re: Bike lane controversy on Glenmore Ave in BR

quote:

---

bike lanes if they were required to carry insurance, pay registration fees, usage taxes, or if cops actually enforced the traffic laws that they largely ignore.

---

What is the insurance thing about? I don't understand this argument. Are they causing a lot of damage? I carry my health insurance card to cover myself in case I get injured on a ride. A bike can cause about as much damage as a jaywalker. Should people walking be required to carry insurance for that?

This paying registration fees is absurd. I looked it up and registration, fuel tax, and tolls only make up 22% of LA'so roadway revenue. 26% comes from general taxes. So bikers are paying too. Registration is for your motor vehicle and is really just a money grab at its base. I guarantee you if they made bikes register, you all would still complain (just like with a bike lane). The gas tax is where most of the money comes from. So should it be illegal for electric cars to use the road? They aren't paying their share. You all love to nut over Tesla's. Should they be banned from the road?

The law thing I can understand. Cops should give a ticket to a cyclist for breaking the law. But again, all these "cyclist blow through stop sign" cases probably really don't affect you and just annoy you because it's a cyclist. He is likely not blowing through in front of cars slamming on their brakes. He is more likely going slow enough to assess the cars that are coming or not coming and making a decision to drive through. Definitely illegal and deserves a ticket, but I see cars do it ALL THE TIME. We had to get a cop in our old neighborhood to watch two intersections because cars would do this non-stop.

So again, I think everyone needs to be honest with themselves. You hate bikers. You don't have much of a legal or financial reason to. You just hate them because they annoy you. Admit to it and quit debating a bunch of BS.

quote:

---

One of the more interesting solutions was to build bike lanes in the median like they have on Stuart Ave. Not sure why either side would oppose this.

---

I mentioned this back on page 6 or so. Of course people got butthurt over who would pay for such a thing.

quote:

---

it's the arrogant attitude of entitlement

---

I truly don't understand. What are they acting entitled to? The road. They are entitled to that. I don't think they go around randomly arguing that they have a right to the road. I think it only comes up when motorists decide to tell them they should get the hell off the road. It's not like a guy in spandex shorts walked into your house and took the sandwich you just made right out of your hands because he felt entitled to it. You are all just making this up (for the most part). They are on the other side of the argument than you, and when they fight for any right to be on the road, you say they are acting entitled.

Again, be annoyed all you want by being held up behind a rider. I get that. But let's quit making up these bullshite talking points "they act entitled", "they don't pay for the road", "they are basically just common criminals breaking the laws". Be annoyed and have the confidence to stand behind that argument without all the other nonsense.

quote:

---

What is the insurance thing about? I don't understand this argument. Are they causing a lot of damage? I carry my health insurance card to cover myself in case I get injured on a ride. A bike can cause about as much damage as a jaywalker. Should people walking be required to carry insurance for that?

---

One time I had to take my grandmother to the emergency room when she was run over by a biker. He didn't even stop, he just yelled "this is a bike lane, a-hole!"

This is like buying your wife a television as a gift because you don't like her watching your television. Then, you keep walking in on her watching her television you bought her as a gift, and changing the station to what you want to watch. I do agree it's crappy to make the cars get tickets, but I'd say that's the definition of a shitty gift

Very poor analogy. I can see from your responses you are a bit too defensive and blinded by bias on this issue to discuss it with reason.
Like I stated previously I am an occasional biker but it's obvious the bikers have not been reasonable in this particular case.

How is the analogy a poor one. Motorists don't want cyclists on the road, so according to you, they gave them the "gift" of a bike lane. Then they use the bike lane for parking so that cyclist can't use it properly. Pretty much sums it up. That's not bias, that's spelling it out according to what you said.

I ride, but you can ask my wife. I constantly yell at stupid cyclists who are riding where they shouldn't when I drive. I understand. But the driver mentality towards cyclists is not based in anything but being annoyed by them holding up traffic. Quit with this "entitled attitude" BS.

quote:

---

Man, some of y'all really hate bikers. Y'all are gonna be pissed when they make Government 3 lanes and add bike lanes.

---

I'm actually very much in favor of the Government street plan. I am just not crazy about spending a bunch of money to retrofit residential streets with bike lanes. Capital heights was a fantastic idea but it does not work for Glenmore.

I used to complain about Houma painting a bike symbol in the middle of the road and calling it a bike lane.

I'll give you a better analogy.
You buy your wife a TV as a gift. One morning she wakes up to find you watching this TV and starts hurling insults at you and tells you to never watch this TV again so you simply take the TV away from her.
That's what's going to happen here if the bikers don't quit acting arrogant and entitled.