steve king does not support safe roadways!

This post will be very one sided politically. Some will not like what I have to say about a certain politician. As I have deactivated my political blog, when comes to bicycle safety and advocacy and when it involves politics it will now be posted here. If the readers can not handle strong, one sided opinion and attitude then stop reading and simply leave the blog. No one should attempt to tell me they think I should not post things like this. You can disagree and debate this with me if you'd like, in fact I am sure some will. But do not presume to tell me I have no right to post this. To answer your question, yes there have been some in the past who have tried to tell me to not post something, thus violating my First Amendment Rights. This is something I will not stand for.

A little more then a week ago I filled out and submitted this form supporting the Complete Streets Act of 2009 One of the members of congress it went to was steve king, a republican for the 5th District of Iowa, the area I live in. king sent me this letter in response:


This tells me one thing. steve king does not support safe roadways for all users. It also tells me he has the same auto-centric attitude a lot of his voters and supporters has. After all it was they who made the foolish decision to put him in office.

A person with an auto-centric attitude is one who believes that a roadway should only have one type of roadway user, automobile drivers. They do not think any roadway should have or need any other type of user such as pedestrian or cyclist.

In the letter there is mention of this being handled at the local level. The problem with that is very little to nothing is being done at the local level, or even the state level. I think it is felt since that is the case it is time to get the Federal Govt. involved to force the hand of the state level and thus the local level.

king's attitude on this comes as no surprise to me. I have serious doubts he supports any type of Complete Streets Policy at the state or local level. In fact I am calling him a liar on the matter. I think he is a hypocrit of the worst kind. He says he does not think this should be "forced" on the states at the Federal level. Yet I can gurantee you he has voted on issues that does that very thing. He is hiding behind tht piss poor excuse because he is an auto-centric anti-cyclist liar.

king is also the type of politician who takes sole credit for something that far more people are involved in. He also runs and hides when it comes to people in the 5th District confronting him about things they do not agree with that he voted on. Some of the people are folks who voted for him. Before the last election he would run and hide when people would picket outside his office in downtown Sioux City and he ran and hid when he was asked to show up for a debate with his opponent. What does this tell me and what should it tell you? That he is a coward.

For some reason in the past people kept voting the coward back in. He was like that bad penny that would not go away or the turd that just won't flush. Hopefully at the next election the voters will get it right and not vote the coward back in. It is time he went away and stayed away. Then maybe with the right person who would support this in place of king we would have safer streets mandated at the Federal level which will get the states off of their asses to comply and make it happen.

BOYCOTT manor, texas!

The city council of manor, texas has passed an ordinance to ban cyclists from the roadways. Why? Because of a bad roadway, the city will not fix, where a cyclist had an accident because of the road conditions and sued the city.

There are 2 interesting things to this:
1. The law suit was denied because the accident happened outside the city's jurisdiction. That makes sense. Why should a city pay out on a law suit unless the incident happened within their jurisdiction. It is not stated who is responsible for the section of roadway where the cyclist had the accident. But whom ever is responsible for that section of roadway is responsible and I hope the cyclist is suing them.
2. In the past year, there have been seven major traffic accidents on the road, and one person died. You would think instead of taking a knee jerk reaction the governing bodies of this roadway would work to fix it.

For the city and residence of manor, texas: I say boycott manor, texas until they lift the ban. People from the outside should not spend any money there. If there are any events I advise people to stay away. Here is something the city of manor, texas should consider. A lot of small towns are still struggeling because of the economy. Doing this like this that could/should cause them to be boycotted will only make things worse for these towns.

For the cyclists: Be prepared for a long drawn out battle and expect it to get worse before it gets better. When the law suit happened in Crawford County, Iowa and was paid out, after which the ban was put in place, it took almost 3 or 4 years for the ban to be lifted and at several other counties either did pass or were considering passing such bans. All have been lifted since.

Unfortunatly this does not just happen in Iowa.

Story:
Cyclists oppose new road ban in Manor City officials cite safety concerns on Blake Manor Road.

Cycling shoes and carpeted stairs.

Yesterday I slipped and fell down my carpeted basement stairs.

I was getting ready for a bike ride and had to go downstairs for something. Why did I fall? Because I had my bike shoes on. My shoes have carbon fiber soles and the carpet is made of synthetic fibers. Put the 2 together and it is literally a slippery slope. When I slipped and fell my feet went out from under me, I went down on my back, impacting my right arm near the elbow and then slid the rest of the way down the stairs on the steps and the wooden frame of the stairs. My arm took the brunt of the impact. My back, neck, head and back of my legs/glutes really didn't hit hard at all. I think this is because I was near the bottom and my feet helped stop the areas of my body, except my arm, from hitting too hard. My injury consists of a pretty good rug burn and a contusion that swelled up and is now bruised pretty bad. It looks like someone took a baseball bat and hit that part of my arm. Had the impact happened closer to my wrist or right at the elbow I have no doubt I would have broken my arm or elbow.

I did still go for a ride.

The lesson learned and moral of this is DO NOT ever try to walk down carpeted stairs with carbon fiber sole bike shoes on. This is the first time I ever did this, before yesterday I never had any reason to go downstairs with my bike shoes on. I know I'll never do that again.

Suppression of the 1st Amendment

The most recent issue I have blogged about, the paul mckinney case, has caused some major concerns.

I have posted here on my blog as well as commented in the online edition of the news stories. In the news stories I submitted links to my blog posts. I was just as open and opinionated and some would say harsh in expressing what I think and feel about the mckinney issue in commenting on the news stories as I have been here in my blog. I freely admit that. As a result there are some who do not like what I have to say and disagree with it. I do not have a problem with that. Those that do not like what I have to say and those that are anti-cyclist have also posted very harsh comments expressing their point of view as well, which I do not agree with. So it has come from both sides.

Though I do not agree with what others have to say I do respect their right to say it under the 1st Amendment. I have never and would never attempt to suppress any one's right to say anything so long as it is not a threat or something that could cause say a riot. The 1st Amendment is not and absolute right. The free expression of opinions and ideas should never be suppressed.

The problem is with this most recent issue with the mckinney case those that do not agree with what I have said wish to suppress what I have said about it. They do not like or agree with it and have more or less stated they have reported me to the authorities. What authorities they have supposedly reported me to, I do not know. Truth be told I am really not that concerned about it. Being concerned about it not the issue though. What is the issue is people that want to suppress and sanction another persons right to the freedom of speech and expression. To those people I say shame on you!

I have to wonder if any of these people currently are or used to serve in the military or in law enforcement. Anyone who serves or served in the military or ever served in law enforcement agrees to uphold the U.S. Constitution, part of which includes the 1st Amendment. Yet it is likely some of the people who want to suppress and sanction others are veterans of the military or law enforcement. Anyone, veteran or not, who wants to sanction and suppress another persons right to the freedom of expression and speech and yet has no problem expressing what they think and feel, no matter how harsh, controversial or questionable are nothing short of a hypocrite.

