A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » Australia
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

What rights? [was "Critical Mass Tunnel Freaks"]



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 1st 03, 09:28 AM
Mayhem
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What rights? [was "Critical Mass Tunnel Freaks"]

On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 20:41:39 -0700, "Just a Cyclist"
wrote:


"Tom Keats" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Just a Cyclist" writes:

So blocking a street so I can't walk across it is not stomping on my
rights?? Pure BS


So how come cars get away with it all the time, but a few
minutes per month of bikes doing it, and some ppl gotta
run around with their hair on fire about it?


Good we are changing the subject........yes they are violating my right to
cross the street! It is a right!


Oh really? I was under the impression that as public roads, the right
you have to acces that public road is a legislated privilege not a
RIGHT. You do not have a RIGHT to walk across a road anymore than you
have the RIGHT to enter my front door. I will afford you the privilege
but not the right, likewise with yourself crossing a road; a PUBLIC
road.

Now, if you are talking about a private road you own, then privilege
changes to right.



Ads
  #2  
Old July 1st 03, 09:49 AM
Tom Keats
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What rights? [was "Critical Mass Tunnel Freaks"]

In article ,
Mayhem writes:

Oh really? I was under the impression that as public roads, the right
you have to acces that public road is a legislated privilege not a
RIGHT. You do not have a RIGHT to walk across a road anymore than you
have the RIGHT to enter my front door.


Public streets & roads are a Commons, and as such are free to
Everyone's use. That's how they're "public". Put another way,
it's not the access per se to them that is regulated, it is the
vehicles upon them. Your front door is not a Commons. Your
impression is wrong.

And cyclists have a right to use public roads, except under
express restriction or prohibition.


cheers, & IANAL,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
  #3  
Old July 1st 03, 09:49 AM
Tom Keats
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What rights? [was "Critical Mass Tunnel Freaks"]

In article ,
Mayhem writes:

Oh really? I was under the impression that as public roads, the right
you have to acces that public road is a legislated privilege not a
RIGHT. You do not have a RIGHT to walk across a road anymore than you
have the RIGHT to enter my front door.


Public streets & roads are a Commons, and as such are free to
Everyone's use. That's how they're "public". Put another way,
it's not the access per se to them that is regulated, it is the
vehicles upon them. Your front door is not a Commons. Your
impression is wrong.

And cyclists have a right to use public roads, except under
express restriction or prohibition.


cheers, & IANAL,
Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
  #4  
Old July 1st 03, 06:04 PM
AustinBoston
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What rights? [was "Critical Mass Tunnel Freaks"]

Mayhem wrote in message . ..
On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 20:41:39 -0700, "Just a Cyclist"
wrote:


"Tom Keats" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Just a Cyclist" writes:

So blocking a street so I can't walk across it is not stomping on my
rights?? Pure BS

So how come cars get away with it all the time, but a few
minutes per month of bikes doing it, and some ppl gotta
run around with their hair on fire about it?


Good we are changing the subject........yes they are violating my right to
cross the street! It is a right!


Oh really? I was under the impression that as public roads, the right
you have to acces that public road is a legislated privilege not a
RIGHT.


What part of "right of way" do you not understand? Leagally, a Public
Road is either a "public way" (the public has the right to use it, and
the government the responsibility to maintian it) or a "right of way"
(the public has the right to use it, but is not required to maintain
it). The public includes pedestrians, bicycles, horses, oxen,
horse-drawn carriages, farm equipment, tractors, mopeds...

I think you are confusing this with "private right-of-way" where a
specific agreement, history of usage, or ruling gives a specific
individual or group a right to use specific land for passage. a
private right-of-way is _not_ a public road or public way.

You do not have a RIGHT to walk across a road anymore than you
have the RIGHT to enter my front door. I will afford you the privilege
but not the right, likewise with yourself crossing a road; a PUBLIC
road.


What country are you in? Were you aware that in the United States,
the pedestrian sidewalk is part of the highway?

Public right-of-way rules have been in existence for centuries, long
before the advent of the automobile. No priviledge had to be granted
to use the roads, and no one could tell you you could not use the
roads...not even the courts. (That sounds to me like a right, not a
priviledge.)

When automobiles started appearing, it was quickly recognized that
they posed a much greater hazard to other road users. I may be
mistaken, but I believe it was Henry Ford himself who was involved in
the first major automobile accident. After that, he began advocating
licensure of motor vehcile operators. Doing so recognized that motor
vehicle operators do not have a _right_ to operate on the roads. The
license was a form of priviledge granted to an individual to operate a
motor vehicle on the road. It granted restricted "rights" but because
it could be revoked it was still legally a priveledge. IIRC, Henery
Ford was granted the first license to operate motor vehicles in the
US.

