Thirty Miles Per Burger

Grumpa Joe Pulling Into the Job

Grumpa Joe Pulling Into the Job

In the last two days, I have heard how the government handling of federal highway funds is being squandered on things such as bicycle paths. I agree that we need safe bridges and good roads, but I disagree that we don’t need bike paths.

A bike rider has every right to share the road with drivers. He does carry the same responsibility as a driver and must obey the same laws. A bicycle is considered a vehicle the same as a car. Most drivers do not share this attitude, even though the laws clearly state the right. I know many avid cyclists who use a bicycle as a form of transportation. They ride to work,  take trips across states, and tour foreign countries; all on a bike. They use public highways when they ride. I also happen to live near a popular bicycle path called the Old Plank Road Trail. It is twenty miles long and connects six towns.  I walk the path regularly. I see hundreds of cyclists using the path daily. They range in age from eight to eighty. They feel safe on a path whereas they would never ride a bike on a busy public road. They get their exercise through the enjoyment of a linear park. 

Here is my argument. A bike path will keep  bicyclists off  public roads where sociopathic drivers love to score points for taking out cyclists. I have several personal experiences that I can share about how much love there is for a bicyclist by a driver.  A bicycle path promotes exercise, a much needed activity in this OBESE country. The logic would go this way:

A bike path promotes exercise,

Excercise helps maintain health

Therfore, a bicycle path helps maintain health.

With all the argument about the high cost of  health care, why pick on one thing that will help us maintain our health with a nominal investment?

Bike paths are infrastructure that don’t require as much maintenance as a highway. Thus, the money spent goes further than money spent on a federal highway.

Right Turn On Red

Our great state of Illinois has a law that allows a right turn on a red light. Many states have the same law. The way I understand this law, a person stopped for a red light wanting to make a right turn, may do so, even if the light is red. The following conditions must exist: there is no traffic coming from the left, there are no cars turning left into your path, it is safe to do so, and you choose to do so. That last part is the part that got my dander up today on two separate occasions.  I don’t always choose to turn right on a red. Today, I got the horn and a shrug of shoulders from the driver behind who thought I should have been moving instead of sitting.

The law seems to be evolving from a choice to a requirement, or at least some drivers believe. When did it change? I have seen some drivers drive right through a red light into the right turn. No attempt whatsoever to stop first.  What wrinkles me is if this is a real law, we should obey it, and it should be enforced. Mayhem would ensue if we allowed all traffic signals and laws to be transgressed. Am I wrong, or am I just too old to understand?