I am not going to stop in my opinions of even the most controversial bicycle related issues. If others do not like I say tough shit. Deal with it, move on with your life, get over it, comment on my blog about it if you wish, but DO NOT attempt to suppress or sanction me for it!

Update 11; Cyclist killed near Cumming, Iowa. Driver left scene.

It would seem it is finally over. The M.E. determined mckinney's death to be a suicide. Now all that's left is for the 2 family's to pick up the pieces and hopefully move forward with their lives.

Here is the story:
M.E. rules suicide in death of man charged in cyclist's fatality

Update 10; Cyclist killed near Cumming, Iowa. Driver left scene.

The driver, paul "jud" mckinney, who hit and killed cyclist Mark Grgurichand and then left the scene of the collision is dead in an apparent suicide. He was found this morning in a car parked in a garage with the engine running. He will be autopsied to confirm how he died.

My opinion of this is he took the cowards way out. Rather then face justice for killing Mark, paul kills himself. Sure he was facing the rest of his life behind bars, but he would still have a life to live, as limited as it might have been. Who knows? He may have gotten away with the murder of Mark with just a slap on the wrist. Now no one will ever know.

I do not feel sorry for him. I do have sympathy for Mark's friends and family and empathy for paul's. At the same time I do not think paul deserved to die for his crime, but have no sympathy for anyone who takes the cowards way out and does not "man" up and face justice as he should have done.

I am sure there are many questions as to why paul killed himself. I have expressed my opinion that he took the cowards way out. But other questions comes to mind at the same time. Is it possible that along with not wanting to face justice for his bad actions he wanted to continue to cause Mark's family stress and anguish? What I mean by this is by escaping justice, by killing himself, there will be no hearings or trial for this. Mark's family will never know if paul would have either owned up to this and faced his fate at the hands of the court or if it would have went on to trial and a judge and jury would have decided his fate. Mark's family is now left with no justice to show for this and has to suffer with that for the rest of their lives. 2 families are devastated by this. I do not think paul intended to cause his own family any pain and anguish, but perhaps he wanted to cause Marks family firhter pain and stress. Is it possible? I think it is. But this is only an unprovable theory. As I have stated a good theory is an unprovable one.

Before anyone says anything, yes I have made mistakes in my life. But I have NEVER came close to killing someone and I have ALWAYS owned op to and faced the consequences. Plus my mistakes have never landed my in trouble with the law to the point of being put in jail and on trial for breaking the law.

Here are the story's:
Iowa man charged in fatal hit-and-run is dead of apparent suicide
Driver's suicide called 'a tragedy on top of a tragedy'

Iowa drivers should learn from Nebraska and South Dakota drivers.

There were no pedalcyclist fatalities in 2008 in the states of Nebraska and South Dakota according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Pedalcyclists includes bicyclists and other riders of 2-wheel, non-motorized vehicles, tricycles and unicycles powered solely by pedals. In other words anything with pedals that is human powered.

This is not because there are no pedalcyclists in Nebraska or South Dakota, there are, a lot.

Why do I think there were no fatalities? I think it is because drivers are safer and more aware then drivers in Iowa. Drivers in Nebraska and South Dakota know how to react and behave when encountering a cyclist Let em explain that. I live and work in the area where Iowa, Nebraska, and South Dakota border one another on the Missouri and Big Sioux Rivers. A cyclist can literaly ride in all 3 states within a matter of minutes. I have several times a year. When I encounter drivers on the roadways in Nebraska and South Dakota they are not nearly as bad as drivers in Iowa. Sure there are some that are bad drivers, just as there are some drivers in Iowa that are good. Based on my experience the ratio of good to bad drivers in Nebraska and South Dakota are more good then bad, compared to Iowa.

What tells me this? I have bad experiences with more Iowa drivers then Nebraska and South Dakota combined. More Iowa drives pass too close, honk and swerve at me, yell out the window at me then drivers from Nebraska and South Dakota. Soemthing else that points to this is the amount of car/bike collisions that resulted in fatalities in the last 3 years in Iowa. I'll even go as far as saying the bad drivers from Nebraska and South Dakota in my area are originally from Iowa. Therefore already had the bad driving skills before they moved.

Story:
Report: Cyclists on Neb., S.D. roads among safest

Public Service Announcement from the U.S. Department of Please Don't Kill Other Human Beings.

Dear Sir.

We had our encounter on Bedford Avenue this afternoon, just south of Division. I was the petite brunette in a white sundress, riding a red road bike in the rain; you were the Hasidic gentleman (and I use the term loosely) in a blue SUV who came up on my back wheel, honking, and attempted to run me out of the bike lane before swerving directly in front of me and pulling up to the curb ahead.

You refused to roll down your window and talk to me after this incident, leaving me to shout, "That's against the law" at the rain-streaked glass and then continue home. And while it *is* against the law -- both the laws that govern New York City drivers, and also those that govern general human decency -- what I really wanted to say to you was simultaneously less accusatory and more important. This is it.

I know that the bike lanes aren't great. You may not believe it, but cyclists don't like riding next to you anymore than you like sharing the road with us. Given the choice between inhaling your exhaust and pedaling blithely down a forested greenway, I'd always take the latter.

I also know that presence of cyclists on busy streets can make driving in the city even more nerve-wracking than usual, and that some of us antagonize the shit out of drivers by disobeying traffic laws, failing to signal, and generally acting like we own the road (I am not one of these, but that is beside the point). And I completely understand if, at this point, you start hyperventilating at the mere sight of a bike with which you have to share the road. I empathize; I have a car, too. It sucks. I know.

Nevertheless, we can't all live in Amsterdam, and the frustrations of sharing the road with me do not change the facts: You are in a car, and I am not. You are protected from collisions by airbags, fenders, and a steel cage; I'm not. You are piloting a one-ton pile of steel; I am piloting something that weighs as much as a dog. (Not even a big dog -- we're talking Welsh Corgi, here.)

And if your frustrations at sharing the road get the better of you, and you want to get in a fight with me, sir, there is no doubt whatsoever that you will win.

You'll win... and, in all likelihood, I'll be dead.

This is what I wanted to say to you: You may not like cyclists, and that's fine. But you have a responsibility to the human race, and I don't cease to exist the second I step off my bike. I am someone's wife. I am someone's sister. I am someone's daughter.

And if you have any of those things -- a spouse, a sibling, a child -- do me this favor.

Picture them.

Imagine yourself on your way to meet your wife for lunch; imagine yourself waiting for your daughter to come home from school.

Now, imagine getting a phone call, hearing the voice on the other end telling you that that person -- the person you love -- is dead, because some asshole in an Audi thought her life was less important than waiting another five seconds to park his car.

