Discrimination and Loss of "freedom of movement" for poor and disabled

[black'n'yellow]

Negligent drivers are the ones that will kill me,

negligent drivers will kill anyone...because they're negligent.

 

[Linford]

Boy, you're good

 

[Canrider]

Not having read the entire thread, a couple pages back I noticed you saying you couldn't use a rearview mirror because you needed to hear traffic coming in order to know to look in it.

This doesn't entirely make sense to me:
- In a car you can't generally hear traffic behind you, you should be periodically checking your mirrors as you drive along. Surely this is the same if you're riding a bike with mirrors?
- On a bike even if you can hear, I find wind noise makes it impossible for me to hear much of what's behind me unless it's very loud and very close.
- People cycle with earphones in. I don't, and some claim they're foolish to do so, but the earphone wearers are not dying under car wheels in any great numbers despite not being able to hear oncoming traffic.

 

[ianrauk]

Actually I been on the side walks for the last 6+ years.

Civilians / neighbors are trying to force me on to the road , using the letter of the law, where I will go splat under some negligent driver.

if only this was your first post.....

 

[disabled rider]

Thank you
Are you saying that your neighbours are speaking to the police specifically to stop you from riding on the "side walks"? If they are what has changed from 6 years ago?

do you understand the concept that a law isn't a law, if it is not enforced by peace officers or court systems??

The law was there, but wasn't being enforced, by the police, for my safety. The Police recognized, that I had a need, that needed to be filled, so I could participate in society. They were allowing me to participate by not enforcing a discriminatory bike law, which would exclude me from participating.

Now neighbors who want to break the law themselves by loitering on the public sidewalk and choking off the path from other users. Thus NOT share it with me. They use the lettering of the law and go complain to the peace officers, which then forces the peace officer to enforce the letter of the law.

Thus now illegal for me to be on the side walk.
Because the police will be finally forced by people who want to exclude me from participating. in cycling , I cycle for necessity not recreational.

 

[Mugshot]

The law was there, but wasn't being enforced, by the police, for my safety. The Police recognized, that I had a need, that needed to be filled, so I could participate in society. They were allowing me to participate by not enforcing a discriminatory bike law, which would exclude me from participating.

Now neighbors who want to break the law themselves by loitering on the public sidewalk and choking off the path from other users. Thus NOT share it with me. They use the lettering of the law and go complain to the peace officers, which then forces the peace officer to enforce the letter of the law.

Thus now illegal for me to be on the side walk.
Because the police will be finally forced by people who want to exclude me from participating. in cycling , I cycle for necessity not recreational.

Ok.
So why now? What's changed that your neighbours feel the need to;
a) Loiter
b) Get you off the path
c) both
I assume if you feel they're breaking the law themselves you've mentioned this when approached by any police officers?

 

[Shaun]

So it boils down to an issue - specifically - with your neighbours. Okay, so how do you feel us members of the CycleChat community can help with this?

 

[4F]

Could you not wheel your bicycle as a pedestrian past the loitering neighbours before proceeding with the rest of your journey ? There seems to be an underlying issue / fallout with your neighbours that has bought this matter to a head.

 

[Mugshot]

[QUOTE 2076642, member: 45"]And what can we, a big bit of water away, do about it?[/quote]
Sod all, but having invested my time reading the posts my interest was piqued sufficiently to ask a couple of questions.
My ability to do anything about anything that anybody posts anywhere on this forum is practically non existant with or without a large body of water.

 

[Longshot]

do you understand the concept that a law isn't a law, if it is not enforced by peace officers or court systems??

Whoaaaa there Dobbin.

That's not a fact. It's not even remotely correct. It's just an excuse to make yourself feel better.

 

[fossyant]

I'd echo what 4F says - is there any way you can wheel the bike past the neighbours ? What is your mobility like off the bike ? I ask this as we've a number of paralympic cyclists in the UK who are world class athletes on the bike, but once 'off' the bike it's obvious to see their disabilities (i.e. mobility).

Is this just one or two people causing the problem ? TBH Police in the UK turn a complete blind eye to pavement cycling most of the time. Sounds like your local Police understand, but some 'locals' don't see it that way.

Do you stop and chat to those blocking your way so you can make them understand your situation. I assume they 'know you' so should understand you have disabilities.

 

[Boris Bajic]

Could you not wheel your bicycle as a pedestrian past the loitering neighbours before proceeding with the rest of your journey ? There seems to be an underlying issue / fallout with your neighbours that has bought this matter to a head.