At no point (before or since) has the public's right to use the roads
been repealed, revoked, or even significantly altered. These
road-use-by-right users include pedestrians, bicycles, horses (and
other beasts of burden), horse-drawn carriages, tractors and other
farm equipment, and mopeds, among others.

There are some very limited exceptions, and they must be posted. They
are almost always "limited access divided highways" (and in some
places, even limited access divided highways allow bicycles). The
next time you enter one with your car, note the sign. It says
something like "Pedestrians, bicycles, horses, horse-drawn carriages,
tractors and other farm equipment, and mopeds prohibited". Why the
sign? Because everyone (the legislature, the courts, law enforcement
officers, and the public) assume that you have the right to use the
road unless otherwise posted. The _right_ to use the road, not
priveledge.

Austin
  #5  
Old July 1st 03, 06:04 PM
AustinBoston
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default What rights? [was "Critical Mass Tunnel Freaks"]

Mayhem wrote in message . ..
On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 20:41:39 -0700, "Just a Cyclist"
wrote:


"Tom Keats" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Just a Cyclist" writes:

So blocking a street so I can't walk across it is not stomping on my
rights?? Pure BS

So how come cars get away with it all the time, but a few
minutes per month of bikes doing it, and some ppl gotta
run around with their hair on fire about it?


Good we are changing the subject........yes they are violating my right to
cross the street! It is a right!


Oh really? I was under the impression that as public roads, the right
you have to acces that public road is a legislated privilege not a
RIGHT.


What part of "right of way" do you not understand? Leagally, a Public
Road is either a "public way" (the public has the right to use it, and
the government the responsibility to maintian it) or a "right of way"
(the public has the right to use it, but is not required to maintain
it). The public includes pedestrians, bicycles, horses, oxen,
horse-drawn carriages, farm equipment, tractors, mopeds...

I think you are confusing this with "private right-of-way" where a
specific agreement, history of usage, or ruling gives a specific
individual or group a right to use specific land for passage. a
private right-of-way is _not_ a public road or public way.

You do not have a RIGHT to walk across a road anymore than you
have the RIGHT to enter my front door. I will afford you the privilege
but not the right, likewise with yourself crossing a road; a PUBLIC
road.


What country are you in? Were you aware that in the United States,
the pedestrian sidewalk is part of the highway?

Public right-of-way rules have been in existence for centuries, long
before the advent of the automobile. No priviledge had to be granted
to use the roads, and no one could tell you you could not use the
roads...not even the courts. (That sounds to me like a right, not a
priviledge.)

When automobiles started appearing, it was quickly recognized that
they posed a much greater hazard to other road users. I may be
mistaken, but I believe it was Henry Ford himself who was involved in
the first major automobile accident. After that, he began advocating
licensure of motor vehcile operators. Doing so recognized that motor
vehicle operators do not have a _right_ to operate on the roads. The
license was a form of priviledge granted to an individual to operate a
motor vehicle on the road. It granted restricted "rights" but because
it could be revoked it was still legally a priveledge. IIRC, Henery
Ford was granted the first license to operate motor vehicles in the
US.

At no point (before or since) has the public's right to use the roads
been repealed, revoked, or even significantly altered. These
road-use-by-right users include pedestrians, bicycles, horses (and
other beasts of burden), horse-drawn carriages, tractors and other
farm equipment, and mopeds, among others.

There are some very limited exceptions, and they must be posted. They
are almost always "limited access divided highways" (and in some
places, even limited access divided highways allow bicycles). The
next time you enter one with your car, note the sign. It says
something like "Pedestrians, bicycles, horses, horse-drawn carriages,
tractors and other farm equipment, and mopeds prohibited". Why the
sign? Because everyone (the legislature, the courts, law enforcement
officers, and the public) assume that you have the right to use the
road unless otherwise posted. The _right_ to use the road, not
priveledge.

Austin
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Critical Mass planning to disrupt the Republican Convention Jym Dyer Social Issues 2 July 11th 04 11:17 PM
Tour of the Alps 2003 [email protected] Rides 2 September 15th 03 04:52 AM
What rights? [was "Critical Mass Tunnel Freaks"] Mayhem General 2 July 1st 03 06:04 PM
Critical Mass Tunnel Freaks PC Recumbent Biking 0 June 29th 03 08:56 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.