This has been a public service announcement from the U.S. Department of Please Don't Kill Other Human Beings.

You're the Hasidic Jew who tried to kill me. I'm the girl on the bike.

Update 9; Cyclist killed near Cumming, Iowa. Driver left scene.

This is an outrage! And keeps getting worse and worse. Now to add further insult to injury for his victims' family mckinney has entered a plea of not guilty in a written statement and waived his right to a speedy trial. This means this will drag out for who knows how long. It could also cost the tax payers even more money then it normally would to try and hopefully convict the SOB. I beleive this means it will be a jury trial. If so and knowing how Iowa's justice system works when it comes to cyclists being hit and injured or killed, the jury will likely be made up of like minded individuals who think cyclists do not belong on the roadways. Some of them might even agree and applaud what mckinney did. I would not be a bit suprised if this is the case. mckinney is nothign more then a coward! He did not man up and accept responsibility of his actions when he killed Mark Grgurich, then he made it even worse when he ran, hid and tried to cover up the crime and now this.

Oh yeah and one more thing mckinney is still allowed to drive. He is supposed to go in to a DOT office to renew his license this month, no doubt he will find the right DOT officer to grease, er pass him through so he can continue to legally drive and kill again.

I think whom ever is outraged by this and whom ever thinks mckinney at the very least should not legally be allowed to drive should contactt he prosecutors office in this case and expres our outrage and ask that he at least not be allowed to drive and that he be put back in jail until it is over.

Article:
McKinney enters 'not guilty' plea

Air Zound locations.

Here in Sioux City I have deemed certain areas as permenant Air Zound locations. But first let me explain what an Air Zound is:
1. A super loud 115 db horn.
2. It needs no batteries or cartridges.
3. t has volume control switch, a clamp for mounting on any handlebar or it will fit into any standard bottle cage.
4. It is refilled with a standard bike pump via the built in schrader valve and can hold 80 pounds of air.
5. Depending on where the volume is set it can produce up to 50 ear-shattering blasts per charge.
6. It is what is called an Coast Guard Signal Device.

The Air Zound is a fantastic product for any cyclist who needs to be heard. People driving cars are extremely distracted lately with cell phone conversations, GPS nav, and texting. To get your share of a drivers attention this product is an absolute necessity. This compressed air horn has consistently stopped cars/trucks rolling through stop signs without seeing me. This horn also works well on aggressive dogs in rural areas. I recommend all cyclists to be seen with lights and reflectors and heard with the Delta Airzound. Nothing else comes close.

All of the above is true, especially the part that nothing else comes close to performing and doing the job the Air Zound can and will do when used.

As I stated above I have deemed certain location in Sioux City as Air Zound locations. All of these locations are intersections. What is meant by an Air Zound location is an area where no matter what when I ride through the intersection I send out a blast from the horn. The reason is at each one of these I have had too many close calls with inattentive drivers who have almost hit me because they were on a damn cell phone, in too much of a hurry or misjudged the distance and speed at which I was riding. The locations are as follows:

1. Pierce and Gordon Dr. I have to cross Gordon using the trail system to access the river front. This is a 3 way intersection Pierce St traffic can turn left or right onto Gordon or go straight to the I-29 entrance ramp. The problem is with traffic that is turning right from Pierce to Gordon and turning right from Gordon to I-29. The traffic light allows both trail and motor vehicle traffic to go at the same time. In other words when the light is green for motorists the cross walk signal is also activated for trail users to begin crossing. Most drivers do not pay attention to trail traffic. Another problem with this intersection is the east bound Gordon traffic that wants to turn right onto I-29. There is a short curved right turn lane that allows drivers to turn right from Gordon to the entrance to I-29. Because they are allowed to turn right on red they often will not stop where they are supposed to so they can see when it is clear of Pierce St traffic going straight to access I-29. When tye do this they block the crosswalk used by cyclists and pedestrians. Because of the problems at this intersection, which I have reported to the city, and they will not fix the problems I send out a blast from the Air Zound to get the attention of everyone at that intersection.

2. Hamilton Blvd and Stone Park Blvd is the next intersection I have to use the Air Zound at. The problem is when I am waiting in the left turn lane on Stone Park Blvd, facing east, to turn north onto Hamilton Blvd. When I am sitting there waiting on red traffic that is facing north on Hamilton and wanting to turn left or west onto Stone Park often will cut the turn short and almost collide with me. So I send out an Air Zound blast when I pull up to the intersection and I am first in line to turn from my lane onto Hamilton and I sit there with my hand on the horn button ready to send out a blast if I see a driver who is going to cut their turn short and thus going to collide with me when turning from Hamilton to Stone Park.

3. Fairmount and Leech. When I am facing west on Leech to go straight and traffic is turning left from Fairmount to head east on Leech I have to use the Air Zound to get the attention of the drivers so they do not hit me. I was almost hit and certainly would have been seriously injured by a driver who was on a cell phone when she drove right at me during her left turn from Fairmount onto Leech.

4. Anywhere I see a driver on a cell phone. This goes with out saying. Cell phone using drivers are dangerous drivers. They do not pay attention because their call is so damn important to them. So when I see it I blast them with the Air Zound.

That is it for right now. I wil update this as the need arises.

I would not be as nice as he is in speaking out.

Joey Richey, 27 of Linn County was hit by a hit and run driver and left for dead. The driver was in a white pick up. Luckily witnesses saw it happen and stopped to render aid to Richey. He was lucky, had there not been any witnesses he would have certainly died of his injuries.

Now that he is out of the hospital Richey has spoken out about this experience. He is being diplomatic and cordial, etc. I can say for certain I would not be this nice, diplomatic and cordial about it if it were me in this situation. I would not be threatening or vulgar, to the media, but I would not be nice either. I would likely be even less nice about it here on my blog, with some vulgarities about the hit and run driver thrown in and I post about actions I would have every intention on following through with toward him or her, not illegal action, but not pleasent for the driver either.

Richey joins at least 10 others as a statistic of hit and runs by drivers in the last 5 weeks. At least 2, possibly more resulted in fatalities.

Story:
Cyclist Speaks Out After Being Hit by Truck

Texting While Driving Banned for Federal Staff

Today federal employees, tomorrow everyone else.

The federal govt. is finally stepping up and making the roadwayas safer by banning the use of cell phones and other similar types of devices by federal employees. Soon that will include bus and truck drivers who cross stte lines and eventually anyone who drives a motor vehicle. I imagine the way the federal govt. will make it happen is unless states pass these laws banning the use of the devices they will be refused federal funds.

I say if that is what it takes then so be it, make it happen. The sooner the better. I have lost count of how many times I have almost been hit by a motorist because the driver was using a cell phone. Everytime I see someone on a cell phone while driving I send out an Air Zound blast. Sometimes I use it so much it is almost empty when I get home and I have to refill it.