Why should anyone (ANYONE) pay any attention to a moggie with fruit on its head?

Well... I seem to have resolved any outstanding issues on this thread, so we can all get back to whatever it was we were trying to avoid by being here.

Don't thank me.

 

[mangaman]

I disagree.

Shaun has already edited a couple of posts and reminded the membership to at least be civil to this guy, surely we're able to do that?

Nobody should be encouraged to leave a forum to avoid abuse, that's just as unacceptable as telling cyclists to stay off the roads to avoid bad drivers.

GC

I wasn't making myself very clear.

He has a problem which he doesn't specify - if he genuinely wants to debate issues around that problem he might be better advised to

a) specify exactly what he wants us to debate
b) post it on a more appropriate forum

As for him getting abuse, I agree we shouldn't - but if he carries on the way he's posting it will happen.

I don't want him banned, just maybe a PM suggesting if he needs help with some aspects of Minnesotan traffic laws and disabled cycling he could try a Minnesotan cycling forum.

EDIT - I see he has now clarified his problem a bit - I still feel he would be better writing to the local paper or speaking to someone in authority there rather than randomly picking this forum

 

[disabled rider]

Not having read the entire thread, a couple pages back I noticed you saying you couldn't use a rearview mirror because you needed to hear traffic coming in order to know to look in it.

This doesn't entirely make sense to me:
- In a car you can't generally hear traffic behind you, you should be periodically checking your mirrors as you drive along. Surely this is the same if you're riding a bike with mirrors?
- On a bike even if you can hear, I find wind noise makes it impossible for me to hear much of what's behind me unless it's very loud and very close.
- People cycle with earphones in. I don't, and some claim they're foolish to do so, but the earphone wearers are not dying under car wheels in any great numbers despite not being able to hear oncoming traffic.

LOL knew this was coming. I also mention the principle of mirror use between car and bike is totally different. Placing and size of mirrors is critical to be effective. In a car the mirrors are placed in positions where they do the most good. and are lined correctly by the frame of the car so that the mirrors are always correctly pointing in the right direction.

That is not so easy to do on a bike without some kind of huge framing to hold the mirror in the ideal position 3 to 4 ft in front of you just above the head height There is also the factor of lining said mirror up so you can actually see the traffic behind you head or handle bars have to be in an exact position of angle to see. Honest truth is, if the mirror is less than 4 inches, they are very difficult to use to judge distance correctly

car armor plating all around you thus less likely to die, bike not so much, There is not as much need to be as vigilant in the car as it is on bike

Thus car for deaf has 3 Four inch mirrors or bigger strategically placed. I added a parabola mirror 3 inch high by 12 in long over the center one absolutely NO blind spots the 3 mirrors is required by law for deaf/ hard of hearing here in the USA.
They studied how important sound is and knowing direction when driving. If it is important in driving its doubly important in biking, if your going to use the road.

If you have no loss to your hearing you may not even be aware how big of an impact your hearing plays. I gradually lost mine since 5 years old. So I have become hyper aware. I miss my hearing.

Also mirrors off the handle bars in my experience was broken off by driver NOT giving the clearance of 3 ft. That was too close for comfort for me and I switched to the sidewalk. similar to this http://www.cheapcycleparts.com/prod...lebar-mirror?gclid=CN_8mduy57ICFao7MgodAF4AVg

As to the earphone I been reading its bigger problem, than people realize. Maybe its not being recorded properly as being contributor to the accident. Then there are thousands of other reasons too. Example the person who was wearing said ear phones took them out, before cops could get there, so as not to be a party of fault. From cop point, if you had ear buds in, your a greater fault, in the accident for impairing your own hearing. And the insurance company of the driver is going to have a field day with them.

Kind of how taser and death issue, is being recorded as "excited delirium" or other underlying heath problem is at fault and not the taser.. Person never would have died if they had not been tased. due to way its being forced to be recorded, mainly by the bullying of taser international.

It depends on who you listen too. and the criteria they used to record incidents.

 

[Canrider]

That is not so easy to do on a bike without some kind of huge framing to hold the mirror in the ideal position 3 to 4 ft in front of you just above the head height

Yessss, it's amazing how all those motorcycles and scooters are going around with their mirrors 3-4' in front of the rider...

Thus car for deaf has 3 Four inch mirrors or bigger strategically placed

This would be a standard setup for any car over here, and a legal requirement for all cars built after 2010. I haven't been able to find *anything* regarding legal mirror requirements for hearing impaired drivers bar a page from the California DMV saying 'deaf drivers should look around more'.