Do bicyclists belong on the roads or on the sidewalks?

[ProfessorLayton]

Sidewalks, obviously. I can't tell you how many times I've seen cyclists ride on the road and end up getting much too close for comfort. I either have to move over into the other lane and hope no one is already there or hope the cyclist doesn't swerve or something.

 

[Lilani]

Legally, in most states, a bicycle qualifies as a "light vehicle" and thus must be driven in the traffic lane. This also means that all traffic laws apply to bikes, so you can technically get ticketed for not signalling, yielding to pedestrians, or for not coming to a full stop at stop signs. This also provides the cyclist with a measure of protection, because as long as you are obeying the laws and some bonehead in a car dings you it's their fault and their insurance premiums that go up.

That's all well and good, but no car gets into an accident on purpose. No matter how much monetary incentive they have, it doesn't make them immune to a momentary loss of control or a small lapse in judgment. I couldn't care less about getting "dinged," I'm more worried about having my my vital organs wrapped around their tires. All the insurance and monetary compensation in the world can't save you from being dead.

 

[thom_cat_]

and that's the way it should be.
Although if the bike lane was inside the parking spaces it would be better.
like this:

the top of Swanston St is awesome for bikes.

 

[Boris Goodenough]

Wherever there isn't traffic.

Too bad, cyclists are traffic.

THE Yellowbeard?

 

[Hashime]

They should be on the sidewalk, and so should joggers. Seriously, why the fuck are there joggers jogging on the side of the road when there is a perfectly good sidewalk right there? But anyway, bikes. They don't want to get hit by me and I don't want to be hit by them. So get them off my road and on the sidewalk where they belong please.

Of course, this is based off all the cyclists I've seen, which were idiots who kept weaving in and out of the lane I'm driving in instead of staying off to the side. This is regardless of whether or not there is a bike lane (usually there is and they don't use it despite it being clear because vehicle parking is on the opposite side of the road).

Cyclists should not be on the sidewalk as cyclists cannot hope to be safe moving in an environment where people moving at least 3 times slower than them are. Also you should not judge the entire population based off of one or two cyclists.
As for joggers: Have you ever run 8+ km on a sidewalk? It is unbearable, the concrete is just enough harder to mess with your knees, and the sidewalk is usually uneven leading to trips and falls. Most jogger I know will run in the shoulder, but not in heavy traffic or on a heavily used road.

 

[Yopaz]

Here the law states that you can ride on the side walk if there's room for it, if not ride on the road. Both are legal, both are annoygin for cars or pedestrians though. Over here those who ride bicycles follow the rules that suit them. Pedestrians when they can cross the road, vehicles when there's green light for them.

 

[Hashime]

I think you are absolutely right. The logic behind forcing cyclists to the edge of the road just perplexes me, so for safeteys sake, stick as close to the footpath as you can, and hop up on it if theres virtually nobody around.

I absolutely despise cyclists who have been doing it long enough to think they count as a vehicle and go so far as to ride their bikes on the street. Its just bloody dangerous, I dont care what the law says, people should know better. I was once going over a bridge at night in my hometown, a bridge that has a perfectly good pathway to use, and some asshat cyclist was on the road, forcing cars to swerve INTO THE OTHER LANE to avoid running him over. Just ahead of the bridge though, there was a set of lights that stayed red long enough for him to ride past me, allowing me to wind down my window and let him know what a fucking retard he was.

We do. Bicycles are vehicles and have every right to use the road where permitted. The cars that swerved into the other lane were driven by retarded drivers who were not paying attention to the road. Going up onto the pathway and back down onto the road is a dangerous task. It is always better to keep to the side of the road.

 

[Hashime]

Road.
I've read some people above talk about footpaths designed to accomodate cyclists. Such would be a glorious thing but, alas, where I'm from, they don't exist. Cycle lanes do and they're good but often too small or right on a tiny parking shoulder, meaning that if you ride in them you risk getting door'd. Sounds hilarious but can be deadly.

Anyway, so long as everybody obeys the road rules, cyclists are only going to hold you (you being person in the car) up for a matter of ten to twenty seconds.

On the other hand, if you ride on the footpath, you have to contend with:
1. People stepping out of shop fronts.
2. Generally poor quality pavement (designed for walking, not wheels).
3. People walking dogs.
4. People backing out of driveways.
5. Footpaths suddenly ending.
Really, you need to slow way the hell down to the point where you might as well just jog to work. Which will stop people using bikes. Which will put more cars on the road. Which will lead to more pollution and congestion. Also a less fit populous. Is that really worth it because some drivers can't wait ten seconds to overtake safely?

True that. I have almost been car-doored as well. Idiot did not look and had a giant SUV with a bloody 1m+ door on it. It almost clipped my face.

 

[GeorgW]

Bike lanes.
/thread

Seriously, it's the only answer. Only problem is it takes up a lot of place.