No doubt there are opponents to this just as there were opponents to the seat belt laws and DUI/OWI/drinking and driving laws. The opponents are against these laws for various reasons. Granted while wearing a seat belt does not improve driving skills they do protect in the event of a collision and crash. The use of drugs and alcohol and the use of a cell phone does affect a persons driving skills. Alcohol and drugs slow reaction times and a cell phone is a distraction. The opponents of the seat belt laws bitched and moaned because they claim it goes against their freedom of choice. Some of them even said the same thing about drinking and driving. So no doubt they think the same thing about banning the use of cell phones.

Article:
Texting While Driving Banned for Federal Staff

Vehicular homicide charges to be filed in motorcycle death

I have almost no doubt if this were an adult cyclist that was killed the punks involved in killing him would not be charged with the death. Because it was someone riding a motorcycle, not a bicycle, these 2 young punks are being charged with his death. If the victim was an adult riding a bicycle these 2 would not be charged with the death. Even though it was in the course of committing a crime, stealing gas.

What tells me this?

Again this is an unprovable theory. Remember what I have said about unprovable theory's? If not read my most recent past blog postings.

The history of how law enforcement and prosecutors treats the death of cyclists at the hands of drivers is what this theory is founded on.

Link to the story:
Vehicular homicide charges to be filed in motorcycle death

Drivers Learning Consequences Of Hit-And-Run Crashes

First I have to say I do not agree that drivers learn the consequences of a hit and run collision. The drives who are caught only sometimes show remorse because they are trying to throw themselves on the mercy of the court. I believe however that deep down drivers are sorry and remorseful they got caught. To them their only crime was getting caught otherwise hti and run drivers have no remorse and are not sorry for their victims nor do they care that they hit someone, especially if it was a cyclist, and they do not care whether or not they kill someone.

What tells me this and why do I say this?

Well for starters it is a theory of mine. As I said in the past a good theory is an unprovable one. As such I have no intention of attemptig to prove this theory, nor do I really need to. Just look at my most recent past blog postings about this. These are just the cyclists. This theory however is backed up by the recent hit and run collisions between motorists and their victims. Some were killed, some were not, some were cyclists and some were not. There have been 10 hit and run collisions in the past 5 weeks in Iowa. That is an average of 2 per week.

Why do motorists leave the scene after hitting someone? Good question. Law enforcement has some theories/answers. They are: "Alcohol may be being used or drugs being used maybe. Depending on the age, you may have older people who may not be aware they struck something. You may have younger people who are just plain scared," said Iowa State Patrol trooper Kirk Lundgren.

I call absolute BULLSHIT!!! on not being aware a driver struck something. I don't care how old a person is. If it is to the point where an old peson is not aware they hit something then they are not aware of the bumps and holes in the roadways then they should not be driving. They need to have their license revoked before thjey kill someone. Iowa is way to lax on preventing old people from driving! The DOT is so afraid of offending someone and having someone accuse them of discrimination they pass them. Old people know which DOT officers will pass them when they go in to take their eye test to renew their license and only go on the days when those particular DOT officers are working.

Young people being scared is also no excuse. I consider it young people being cowards and not wanting to face up to a mistake. This in part falls to the parents who do not properly teach their kids right from wrong and if you make a mistake own up to it and face what ever consequences there may be.

Iowa has come a long way on illegal drugs and operating a vehicle while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. But we still have a long way to go. The laws and consequences are still not tough or adequate enough. Someone once told me the story of what happened to him when he was busted for DUI/OWI. I do not think it was in Iowa. He, thankfully did not hit and injure or kill someone. He also does not have any repsect for law enforcement officers. His biggest complaint was how expensive it was. Something about having to pay the fines, court costs and having to report in every day and he could not drive to do so and was stuck in the state this happened in because he broke the law, and if he missed reporting in he was fined even more money, etc. This happened a few years ago and the ordeal is over for his as is what he had to do to make ammends for it. But I have no pity, empathy or sympathy for him at all. Nor for anyone else who gets busted for DUI/OWI. He and anyone else who gets caught got exacly what they deserved. As far as I am concerned people do not pay a high enough of a price for a mistake like this.

I think the worst thing about this is the the counties and state let these people out on bond and they do not take their license from them. So they are free to drive and hit and kill someone again. In this respect the state and counties share in the responsibilty as well if these people drive and hit and kill someone while awaiting their arraignment in court. These criminals should be held with out bond, especially if they killed someone.

Here is a story about the consequences of hit and run drivers who get caught:
Drivers Learning Consequences Of Hit-And-Run Crashes

Update 8; Cyclist killed near Cumming, Iowa. Driver left scene.

mckinney the killer could face a re-exam for his license because he hit and killed someone. The thing is he has to go in next month, October, for the mandatory exam anyway even though the state could call him in earlier. I doubt the Iowa DOT will though. They will likely let him continue to drive as a risk to everyone on the roadways thus increasing the chances of him killing someone else. The only way the state can revoke his license is if he was convicted of a felony, they can not do so while the case is pending. This is what does not make sense to me. Let me explain why. A very long time ago I was caught for speeding in Des Moines. I was doing 62 in a 30 mph zone. The cop let me off with a citation, which I paid and thought no more of it. A few months later I get a letter from the DOT stating they need me to surrender my license or I could challenge it. I hired an attorney and challenged it and was put on driving probation and have not had a problem since. Here is the kicker. I was speeding, I did not hit anyone or anything, I was not drinking and driving and the state still wanted me to surrender my license. This guy mckinney who has macular degeneration hits & kills someone and then runs away to cover it up. He was finally caught and arrested, he admitted to it and is awaiting arraignment in October and he is still allowed to drive. Am I missing something here? Is this justice? Or just the screwed law and justice system we have right now?

Link to the story:
Driver named in hit-run crash still could face license re-exam

Update 7; Cyclist killed near Cumming, Iowa. Driver left scene.

There has been more of a travesty of justice and more of an insult to Mark's memory and his family. The killer paul mckinney is not only out on bail but he also allowed to continue to drive. This is despite his vision problems. The very least of which include macular degeneration. His own sister has even stated he should not have been driving the day he killed Mark, should not have been driving before that and should not be driving even now.

