By: Robert Proudfoot, Staff Member
With
environmental advocates pushing for bicycling as an alternative to automobiles
through new users and Bike Share programs, bicycling laws become more important
as way to eliminate safety risks and provide standards of conduct for
predictable road use. Currently, the state and local laws for bicyclists are ambiguous;
sometimes they are motor vehicles or other times pedestrians. In some states, bicyclists are not
subject to violations
for driving under the influence laws (“DUI laws”) while theses laws apply in
other states.[1] Further, state uninsured motorist
insurance coverage does not apply to accidents with bicyclists.[2] For traffic violations, some courts
have ruled that bicycles are “vehicles” and subject to traffic laws.[3] This piecemeal approach for bicycling
serves to muddle the regulatory environment and create uncertainty as to the
rights and duties of all road users.
Bicycle advocates have long
debated whether a bicycling should be
considered use of a vehicle or not under state law.[4] The United Kingdom struggled with this
ambiguity more than a hundred years ago when it defined a bicycle use as a “carriage”
in regulation.[5] By placing bicycles into an already
defined category of vehicle, it required riders to have a “lamp” and give an
audible signal for passing.[6] An Oregon
case, State v. Potter, exemplifies the strained application of vehicle
definitions to bicycling in the United States.[7] In that case, a bicyclist was cited for
a traffic violation but appealed the decision on the basis that the relevant
law only applied to “motor vehicles” and not “vehicles.”[8] The court agreed that the law was only
for “motor vehicles” but held that another statute gives a bicyclist the “same rights and duties as the driver of
any other vehicle” which
includes motor vehicles.[9] The court ruled that the bicycle, even
though it was only a vehicle, had to follow the motor vehicle traffic law in
question.[10] In California, bicyclists
also have the same rights and duties as drivers of motor vehicles.[11]
Bicycle
lanes are regulated separately in different states as well.[12] In California, it is considered another
lane of traffic that automobiles must cross to turn right, similar to bus
lanes.[13] In Oregon, automobiles must yield to a bicycle
lane behind them before making any turns.[14] While Oregon’s law is meant to
protect bicyclists from right-hook accidents from turning automobiles,
collisions still occur and the law has confused some.[15]
Bike
share programs implemented in places like New York City, Washington, D.C., and
Miami have further complicated the issue.[16] In these cities, there is an increasing
amount of first-time or casual bicyclists. This group may not understand the fact
that while bicycles are not legally defined as motor vehicles, bicyclists are required
to follow traffic laws as a vehicle.[17] The new riders ride on sidewalks, go
down one-way streets the wrong way, and slalom in and out of traffic
unpredictably.[18] New York
City just recently started aggressively issuing tickets to commercial bicyclists,
such as food delivery or messenger persons, for riding on the sidewalks,
violating traffic laws, and unsafe riding.[19] In Florida and most other states, even
though a bicycle is considered a vehicle under state law, a bicyclist has the
right to ride on a sidewalk.[20]
As
public officials struggle to define a bicycle’s official legal status on roads
and sidewalks, tensions between bicyclists, automobiles, and pedestrians are on
the rise. The legal issue and conflict will continue as bicycling increases in
popularity as an environmentally friendly alternative.
[1] State v. Johnson, 203 N.J. Super. 436, 438, 497 A.2d
242, 243 (Ch. Div. 1985) (bicyclists cannot violate driving under the influence
laws for motor vehicles); Contra State v. Tehan, 190 N.J. Super.
348, 351, 463 A.2d 403, 404 (Ch. Div. 1982); N.J. Stat. Ann. §
39:1-1 (West 2009) (excludes bicycles from a motor vehicle definition for
driving under the influence violations). Compare
City of Montesano v. Wells, 79 Wash. App. 529, 533, 902 P.2d 1266, 1268
(1995) (held bicycles are not motor vehicles); Wash.
Rev. Code Ann. § 46.61.502(1) (West 2012) (The statute states that
driving under the influence applies if “a person drives a vehicle” which
contradicts the court’s interpretation of it applying only to “motor
vehicles”).
[2] Chong v. California State Auto. Assn., 48 Cal. App.
4th 285, 288, 55 Cal. Rptr. 2d 648, 650 (1996)(holds bicycles are not motor
vehicles as defined by state insurance law); Cal.
Ins. Code § 11580.06 (a) (West 2012) (defines “motor vehicles”); See also 9 Couch on Ins. § 123:23 (3d.
ed. 2011).
[3] Green v. Pedigo, 75 Cal. App. 2d 300, 305, 170 P.2d
999, 1003 (1946) (when a bicyclist and motorist meet at an intersection, the
person on the left must yield according to traffic laws).
[4]
Fred Oswald, Et Al., “Bike = Vehicle? To be or not to be?”. Bikelaws.org,
http://bikelaws.org/
(last visited July 16, 2012).
[5]
Local Government Act, 1888. § 85(1). (U.K.) (1888) available at http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1888/41/pdfs/ukpga_18880041_en.pdf.
[6] Id. at §§ 85(1)(a), (b).
[7] State v. Potter, 57 P.3d 944 (Or. App. 2002).
[8] Id. at 945-46.
[9] Id. at 945
[10] Id.
[11] Cal. Veh. Code
§ 21200(a) (West 2011); See also California Driver Handbook – Sharing the
Road. California Department of Motor
Vehicles. http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/hdbk/shr_slow_veh.htm#bike (last visited July 15, 2012).
[12] See Bike
Lanes & Right Turns, San
Francisco Bike Coalition, http://www.sfbike.org/?bikelane_right_turns (last
visited July 15, 2012).
[13] Cal. Veh. Code §§ 21209(a); 21717 (West 2012).
[14] Or. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 811.050 (West 2012).
[15]
Stuart Tomlinson, Women’s Death throws
spotlight on ‘right hood’ bicycle accidents, Oregonian (May
18, 2012,10:20 AM), http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2012/05/bicyclists_death_throws_spotli.html.
[16] Alan
Gomez, Bike Sharing Stokes Conflicts
Between Drivers, Cyclists, USA TODAY (July 7, 2012), http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-07-07/bike-share-programs/56068082/1.
[17] Id.
[18]Ted
Johnson, An Arizona Hick Tries Capital
Bikeshare, CommutebyBike.com (June
28, 2012), http://www.commutebybike.com/2012/06/28/an-arizona-hick-tries-capital-bikeshare-part-2/
(at least one account of unsafe Bike Share users).
[19]Matt Flegenheimer, In
Fight Against Unsafe Delivery Cyclists, a Focus on Employers, New
York Times (July 13, 2012), http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/14/nyregion/new-york-going-after-unsafe-delivery-cyclists.html.
[20] Fla. Stat. Ann. § 316.2065 (West 2012).
No comments:
Post a Comment