On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 12:41:23 PM UTC-4, Jay Beattie wrote:
On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 7:46:53 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

... IIRC you've said that Mionske, in addition to being a fellow lawyer, is a friend of yours. I'm surprised you haven't at least skimmed the book for those reasons alone.


I taught mechanical engineering for decades. If a friend and fellow engineer wrote a book on the engineering of bicycles, I'm sure that I'd read it.


I don't know Bob, except that he passed me going up the Newberry climb like I was standing still.

Ah, my mistake then. I thought you said you knew him personally.

Fundamentally, though, I don't care about what the law was. I care about the Oregon version of the UVC, City of Portland regulations and the other laws that actually regulate my use of a bicycle.

That's fine, if your scope is just that: what governs _your_ use of a bicycle. I tend to be interested in bicyclists' rights in general, so I read a bit further afield.

People should read their state VCs and local ordinances -- typically covered in the back of the city's web-site, state driver's manual or in a separate publication.

I agree, people should read those. But a caution: I've been made aware of quite a few instances where the websites, the driver's manuals, etc. have contained serious errors. One of the most common is for those secondary sources to claim that a bicyclist must ride as near to the right as _possible_, rather than as _practicable_. The former would imply bumping along in the gutter. Mionske discusses the differences between the two, and the implications, on page 57.

A similar misinterpretation contributed to my (or rather, our) being stopped by an Idaho state highway patrolman. He very loudly said we were not allowed to ride two abreast. Some very, very careful discussion on our part (my daughter and I) got him to show us the traffic law manual he had with him, in which it was stated that bicyclists may not ride _more_ than two abreast. He eventually had to agree - but it shows that even a cop in a car with a manual is not necessarily a valid secondary source.

No "expert" help required and no speculation about what local law is or might me. As you know (and we have discussed) Oregon law is significantly different from Ohio law, at least as far as the "impeding traffic" goes -- and some other variations from the UVC.

Mionske concentrates on the UVC, but acknowledges that many (or most?) states have their own variations.

But I think that for the average cyclist, "expert" help is still quite valuable. In Ohio, Steve Magas (who worked with Mionske on that book) distributes cards with brief, one-sentence summaries of state bike laws. Locally, we've had similar information printed on bike maps. Really, that's all that most cyclists are willing to read, and it's usually all that they really need. The actual laws are generally at a reading level that most folks find uncomfortable. (Including Idaho State Highway Patrolmen, apparently!)

Land use and local bicycle infrastructure choices also concern me, and I do know the people making those choices, including third-party contractors like Mia Birk at Alta. I think I'm mentioned in her book, but I haven't read that one either. I am reading a book about Eisenhower, though. I haven't found time to finish that last fifty pages.

I'm frequently told by my family that I need to read more fiction. Having just plowed through a 600+ page novel (IOW reading about fictional people's problems), I'm ready to go back to reading factual stuff. And several books in my stack have to do with bicycling rights, infrastructure, etc. It interests me, and helps with the advocacy work I do.

- Frank Krygowski