 

[Hashime]

Yeah I very much agree with you OP. I never ever felt safe driving on the street whereas I have no problem seeing bicyclists on the sidewalk when I'm a pedestrian. Being hit by a bicycle is nothing. Really, nada. Not to mention, it'd be pretty easy saying "speed limit on the sidewalk is 15 mph" or something. Not that you can really get over that on sidewalks, I usually move 5-10 mph at best. Not to mention, due to a bike's much slower speed and especially start speed, I always, always feel like a burden to the cars, especially if I have to stop for a red light.

That said, we need bicycle lanes and we need them everywhere. We have them here in Belgrade in a few places, though it's mostly confined to New Belgrade sadly (and thus completely out of my interest zone when driving to uni). It's basically a really thin lane, can take 1-2 bikes in it (and guess where it's located? That's right, on the sidewalk of course). You grab one of those and then you know you're on your own, no cars to hit you, no pedestrians for you to hit. Win win situation and all it really takes is a bit of a paint job on the sidewalk.

Cycling on the pavement (that's a British sidewalk) is illegal and stupid! The pavement isn't designed for it, there are no clear sight lines, people will pop out of their front doors or shops with no warning. As to those who say it won't hurt pedestrians too much, what if you hit a little kid or and o.a.p. I've been cycling longer than most of you have been alive and cyclists on the pavement piss me off! Be a safe cyclist stay on the road!

You do realise bicyclists can't get high speeds on the sidewalk right? Not unless you're utterly insane and have a lot of space to get velocity in (which you really, really don't). Also, we have breaks. I actually "hit" a little kid with my bike. I was going 30+ mph (which is about as fast as my bike will go really) and she was on roller blades going right at me. Just hit the breaks, even in that worst-case-scenario (high speed, other person moving towards you) I stopped just in time and barely touched her. She didn't have so much as a boo-boo, was perfectly fine.

That was on a bicycle lane mind you. On the sidewalk, as I said above, I'm confined to some 10 mph or so. It's not a matter of whether you want to go faster, a sidewalk with any people on it just won't let you, you have to slow down every few seconds. Now granted, if you have an empty pavement for some reason, you shouldn't abuse it cause as you said, people coming out of buildings and such, but that's once again something you can monitor and limit the bikes' speed on it.

Now, cars on the other hand are nasty fuckers. They're happy moving right past me (I'm talking about a meter between us) at 40+ mph. See, when a bicyclist moves past me (me being pedestrian in this case), he slows the fuck down unless he can get a really good distance going past me (and even then he's not moving more than 25 mph). Drivers don't usually give bicyclists the same treatment, oftentimes you'll get a car moving right past you, without slowing down and without taking care to move away from you a little bit.

So yeah, between the two evils, biking on the sidewalk is definitely the lesser one by far. But as I said above, we really need bicycle lanes, they make life easier for everyone.

You do realize many cyclists are capable of speeds over 50km/h right? Bike paths are great, but many do not accommodate such a speed (the painted in ones you talk about especially). Plus I can tell you that hitting a pedestrian on a bike is not laughing matter, and no cyclist wants to have to slow down and speed up at every pedestrian they see. A cat passing 1m away from me at full speed does not bother me as I know I am not going to swerve out of nowhere, then again the usual speed difference between us is only 10 or so km/h so the driver has some time to see me.
My point is cyclists who are traveling at speed should under no circumstances be on the sidewalk, it is dangerous.

 

[Hashime]

Sidewalks, obviously. I can't tell you how many times I've seen cyclists ride on the road and end up getting much too close for comfort. I either have to move over into the other lane and hope no one is already there or hope the cyclist doesn't swerve or something.

So it would be safe for an object traveling at least 3 times faster to be in the same area as pedestrians?
Leave the cyclist a meter and drive on. That is all you have to do.

 

[GundamSentinel]

Take a bicycle to the sidewalk here and you get fined before you know it. Then again, there are bicycle lanes everywhere in my country so not getting run over shouldn't be a big problem...

What the hell?

 

[Nemu]

The road.

Bikes are vehicles, they have rules for being on the road, that's where they belong.

 

[Sorafrosty]

We have the same thing here in my country, where people riding bicycles are considered vehicles, and thus must stay in the road... However, they must be as fast as the cars, to not be a hinder for traffic. Logical? Not really, since most bikers can't...

 

[Nocta-Aeterna]

In the Netherlands, we have bike lanes and lots of 'em. When there aren't any, we ride on the road. Cycling is very much ingrained in our culture. Also, cycling on the side walk means you can't go very fast as you'll have to constantly dodge pedestrians.

Spoiler: Then there's this

 

[Ekonk]

The bicycle lane.
http://fietsen.web-log.nl/photos/uncategorized/fietspadmaasmechelen.jpg
That pink ************ right there.

 

[DTWolfwood]

Sidewalks need a bicycle Lane! not the Roadway!

bicycle on people crashes don't have nearly as high a mortality rate as bicycle on car crashes.

 

[elvor0]

Neither. I hate them on the pavements and I hate them when I'm driving an some dick on a bike cuts me up, strangely no one's ever cut me up on a motorbike, just bicycles.