In October, I wrote about Maryland's step backward as the state moved toward enacting an obviously flawed three feet passing law. My point was that new law shouldn't value convenience for one group of road users while degrading the safety of another group. Yet the proposed legislation does precisely that - making passing more convenient for motorists while making the roads less safe for bicyclists.
Anyone overtaking another vehicle has a duty to do so safely. Maryland's exception to maintaining three feet of separation between a cyclist and a motor vehicle when the lane is too narrow to share removes that duty from the overtaking driver. Despite their faults, three feet laws are intended to enhance the safety of road cyclists, yet the state of Maryland ignores that intent, preferring a motorist's convenience over a cyclist's safety. That's simply wrong. Safety - for all road users - always trumps convenience, and we should insist that traffic law, road design, and similar improvements put safety first.
Most state bicycling laws say that cyclists have the same rights and duties as any other road user. Rights are always accompanied by responsibilities. But the laws could be more explicit:
Like any other vehicle, bicyclists are entitled to the full width of the lane they occupy, unless it is wide enough to share side-by-side with a motor vehicle.
Like any other vehicle, bicyclists must adhere to the laws that require slow vehicles keep to the right lane, with the usual exceptions from the Uniform Vehicle Code.
For all road users, it is always the responsibility of the overtaking driver to pass safely, exercising due care toward every other road user.
This isn't new, yet for a frustrated motorist 'stuck' behind a slow-moving cyclist on a narrow road, there's an undeniable temptation to ignore the law. And Maryland gives him a convenient out if he makes a mistake and side-swipes a cyclist. Is anyone's time so valuable that they're compelled to put another person at risk? Or, put another way, how much time is 'lost' because of that slow-moving cyclist? A motorist may have to slow down for a few seconds before it's safe to pass, but there's always another traffic light up ahead that will slow him or stop him. City traffic slows for buses, delivery trucks, and pedestrians. Motorists slow each other all the time, yet it doesn't seem to engender the anger and frustration that some feel toward cyclists. One local advocate pointed out that cities spend huge sums on traffic calming, but cyclists perform the same function for free.
Here in Tulsa, the average commute is about 5 miles. That's roughly 15 minutes in a car. If my commute takes an extra 30 seconds, is that a serious inconvenience?
I hope Maryland addresses the deficiencies in this bill. It's not an improvement for cyclists. We don't want or need special treatment under the law, nor do we want to be legally superior to any other road users. We already have an equal right to the road, a right that could be better communicated to motorists and cyclists alike through better education. Cyclists should be accepted as a normal part of the traffic mix, so common that their presence is unremarkable.
Comments