They also don't apply enough wear and tear on the road to make taxing them worthwhile.
Bicycle Rant
- Thread starter llowry61
- Start date
They also don't apply enough wear and tear on the road to make taxing them worthwhile.
Agreed. Clipping a bicyclist with your car door as you drive by is vehicular assault - which is a form of assault with a deadly weapon. Self defense would be justified - if you saw it coming and shot to prevent it. After the fact when you pick yourself up from the crash, not so much. At that point you are not in danger, you are just angry and seeking retribution. Shoot at the motorist at that point and you go to jail right along with them. Right or wrong, that is how it would work, because at that point you can't demonstrate a reasonable fear for your life - the threat is already over.
Last edited:
Doesn't matter. Neither does my motorcycle, but I pay the same tax for the plates, the same cost per gallon of fuel, and am still required to have insurance on it, just like on my cars. Bicyclists don't shoulder any of those costs (responsibility) for maintaining the roads, so why do they have an equal "right" to them?
The fact is that one cyclist tying up traffic on a busy road is not just "sharing the road". Their use of the road is an impediment to everyone else's equal use of the road. Even though everyone in cars are paying the taxes for maintaining the road for every mile they use it and the bicyclist isn't.
Last edited:
Here is another:
Oakmont man charged with attempted murder in cyclist road-rage assault
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
NOTE, I did say SOME initial grant funds for construction, not all.
Last year alone $308,000 was raised/donated locally
Now there's a good logical justification and argument.
The law also says you go to jail for owning an unregistered 15 round magazine in CA or buying a box of ammo in NV and taking it home with you to CA too. That doesn't make it right or justified.
You also said that they weren't supported by tax $$.
I just pointed out that federal grants ARE tax $$ and if grants were used even to partially fund the trails they are partially funded by tax $$.
I didn't say it - you did. I just pointed out the contradiction.
I never said they were fully funded by tax $$ either. Only that you can't say they WEREN'T funded by tax $$ if they were even partially funded by federal grants.
Last edited:
OK, so after attacking multiple people with his car, and literally chasing them to run them down, the prosecutor decided to go to an extreme length to charge him with attempted murder. Good luck making it stick. Total prosecutorial tactic. Over-charge the defendant to have a stronger bargaining position. Think he'll be tried for it? Or will it settle for a lesser charge that gets him out from behind the wheel - which is what the prosecution is obviously after?
Not the same thing as simply knocking someone off their bike - which was what we were originally talking about.
But I'll give you that one. Dig hard enough and you can find a ridiculous example on the internet of almost anything.
Last edited:
My original post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by pawngal View Post
The trails in my county are not maintained thru taxpayer $$. Totally by local sponsors and donors. Federal grants for some of the construction
Like I said, NOT MAINTAINED. Quit twisting what I said.
And now you edited your post, I'm done playing tic-tac-toe.
The trails in my county are maintained by local sponsors and donors. Like I said first. NOT maintained by tax $$.
Last edited:
It’s hard to keep track of the moving goalposts.
You originally said charged not convicted.
We were originally talking about “open the door and clip ‘em”. That is Intentionally striking with a vehicle.
Whatever. I’m gonna read about guns now.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Clarke Hammer
Member
Man, who would have thought that bicycle riding would be such a contentious subject? At least we can all still agree on the S&W internal lock, the wearing of masks, and that .45acp is clearly superior to .40 and 9mm. 
Drivers use the road as a matter of privilege (they require licensing). Cyclists use the road as a matter or right (they don't).
And cyclists do pay taxes that are used to fund road maintenance - income and sales taxes for example. Road maintenance isn't paid for entirely with fuel taxes.
Cars do far more damage to the roads and require far more complex design than bicycles.
Fair enough. Built by tax dollars but not maintained by tax dollars. At least not until the donations aren't enough. Got it.
Wonder which was the bigger bill - buying the land and building it, or maintaining it after it was built...
So you see clipping someone with the door and causing them to crash as equivalent to running over them with the intent to kill them. Interesting.
BTW, that is what happened in your second example as well. The guy in the car didn't just knock the bicyclist off his bike with his car door. He actually chased the guy down off street onto a golf course and rammed him. Not the same thing - but if you say they are the same thing, then OK, we'll have to agree to disagree.
Last edited:
Absalom
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
It is worth pointing out that in general, gas taxes (federal and state) and vehicle licensing fees only pay for part of the roads.
Percentages vary significantly by state, but here in Oregon, about 35% of road costs are paid out of general fund revenue, meaning by all tax-paying citizens. In many states, the general-fund percentage is even higher, up to over 75% in the Dakotas.
Considering that bicycles cause minimal to no road damage compared to cars, and use much less of the road, the average cyclist can safely be assumed to contribute more to paying for those roads relative to use than a driver.
So that whole cost argument is not very compelling.
Percentages vary significantly by state, but here in Oregon, about 35% of road costs are paid out of general fund revenue, meaning by all tax-paying citizens. In many states, the general-fund percentage is even higher, up to over 75% in the Dakotas.
Considering that bicycles cause minimal to no road damage compared to cars, and use much less of the road, the average cyclist can safely be assumed to contribute more to paying for those roads relative to use than a driver.
So that whole cost argument is not very compelling.
mike from st pete
Member
WHY?
Pinellas County FL removed a rail line to make a bike/jogging path some 25 years ago. Kriseman and St Pete city council remove one, the south bound lane of MLK St No to make bike lanes on both sides of the street for 25 blocks. Rumors have it more bike lanes are on the drawing board.
Back to the rail line, about five years ago a group in the county was pushing for commuter rail, two decades after ripping out the rail line that could have served commuters?
Anyway, here is my opinion. When bicyclists have to meet a lower age limit (16), have certification on their auto license like motorcyclist do, have to register and buy a license tag, and have at least PIP insurance then they are sharing.
Pinellas County FL removed a rail line to make a bike/jogging path some 25 years ago. Kriseman and St Pete city council remove one, the south bound lane of MLK St No to make bike lanes on both sides of the street for 25 blocks. Rumors have it more bike lanes are on the drawing board.
Back to the rail line, about five years ago a group in the county was pushing for commuter rail, two decades after ripping out the rail line that could have served commuters?
Anyway, here is my opinion. When bicyclists have to meet a lower age limit (16), have certification on their auto license like motorcyclist do, have to register and buy a license tag, and have at least PIP insurance then they are sharing.
I average driving 35,000 miles a year with my business and I’ve been to most of the 50 states. If I added up all the times I was delayed by a bicycle it would be minuscule compared to all the times I’ve been delayed by under powered trucks pulling over loaded trailers, RVs, and senior citizens with Coke bottle glasses. I don’t ride my bike on city streets because I’m afraid of other drivers even when I’m in my 6000 pound pick up truck, I ride around a local lake on an 11 mile paved bike trail and it’s still scary. I go to pass people walking and yell that I’m passing and they cluelessly walk in front of me and force me off the road.
I remember a story my Dad told me.
When the American Indian first saw bicycles they said, "white man so lazy, he even sit down to run."
When the American Indian first saw bicycles they said, "white man so lazy, he even sit down to run."
Similar threads
- Locked
