have the courtesy of following on their obligations.

I'm not suggesting that the city should make its decisions based on the behaviour of cyclists. I've always been in favour of complete streets and would love to see a bike network and wide sidewalks all over the city. I too am a cyclist and a pedestrian and I use the roads via Uber and ZipCar.

But a group demanding infrastructure without showing the maturity to use it responsibly is a bit rich.

 

[PinkLucy]

You're stereotyping. Yes, there are idiot cyclists. But there are a lot of responsible ones. The groups demanding infrastructure, like Cycle Toronto and other, often bemoan the idiot cyclists too.

I live near QQ and am there often, in both quiet and busy times. Cyclist behaviour is more responsible than not along there lately, but of course there are jerks out there, just as there are jerks on foot and jerks behind the wheel. The jerks are just more noticeable than the people who go about their day following the rules.

Next time you're down near the water, stop looking for trouble and instead enjoy the water, sit at the beach, relax. You'll have a better time.

 

[LNahid2000]

Cyclists who don't follow the rules — which in this city is a built in part of the cycling culture — don't have the moral authority to demand the benefits and privileges of cycling infrastructure given that they don't have the courtesy of following on their obligations.

So how about all those drivers going above 100km/h on highways? If that's not a culture of not following the rules, I don't know what is. I guess highways shouldn't exist either since motorists rarely do the speed limit on them.

 

[smably]

Cyclists who don't follow the rules — which in this city is a built in part of the cycling culture — don't have the moral authority to demand the benefits and privileges of cycling infrastructure given that they don't have the courtesy of following on their obligations.

But a group demanding infrastructure without showing the maturity to use it responsibly is a bit rich.

As many have pointed out in this thread, you're going from "some cyclists don't obey the rules" to "cyclists as a group (as if we are some unified bloc) don't deserve safe infrastructure" -- in other words, we deserve to be injured and killed by drivers. It's a fraudulent and nonsensical argument and I don't know why I'm wasting my time responding to it.

Do drivers "deserve" safe roads? Do pedestrians "deserve" safe sidewalks and crosswalks? Of course they do. Nobody deserves to be killed or maimed while moving around the city.

 

[salsa]

If you don't believe me, stand on Queens Quay for a few lights and count how many cyclists run reds vs those who actually stop. Stand at a T intersection like the one at Queen West and York and count how many cyclists going westbound actually stop at the red light. Hint: few to none.

Ok, and what about other roads besides Queens Quay? I don't see as much rule-breaking on Richmond/Adelaide for whatever reason.

 

[MetroMan]

Ok, and what about other roads besides Queens Quay? I don't see as much rule-breaking on Richmond/Adelaide for whatever reason.

Because if they run a red on Richmond or Adelaide, they'll become road kill. It still happens nonetheless with cyclists driving in the wrong direction or running reds past quiet side streets like Brant.

And I did gave another example: T intersections like Queen West and York or the end of Strachan at Bellwoods Park. Cyclists don't have to cross a live car lane to run a red so they run it and cut off or collide with pedestrians crossing the crosswalk instead.

Queens Quay is the best demonstration of this flaunting of the rules because for most of its length cyclists are the top of the food chain and don't need to worry about being run over themselves.

 

[reaperexpress]

Because if they run a red on Richmond or Adelaide, they'll become road kill. It still happens nonetheless with cyclists driving in the wrong direction or running reds past quiet side streets like Brant.

And I did gave another example: T intersections like Queen West and York or the end of Strachan at Bellwoods Park. Cyclists don't have to cross a live car lane to run a red so they run it and cut off or collide with pedestrians crossing the crosswalk instead.

Queens Quay is the best demonstration of this flaunting of the rules because for most of its length cyclists are the top of the food chain and don't need to worry about being run over themselves.

If you design a road for 120 km/h but post a 100 km/h limit, people will drive at 120 km/h. If you provide lots of red time for pedestrians or bicycles but there's no traffic crossing, people will walk/bike through red lights.

Call it "flaunting the rules", or call it "human nature", either way the solution is to improve roadway design. Going on a rampage against a mode of transportation is thoroughly counterproductive.

If you want to reduce people's tendency to flaunt the rules, you should support initiatives which tend to improve law-abidance such as designing roads for the posted speed limit (and posting speed limits corresponding to the road's design speed), and providing infrastructure to allow people to cycle safely and efficiently without needing to do weird or illegal manoeuvres.

 

[Juan_Lennon416]

I mentioned this before but why can't they make QQ a one-way street and make it easier for the drivers?