// Yet Another Reason to Ride on the Streets
Posted on Thursday, January 14th, 2010
I get kind of harpy and annoying about this, but the sidewalks and crosswalks are for walking (that’s why they’re called sidewalks and crosswalks, people). When I’m walking, which I frequently am, I like to have the room to walk, and not be run off the sidewalk by cyclists. And when I’m riding my bike, which I frequently am, I like to have the solidarity of other cyclists on the street with me. Plus riding my bike on the street is pretty much proven to be safer, is legally where my bike belongs, and is faster than navigating cracked sidewalks full of people.
But if all that wasn’t enough for you, then you might want to consider what would happen to you if you were riding on a sidewalk or in a crosswalk and you were hit by a car. A recent case in Canada suggests that while the accident may be the driver’s fault, the fact that the victim was a cyclist who was illegally in the crosswalk means that the cyclist shares some of the fault. In fact, an appeals court split the fault right down the middle–50% driver, 50% cyclist.
The trial court, when it first heard the case, had placed the fault 100% with the driver of the automobile. The rationale was that if the cyclist had been a pedestrian in the crosswalk, the driver would have been 100% at fault. But on appeal, it was determined that because the bicyclist was in the crosswalk, where he didn’t belong, he was partially at fault.
All I’m saying is be careful. Follow the rules of the road, for your own sake!
I agree with this wholly. Too many times I’ve seen and heard it all our way. What would we be saying if cars drove down the sidewalks and people walked down the middle of the streets.
Some of us seem to think we are allowed to do it all.
-B