Shortly after paul hit and killed Mark and left the scene I contacted Senator Steve Warnstadt and asked if Iowa has or if not if Iowa law could be changed to have what Florida has. That is a form that be submitted by anyone to report anyone who could/should be deemed unfit to drive a motor vehicle. Here is a link to the form: STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES MEDICAL REPORTING FORM Senator Warnstadt sent me a response stating what the Iowa code is regarding this matter. Here is what he sent to me:

Code of Iowa: 321.186 EXAMINATION OF NEW OR INCOMPETENT OPERATORS.
1. The department may examine every new applicant for a driver'slicense or any person holding a valid driver's license when thedepartment has reason to believe that the person may be physically ormentally incompetent to operate a motor vehicle, or whose drivingrecord appears to the department to justify the examination. Thedepartment shall make every effort to accommodate a functionallyilliterate applicant when the applicant is taking a knowledge test.The department shall make every effort to have an examiner conductthe commercial driver's license driving skills tests at otherlocations in this state where skills may be adequately tested whenrequested by a person representing ten or more drivers requiringdriving skills testing.
2. The department shall make every effort to accommodate acommercial driver's license applicant's need to arrange anappointment for a driving skills test at an established test siteother than where the applicant passed the required knowledge test.The department shall report to the governor and the general assemblyon any problems, extraordinary costs, and recommendations regardingthe appointment scheduling process.
3. The examination shall include a screening of the applicant'seyesight, a test of the applicant's ability to read and understandhighway signs regulating, warning, and directing traffic, a test ofthe applicant's knowledge of the traffic laws of this state, anactual demonstration of ability to exercise ordinary and reasonablecontrol in the operation of a motor vehicle, and other physical andmental examinations as the department finds necessary to determinethe applicant's fitness to operate a motor vehicle safely upon thehighways. However, an applicant for a new driver's license otherthan a commercial driver's license need not pass a vision testadministered by the department if the applicant files with thedepartment a vision report in accordance with section 321.186A whichshows that the applicant's visual acuity level meets or exceeds thoserequired by the department.
4. A physician licensed under chapter 148 or an optometristlicensed under chapter 154 may report to the department the identityof a person who has been diagnosed as having a physical or mentalcondition which would render the person physically or mentallyincompetent to operate a motor vehicle in a safe manner. Thephysician or optometrist shall make reasonable efforts to notify theperson who is the subject of the report, in writing. The writtennotification shall state the nature of the disclosure and the reasonfor the disclosure. A physician or optometrist making a report underthis section shall be immune from any liability, civil or criminal,which might otherwise be incurred or imposed as a result of thereport. A physician or optometrist has no duty to make a report orto warn third parties with regard to any knowledge concerning aperson's mental or physical competency to operate a motor vehicle ina safe manner. Any report received by the department from aphysician or optometrist under this section shall be keptconfidential. Information regulated by chapter 141A shall be subjectto the confidentiality provisions and remedies of that chapter.

Iowa Administrative Code

761-604.50 (321) Special reexaminations. The department may require a special reexamination consisting of a vision screening, knowledge test and driving test of any licensee.
604.50(1) The department may require a special reexamination when a licensee has been involved in a fatal motor vehicle accident and the investigating officer's report of the accident indicates the licensee contributed to the accident.604.50(2) The department may require a special reexamination when a licensee has been involved in two accidents within a three-year period and the investigating officer's report of each accident lists one of the following "Driver/Vehicle Related Contributing Circumstances" for the licensee:
a. Ran traffic signal.
b. Ran stop sign.
c. Passing, interfered with other vehicle.
d. Left of center, not passing.
e. Failure to yield right-of-way at uncontrolled intersection.
f. Failure to yield right-of-way from stop sign.
g. Failure to yield right-of-way from yield sign.
h. Failure to yield right-of-way making left turn.
i. Failure to yield right-of-way to pedestrian.
j. Failure to have control.
604.50(3) The department may require a special reexamination when a licensee has been involved in two accidents within a three-year period and the investigating officers' reports for both accidents list a driver condition for the licensee of "apparently asleep."
604.50(4) The department may require a special reexamination when a licensee who is 65 years of age or older has been involved in an accident and information in the investigating officer's or the person's own report of the accident indicates the need for reexamination. A circumstance that may indicate a need for reexamination includes, but is not limited to, any one of the following:
a. The licensee made a left turn that resulted in the accident.
b. The licensee failed to yield the right-of-way at a stop sign.
c. The licensee failed to yield the right-of-way at a yield sign.
d. The licensee failed to yield the right-of-way at an uncontrolled intersection.
e. The licensee failed to yield the right-of-way at a traffic control signal.
f. The licensee's vision may be a contributing factor to a nighttime accident.
g. The licensee has a physical disability-related license restriction other than "corrective lenses"and the accident involved one of the circumstances listed in paragraphs "a" to "f" above.
604.50(5) The department may require a special reexamination when recommended by a peace officer, a court, or a properly documented citizen's request. A factor that may indicate a need for reexamination includes, but is not limited to, any one of the following:
a. Loss of consciousness.
b. Confusion, disorientation or dementia.
c. Inability to maintain a vehicle in the proper lane.
d. Repeatedly ignoring traffic control devices in a nonchase setting.
e. Inability to interact safely with other vehicles.
f. Inability to maintain consistent speed when no reaction to other vehicles or pedestrians isrequired.
This rule is intended to implement Iowa Code sections 321.177, 321.186 and 321.210.

Here is the latest story involving this:
No plans to pull hit-run suspect's driver's license

Update 6; Cyclist killed near Cumming, Iowa. Driver left scene.

The killer is free on bond. paul mckinney was freed on $7,500 bond and his arraingment is set for Oct. 12, 2009, the original date was today, Sept. 22. His bond was originally $10,000, which is about $990,000 too low. Now to add even more insult to injury, or death in this case, the killer has been set free on bond.

How much more of a travesty of justice can this turn into? Time will tell. Knowing the history and pattern the judicial system doles out to motorists who kill cyclists mckinney will get nothing more then a slap on the wrist. Which is why the IBC is sending a letter to Gov. Culver.

Here is the latest article on this injustice:
Arraignment date set in fatal hit-run case

Inconsistent charges noted in traffic crashes with severe injuries.

Recent traffic crashes with similar characteristics have
produced a wide variety of penalties and Iowa travelers are
left wondering what is the appropriate charge when a traffic
crash leaves a person with severe injuries. Crashes
involving bicycles seem to have the lightest penalties.

The Iowa Code call for enhanced penalties when a serious
injury or fatality occurs as the result of a traffic crash.
The law is not specific to mode of transportation and
applies equally to motor vehicles as they do to
non-motorized modes of transportation.

In the most recent sentencing for a crash outside of Polk
City, the driver plead guilty to a $65 traffic ticket
despite serious injuries to the victim including a fracture
that required emergency surgery to save the persons foot
from loss of circulation.

The victim of that crash was Leesa Shoemaker, a Polk County
Deputy. Shoemaker was riding her bike to work in the early
morning when she was struck from behind by a vehicle driven
by Jerry Culbertson on May 12 resulting in fractures to her
face, back and leg.

Mark Wyatt of the Iowa Bicycle Coalition is appalled by the
inconsistent charge. “We have been talking with Leesa since
this crash. She was assured the Iowa Code was going to be
applied as it would with any other traffic crash with a
serious injury. It seems a last minute plea arrangement was
made that dramatically reduced the penalty.”

