blacklabman
Well-Known Member
I just saw go over the TJ Bridge northbound. What an idiot!
Is that a bicyclist ...
- Thread starter blacklabman
- Start date
RPMDAD
Well-Known Member
May explain the traffic news i heard on the radio coming home about that time. Northbound TJ bridge traffic slow though no accidents on either side.
Definite idiot if it was a bicycle rider for sure.
blacklabman
Well-Known Member
The bridge was already slow. The sign advises against bikes. That is stupid. You want to risk your life to save a couple of bucks?
DEEKAYPEE8569
Well-Known Member
That bridge bothers me going over it on a motorcycle; but on a bic...y...c..l...e, there, that's it......NFW!
glhs837
Power with Control
Bridge made me nervous the first couple times over on the V-strom, but after adding a fork brace and an adjustable bracket for my windshield, it's steady as a rock over the bridge. Set the windshield for max low, and no wind issues, the front end wobble went away due to the fork brace.
Beery
New Member
Are we talking about the Thomas Johnson Bridge? As far as I know, cyclists are allowed on that bridge. I've taken a look on Google maps and it looks perfectly safe to me as long as the cyclist takes the full lane and doesn't ride in the gutter. Yeah, he's going to slow traffic down to 10mph, but it's not like there's any other option there - the next bridge over that body of water is nearly 35 miles away. If I had to go over there, I wouldn't think twice about it.
It's not as if he's taking the William Preston Lane, Jr. Memorial Bridge - US 50/301 over Chesapeake Bay.
Last edited:
warneckutz
Well-Known Member
Beery
New Member
I hope you're not advocating vehicular homicide, just because they have the temerity to use a bridge and wear a colorful shirt.
Last edited:
KDENISE977
New Member
pelers
Active Member
While it may not be illegal, it's still idiotic, rude and dangerous.
desertrat
0_0
At least inconsiderate.
Beery
New Member
Idiotic and dangerous? In what way? Last I heard, cars have brakes and steering wheels. I think most drivers know how to slow to between 10 and 20mph (cycling speed) and wait until it's safe to pass. This is what the law requires. If people can't even do that, then I think they need to stop driving.
Rude? Inconsiderate? How? It's a road, and cyclists are not rude by using it to get places. If the man is like me and doesn't own a car, and needs to get to work or to some appointment, what other option would he have? As a cyclist, I can assure you that no cyclist would take that bridge if they had another option - we know full well that motorists don't like being slowed to cycling speeds, and to take a bridge that has only one narrow lane will cause many motorists, ignorant of the law and the need to share the road with other users, to switch to road rage mode.
The bridge is only a mile long. It's not going to take him that long to get over it - maybe 3 minutes if he's fit. It takes motorists just over a minute when going at the 45mph speed limit. So he's causing you to be a couple of minutes later. You know there's no right to a certain speed on the road, right? You are required to go at the speed of the vehicle who has the right of way - and if that's a bicycle, so be it. Also, vehicles cannot be cited for holding up traffic if they are going at a normal speed based on that vehicle's capabilities.
I think maybe drivers need to be a little more patient and aware that some folks just don't have the option to drive, and that there are going to be some slower vehicles on the road. This is going to be the case to a greater extent in the future, as fuel prices rise and more and more low income folks have to look to other options for their commute. Middle income and higher income folks don't seem to realize what a burden car ownership is - a car costs thousands of dollars per year in maintenance costs. In these times, that burden is becoming unbearable for millions of Americans. There seems to be a widely held assumption that cyclists are only on the road for recreation. That is not the case for me, and it's surely not the case for others. I think a little consideration might be in order.
Last edited:
desertrat
0_0
warneckutz
Well-Known Member
They can wear a clown suit for all I care as long as they don't impede the progress of traffic.
Beery
New Member
Why do you think the signs advise against it then?
The signs probably advise against it because most people who decide to place signs are not cyclists, and they respond the way most folks here have responded, and assume it's just too SCAARRYY for cyclists. But, as a public right of way, they probably can't make using it illegal.
There are only three bridges in MD where cyclists are forbidden - the Thomas J. Hatem Memorial Bridge - US 40 over the Susquehanna River, the Harry W. Nice Memorial Bridge - US 301 over the Potomac River, and the William Preston Lane, Jr. Memorial Bridge - US 50/301 over Chesapeake Bay. The rules regarding cyclists on MD roads are here.
What is the wording on the sign?
Last edited:
GWguy
*
You might want to investigate 'obstruction of traffic' regulations. If a car can be ticketed for going less than the speed limit and holding up traffic, and a bike is supposed to follow all road rules, then I would think the bike could be fined for traffic obstruction.
Mr. Silver Spring, May I ask how many times you have crossed our bridge?
Beery
New Member
When I took the League of American Bicyclists Cycling Instructor course, I looked into all MD laws pertaining to cycling. As a MD resident and a person whose sole mode of personal transportation is the bicycle, I make sure I keep up with all MD cycling laws. Maryland law specifically applies only to motor vehicles:
"§ 21-804. Minimum speed regulation.
(a) Slow speed impeding traffic prohibited.- Unless reduced speed is necessary for the safe operation of the vehicle or otherwise is in compliance with law, a person may not willfully drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic."
Most states specifically exclude cyclists from the law with wording saying words to the effect of "vehicles driven at a normal speed based on that vehicle's capabilities cannot be cited for impeding traffic". MD doesn't seem to have that wording, but the specific mention of 'motor' vehicles makes it unnecessary. Personally, I think the current MD law is not very smart - after all, a cyclist could legally impede traffic, riding at something silly like 4mph on that bridge, with no fear of prosecution. Of course, he'd probably be lynched, given some of the comments here.
Last edited:
desertrat
0_0
I don't recall exactly, but the word winds is in there somewhere as well as a warning to other light vehicles, like mopeds or scooters. And yes they could restrict it if it became a real factor, but they decided to keep it open as a bike route, for the few that might use it.