Wrong way?

OK. I lived in Illinois most of my life, where bicycles are supposed to
ride WITH the traffic. When I first moved to Missouri in 1975, everyone was
riding against traffic. Is it pretty much universal that bicycles are
supposed to ride WITH traffic, or do some of the states in the US have rules
that bicycles are supposed to ride against traffic?

I was recently in Missouri again and they still seem to be riding against
traffic. I'd also forgotten the term "Missouri stop". I nearly got hit in
the back by someone that didn't realize I was from Illinois and actually
STOPPED at stop signs. . . . .


Charles of Schaumburg

"n5hsr" wrote in message
news
OK. I lived in Illinois most of my life, where bicycles are supposed to
ride WITH the traffic. When I first moved to Missouri in 1975, everyone
was riding against traffic. Is it pretty much universal that bicycles are
supposed to ride WITH traffic, or do some of the states in the US have
rules that bicycles are supposed to ride against traffic?

I was recently in Missouri again and they still seem to be riding against
traffic. I'd also forgotten the term "Missouri stop". I nearly got hit
in the back by someone that didn't realize I was from Illinois and
actually STOPPED at stop signs. . . . .


Charles of Schaumburg


Yes, as far as I know all of the USA states have it defined that a bicycle
rider is supposed to ride on the roads like a motor vehicle, but stay to the
right as far as is practical and safe.
So yes it is universal in the USA that cyclists right with the traffic flow
not against it. Although in some municipalities they may have additional
ordinances about using bike paths over roads were possible, etc.
Unfortunately a typical American only has enough knowledge about traffic
laws and such to be able to pass the driver's license exam, and then they
forget all about that stuff.
Also unfortunately, there isn't any money allocated to educating motorists
about the fact that there are other ways to get around and travel that do
not entail using a motor vehicle.

Earl Bollinger wrote:
"n5hsr" wrote in message
news
OK. I lived in Illinois most of my life, where bicycles are supposed to
ride WITH the traffic. When I first moved to Missouri in 1975, everyone
was riding against traffic. Is it pretty much universal that bicycles are
supposed to ride WITH traffic, or do some of the states in the US have
rules that bicycles are supposed to ride against traffic?

I was recently in Missouri again and they still seem to be riding against
traffic. I'd also forgotten the term "Missouri stop". I nearly got hit
in the back by someone that didn't realize I was from Illinois and
actually STOPPED at stop signs. . . . .


Charles of Schaumburg



Yes, as far as I know all of the USA states have it defined that a bicycle
rider is supposed to ride on the roads like a motor vehicle, but stay to the
right as far as is practical and safe.
So yes it is universal in the USA that cyclists right with the traffic flow
not against it. Although in some municipalities they may have additional
ordinances about using bike paths over roads were possible, etc.
Unfortunately a typical American only has enough knowledge about traffic
laws and such to be able to pass the driver's license exam, and then they
forget all about that stuff.
Also unfortunately, there isn't any money allocated to educating motorists
about the fact that there are other ways to get around and travel that do
not entail using a motor vehicle.



As far as I know bicycles are supposed to follow the same traffic laws
as motor vehicles on all public streets, in all cities and states. Which
would include riding in the same direction as vehicular traffic.

Ken
--
Messengers and mountain bikers share a common chromosome. ~James Bethea

"Ken C. M." wrote: (clip) Which would include riding in the same
direction as vehicular traffic.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Ken, it is clear what you mean, but be careful how you choose your words.
Bicycle traffic IS vehicular. Letting yourself slide into that error is the
thing that helps separate bicycles from the rest of the traffic in the minds
of the general public.

Leo Lichtman wrote:
"Ken C. M." wrote: (clip) Which would include riding in the same
direction as vehicular traffic.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Ken, it is clear what you mean, but be careful how you choose your words.
Bicycle traffic IS vehicular. Letting yourself slide into that error is the
thing that helps separate bicycles from the rest of the traffic in the minds
of the general public.


Of course your right. I should have worded it as "motor vehicle traffic".

Ken
--
Messengers and mountain bikers share a common chromosome. ~James Bethea

"Ken C. M." wrote in message
...
Leo Lichtman wrote:
"Ken C. M." wrote: (clip) Which would include riding in the same
direction as vehicular traffic.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Ken, it is clear what you mean, but be careful how you choose your words.
Bicycle traffic IS vehicular. Letting yourself slide into that error is
the thing that helps separate bicycles from the rest of the traffic in
the minds of the general public.


Of course your right. I should have worded it as "motor vehicle traffic".

What about horses and buggies?

"...the same direction as any other traffic" would be my choice. I agree
with Leo that the words we use shape the way we think and, unfortunately,
the reverse is often also true. In all discussions of vehicular cycling I
try to be careful to use inclusive language.

Be the traffic.

RichC

n5hsr wrote:

When I first moved to Missouri in 1975, everyone was
riding against traffic. Is it pretty much universal
that bicycles are supposed to ride WITH traffic...

It is now. In 1975, the situation was very different in many States,
where bicycles were supposed to obey pedestrian rules, e.g. travelling
AGAINST traffic when not on a sidewalk.

--
"Bicycling is a healthy and manly pursuit with much
to recommend it, and, unlike other foolish crazes,
it has not died out." -- The Daily Telegraph (1877)