Wyatt adds, “The traffic laws in Iowa require the operators
of vehicles to keep a proper lookout so they don't hit,
injury, or kill someone. Prosecutors should expect
motorists to take their responsibility seriously. Letting
someone off the hook because they are distracted or not
paying attention to driving won't deter that type of
behavior. It will continue to encourage distracted or
dangerous driving.”

The Iowa Bicycle Coalition makes sure that prosecutors
understand the penalties with serious injury or fatalities.
When a crash occurs, the Coalition sends a letter to the
county attorney to educate them on the section of code that
refers to serious injury or fatality penalties.

The Coalition has also worked with the legislature in hopes
of clearing up some of the loopholes that hinder prosecution
of bicycle crashes. The bill passed the Iowa Senate last
session, but remains in the Iowa House for next session.
Language in the bill adds bicycles to many of the traffic
violations to compel more consistent charges.

Link: Inconsistent charges noted in traffic crashes with severe injuries.

Iowa Bicycle Coalition sends letter to Gov. Culver to increase roadway safety

Iowa Bicycle Coalition sends letter to Gov. Culver to
increase roadway safety

The Iowa Bicycle Coalition has sent a letter to Governor
Culver asking for him to give some attention to the safety
of non motorized transportation modes. A series of
overtaking crashes have occurred this summer causing
fatalities and serious injuries.

The letter gives examples of the tragic problems encountered
by walking and bicycling. But it also highlights the
inequities faced in a transportation system heavily
dominated by motorized vehicles.

Bicyclists have the same rights and duties of the drivers of
vehicles according to the Iowa Code. There are also
additional penalties for crashes with serious injuries or
fatalities. Mark Wyatt, executive director of the Iowa
Bicycle Coalition thinks the application is much different
in the real world. “It seems that when a bicycle is
involved traffic charges don't apply.”

It's not limited to law enforcement issues. “We have to
crowd meetings and fight for each and every bicycle facility
and accommodation.” adds Wyatt. “When bicycle or
pedestrian accommodations are warranted funding becomes a
burden. In several areas of the state, private groups
purchase and build trails because no one else will. But
roadway construction is automatic and constant.”

Wyatt says the issue is greater than bicycle safety. Other
issues like health, obesity, traffic congestion, and air
quality. Bicycling and walking have a strong relationship
to quality of life and retention of younger workers. “But
it starts with making it safe to ride a bicycle down the
road. We need to conquer the safety issue first.” states
Wyatt.

The letter calls for Governor Culver to examine what state
agencies have plans for bicycle and pedestrian safety and to
help implement those solutions.

Link: Iowa Bicycle Coalition sends letter to Gov. Culver to increase roadway safety

YOU BET WE'RE OUTRAGED!!!

It seems motorists have cyclists in their sites. There has been another hit and run in Iowa, this time in Linn County. Ironically it was by a driver in a white truck. It was not paul mckinney, they guy who has been arrested and his white truck impounded for killing a differant cyclist. Jospeh Richey was hit on on Thursday evening by a driver in a white pick-up truck. The driver left the scene. Richey was taken to the hospital with non-life threatening injuries. This is getting out of hand. I can only specualte and provide theories at this point as to why the driver hit Joseph and then took off. At this point all are unprovable, but as I said before any good theory is an unprovable one.

The Iowa Bicycle Coalition has issued a statement about the 2 most recent collisions between 2 drivers of 2 differant white pick-up trucks and the 2 cyclists hit, one killed, one injured:
CYCLISTS OUTRAGED FOLLOWING SERIES OF HIT AND RUN CRASHES

Here is the news story:
Police Search for Truck that Hit Bicyclist

Update 5; Cyclist killed near Cumming, Iowa. Driver left scene.

The driver who hit and killed Mark Grgurich has macular degeneration. Since this info has come out a lot of people are saying what a poor old guy, while others, a lot of them cyclists are calling B.S. and saying he should never had been driving on the roadways with a medical condition that affects his vision. I do not agree with the poor old man crap. I do agree with he never should have been driving and once his macular degeneration was diagnosed he should have given up driving voluntarily. Iowa does not have a law that forces drivers to do so, yet. Nor does Iowa have a way for anyone to report people like mckinney to have them deemed not fit to drive like Florida does, yet. mckinney and his lawyer are doing a good job at garnering sympathy before his arraingment on Sept. 22. I see it as a rather pathetic attempt to get away with killing someone. He needs to serve the max. prison time for this. Nothing less is acceptable as far as I am concerned.

Here are the latest news stories:
Driver suspected in bicyclist's death has vision problem
Old-Timer Trouble: Elderly man facing charges in deadly hit-and-run that killed a Des Moines bicyclist

Update 4; Cyclist killed near Cumming, Iowa. Driver left scene.

The driver of the white Chevy truck has been caught, arrested and charged for hitting, killing and leaving the scene after he hit and killed Mark Grgurich. It was indeed paul mckinney, age 79, who also goes by judd. paul is apparently not a very well liked man by some in Winterset, IA. It appears this comes as no surprise to folks who know him. He has a wife who is suffering from alzheimers. paul likes to take his wife to a bar, leave her in the corner while he drinks, gets drunk, shoots pool and chases the waitresses, etc. There has been more then one occasion where his wife was seen wandering around and lost by herself because paul was too busy chasing tail then taking care of her.

paul has also been in trouble with the law before. He has prior traffic violations. The day he hit and killed Mark he was seen at a bar drinking. Though he can not be charged because it is too late it has been stated it is thought he was drinking before he hit and killed Mark. paul also tried to hide and modify his truck to hide the evidence and he drove a differant vehicle until he was caught and arrested.

It seems paul was in the truck by himself when he hit and killed Mark. I wonder where was his wife? Who was taking care of her? People are stating he is a poor sweet old man who is doing well but having a hard time taking care of his wife and he should not be in jail because of her health. I say tough shit! He should have thought of that before he killed someone. If he can do the crime, he can do the time. If convicted he faces up to 7 years in prison, and some family members of Mark are asking and wanting him to serve more. They are trying to see if he can be charged with something more severe. 7 years could be the rest of his life and some are saying what good will that do, to send an old man to jail. Well it will get a dangerous driver off of the roadways at least that long. If he dies in prison, it will be permenantly. Again I say tough shit! He killed someone, he needs to face justice for it and thankfully she is blind and is not taking into consideration his age. To Lady Justice it does not matter if he is 18 or 80. I say she should bring down her Sword of Justice hard on him and make him pay dearly for what he did! But of course at the same time use her Scales of Justice to make sure it is propely done.

Here are the latest news stories;
Arrest made in hit-and-run that killed bicyclist
Driver Comes Forward In Fatal Bike Crash
Neighbor: Man worked on truck after fatal hit-and-run
Winterset man charged in bicyclist’s death

Update 3; Cyclist killed near Cumming, Iowa. Driver left scene.

It appears that the possible owner of the truck that hit and killed Mark Grgurich has been found. Or at the very least the address where the truck was found by authorities is now known. It took 60 calls to law enforcement before they impounded the truck that was driven by the killer that hit Mark. The truck was found at 121 9TH ST N in Winterset, Iowa. The home, according to the Warren County Assesors office is listed under Paul L. McKinney. Granted it is possible that Paul is the owner of the home and is renting it to the person who owns the truck. It is also possible that Paul, while living at the address is not the owner of the truck. And it is possible that while the truck might belong to Paul he was not the one driving it the day whom ever was driving hit hit and killed Mark.

If it was Paul that was driving that day and he was the one who murdered Mark then he needs to do the right thing and own to what he did and take responsibility for it. Or whom ever did kill Mark needs to own up to it. Not doing so will make matters worse for them in the future. I would think and hope they feel the pressure of this closing in around them. I wonder if Paul or whom ever did this feels any guilt or remorse. As no one has come forward I seriously doubt it. This make this person nothing more then a weak coward.

The address listed for Paul was not found or disclosed my the media. For some reason they are not doing any investigative reporting on this. This was found and put together by cyclists that span across Iowa. Here are the links showing how the cyclists came to the conclusion of what the address and who is listed as the owner of the house the truck was found at.

A neighbor who lives across the street from Paul was very surprised when she saw law enforcement show up to impound the truck. She stated to the media they were there from about 4 pm to after dark.

Watch the news video on the right of the screen. Pay attention to what the house looks like;
Video

Now look at what the picture of the house looks like and who is listed as the owner in this link;
Address and owner

I don't know about you but I can put 2 and 2 together and come to a plausable conclusion/answer as to who the owner/driver of the truck is.

Update 2; Cyclist killed near Cumming, Iowa. Driver left scene.

They truck that was used as a weapon to kill Mark Grgurich may have been found and is currently in impound. It could take 8 to 10 days to complete the investigation and file charges but for now there are no suspects in custody and no charges have been filed.

I think that is ok. I think the authorities should take the time needed to do a complete investigation, then when the it is done file charges and arrest the suspect. I also think when the driver is punished, part of his or her punishment should include the truck being confiscated, scrapped and recycled and the recycled material be used to make bicycle frames and components to be sold to cyclists in Iowa. It is only right that some good come out of this tragic murder. Yes, that's right I said murder. In my opinion there is no other way to consider this. I am not ready to call this an accident or a collision, or decide whether or not it was on purpose.


I am rather impressed that law enforcement is actually doing something about this. Typically they do not do a whole lot if anything at all. I am kind of thinking the reason is because one of their own was hit and seriously injured while riding her bike. Too bad it takes something like that to prompt them to do their job that they should be doing for all victims.

Recent stories;
Truck Impounded In Fatal Bike Crash Case
Web users join search for hit and run killer
Investigators Piecing Together Hit-And-Run Case

Update 1; Cyclist killed near Cumming, Iowa. Driver left scene.

A funeral procession made up of cyclists for Mark Grgurich, the cyclist that was killed by the hit and run driver will be part of the funeral procession from the funeral home to the cemetery. All cyclists are welcome to attend. Here are the details;
Cyclist procession finalized for Mark Grgurich's funeral

Surveillance has been done and a photo taken of the possible truck and driver who killed Mark.

I do not agree with one of the things in the story. It states it is thought the driver did not do this on purpose. I call BULLSHIT on that one! In my opinion the driver who did this is of the mind set that cyclists do not belong on the roadways and he or she took upon themself to make a point and teach us a lesson and as a result killed someone to do so.

Latest news stories;
Is Clue Key To Fatal Crash Investigation?
New Photo Released In Fatal Bike Crash

Cyclist killed near Cumming, Iowa. Driver left scene.

In Warren County, near Cumming Iowa a cyclist was hit and killed by a driver in a white pickup who fled the scene, thus making this a hit and run. The authorities are currently searching for the driver.

My thoughts and prayers go out to the family of the slain cyclist. That said I hope they catch and fully prosecute the driver nad he serves nothing less then the rest of his life in prison. In Iowa when yo go to prison for life, it is for life, there is no chance for parole. Iowa is one of the toughest states on this. You go in for life and you will die in prison.

A hit and run driver is nothing more then a coward for leaving the scene after killing someone. I can only speculate as to why. He or she could simply be a coward, or the person could have been driving drunk, maybe they had a suspended liscense, or perhaps a warrant out for their arrest. Waht ever the reason it is not a good enough one.

There are more then a few stories in the news about this. Along with the news stories are the horrid comments by those who think the cyclist got what he deserved and are defending the driver. These are the same people who want to ban cyclists from the roadways. And of course there are the cyclists who are countering and opposing those comments. The fact is the whole story is not known yet. Hopefully it will be when they catch and arrest the driver.

On one of the stories, Gary, the guy from the safety group who wants to ban cyclists has posted comments as have I. I have asked and offered for the safety group and the IBC to sit down and discuss this like reasonable and logical adults over a beer/soda/coffee. I have yet to receive a response.

Here are the stories;
UPDATE: Authorities identify cyclist killed near Cumming
Friends Remember Bicyclist Killed
New poll on KCCI - cyclists need to vote
Survey
Iowa Bicycle Coalition saddened by loss of cyclist, outraged by driver leaving the scene.
Mark Grgurich funeral plans - cyclist procession planned
Co-Workers Mourn Loss Of Des Moines Cyclist
Clue could lead to driver in Fatal Bike Crash

Update 14; A safety coalition wants to ban cyclists from all Iowa roadways.

Here is Gary's latest response;

John

Here's the whole deal, I hope to keep this short, the highway I live on. , had a few cars in the morning, a few in the evening, and a bicycle once in a while, we all got along. Then farms got sold to devolopers, they in turn built houses, we are very close to West Des Moines, so we got a large influx of people, { sorry I should have a car count of my own highway, but I don't } I know our traffic is heavy, in amongest this we built a bike trail to it. Well guess what, we have went from a few cars and a few single riders, to a lot of cars and a lot of bikes. Then bicyclist got arrogant, they rode in packs of 10 to 40 on our highway strung out for a mile, so the problem came from trying to pass, that is what I was saying about a truck could be no longer then 85 ft. I can safely pass a 5mph 85ft long anything. I can not safely pass a 1/4 of anything going 5mph. By the way, when I pass, I go all the way in the left lane, even if you ride your bike on the white line on the right, I still use all the left lane. That way if you hit a crack and fall to the left, we are clear. So the problem is on these hilly short passing zones, I can not ever legally, or safely, pass 20 bicyclist in a row. Do you really think I should have to follow them for 20 miles? What about the mom coming up behind me, who does not have a clue I am going that slow, { had that happen } I have been given the finger for passing, given the finger for following when they thought I should pass, it was in a no passing zone. So, I have had enough. Why do you not see horses on the highways? Because they know that they can not match the flow of traffic. Times change, bikes in groups do not fit how our highways are set up.

Thanks Gary

This tells me because he has had enough of cyclists blocking his way and maybe delaying him for at most a minute or 2 he and his group are going to tyr and ban us.

Here is my response to this;

Gary,

You're right, times have changed. But rather then ban bikes from the roadways why not a more equitable solution of changing the roadways to accommodate all roadways users. It is legal to ride a horse on the side of a roadway in Iowa.

What about your group and the folks from the IBC getting together to discuss this in a civil manner with cool heads and calm tempers? Can you put me in touch with someone? Is Dan the go to person for this? How do I get in touch with him if he is?

Some of what you have said has called my bike riding style and skills into question. Let me clear it up for you on how I ride. First I ride defensively, more so then when I drive my vehicle in a defensive manner. I always ride in the right half of the travel lane, not too close to the far right and not to close to the center on most roadways. Some roads are wide enough where I can get further to the right and still be out of the road gutter where all the debris and crap is. I do this so drivers will go around me with out passing too close or buzzing me. I have noticed a difference when I ride like this then when I ride closer to the curb or edge of the roadway. when I am closer to the edge drivers seem to think they have enough room to pass while still being in the lane. I have been brushed by vehicles when this happens. By putting myself further out into the travel lane I prevent this. In a way it forces traffic to pass me at a safe distance.

I never run a stop sign or red light with out fully stopping first, unless the stop light is malfunctioning. There was one stop light in Sioux City that I waited for 6 minuets to change before I ran it. The law states this is legal and the stop light can be treated as a stop sign after so much time. But it needs to be reported to the municipality. I did report it to the city engineers office and they assured me it would be looked into. I no longer have that problem at that stop light.

When I stop I also do what is called taking the lane. That is where I position myself dead center in the lane so traffic can not pull up on my left or right, which is illegal. Lets say I am far to the right and a car pulls up to stop on my left and that car is turning right and I am going straight. The car will collide with me, this is called a right hook. I prevent this by taking the lane. When I proceed through I move to the right once I am clear and I no traffic will not try to hook me if they turn. the same applies if I am in a left lane.

When I turn or change lanes I signal, especially when I move to the left to get into a left turn lane to turn left. I ride in a straight line and am very predictable. I do not swerve or fool around on the bike when I am riding. I will admit however to breaking the speed limit. Only when going down a long enough hill.

I am empathetic to how you feel about this. But a knee jerk reaction, such as a ban is not the answer.

Let me know who the contact person is to set up a face to face with your group and the IBC.

John

Update 13; A safety coalition wants to ban cyclists from all Iowa roadways.

Most recent emails between me and Gary from this safety group;

Gary;

John
1.I would not call Dan a hypocrite from a group of people who can not share a bike path with the moms.He has a buisness, what does that have to do with your hobby? No, I have not heard of the Law, or the LAF, or the NOT, are you just funning with me, why dont you check your history, farm to market roads were made by farmers giving up rightaway to get produce to the towns. Show me a picture of a team of hores pulling a bike out of the mud.LOL. I will show you 50 pics of a team pulling a Model T out of the mud. So I dont believe you, my deed and abstract says I own to the middle of the road. How do you think farm to market roads got started?

2. Yes, I will talk to you about driving a truck. I dont care if your dad, grandpa, uncle, drove a truck. If you have not, then you do not have a clue.You are right, I am not going to follow a group of bikes for 20 miles, that is what the petition is about. I can not pass 20 bikes legally in the 20 miles to town on my road after I slow down to 5mph. Come drive the truck if you think you can. I want to see this.

3.No John, you kicked that blog out like it was to intimidate me. Did not work.

4.OK, give me numbers, I like numbers, how many bicyclist ride to work? Give me a number?

5.Great, I am glad you ride to work for 4 months.

6.John, I have pickup, that I drive on wk. ends. My wife has a car. I have my truck, the one I make a living wiith. When the bikes are gone. Then I have a Hudson, long story on that one. Its old, but I license it.John

7.John, you are wrong, I pay all the same taxes you are talking about, properity, car, we also work in IOWA, you have a free ride, face it, grow up.The ride is over.

8.John, I just talked to a city official on the new bike trail from Ankeny to Woodward. It cost 6 million dollars to build a 26 mile bike trail. That money came from boat reg, snowmobilers, etc.It cost 231,000 dollars a mile, show me your donations.Yes, it was a grant, from the DNR.. Show me your donation money, I can show you all the stats I have given you, In a heartbeat. Not a single dime has come from taxes according to you.Ae you just slow or what? Tax dollars have built all the bike trails. Show me the money? Give me a web site to look up all the trails you have built.

9.Ok, I jumped a couple, wasnt worth my time. LOL. My hobby is fishing, they tell me how long, how many, what time of yr. So get real, we all have to abide by the rules, yours are going to change I hope.

10. Trails dont always go where you want? Get a life, I would like a nice deep river from my house to lake Rathbun. We could build one if the DNR had not spent my boat money on bike trails.LOL Why do NONE of you answer my question of why not a vote of the people? What is wrong with it on the 2010 ballot. All bicyclists tell me we are going to lose, SO LETS VOTE.

My most recent response;

Gary,

I'm going to try sending this reply a third time. For some reason when I started to respond last night and tried to save as a draft it didn't work. Tried to retype it and save it as another draft and it didn't work the second time. Let me know if you receive this please. I'm wondering if something is wrong with my email account or email client. Might just be simple user error.

First what is with the name calling? The only name I have called anyone is calling Dan a Hypocrite. I view him as one because he no doubt enjoys his liberal protected right to own and deal in firearms. Yet he and your group are trying to restrict and eliminate the liberal rights of others. His right to deal in firearms is protected byt he U.S. Constitution. Well so is cyclists rights to the roadways. It falls under the Right To Pursue Happiness. What your group is doing is in blantent violation of that. I am going to ask that you refrain form refering to me as slow and stupid. I am an educated person., If you can not refrain then this conversation/discussion/debate is over.

I have no problem sharing a trail with moms with strollers. I do it all the time when I have to. I yield the right of way to them and announce my presence when passing and only pass when safe to do so. Why can't motorists share the road with cyclists? No need to announce your presence we cna hear you. But why not pass only when safe to do so? Why not slow down a bit and be patient?

I have no problem with a vote of the people. If this even makes it as far as being put on the ballot. That is a long way off and I have doubts it will make it that far. I can not speak for other cyclists, only myself on this one though. What I do have a problem with is the ban itself.

You comment about passing cyclists leads me to believe you don't want to be patient and wait to pass safely. Is this what you mean? Is my interpritation correct? When you encounter cyclists on the roadways how do you behave? Do you pass them too close? Do you put them in harms way? If anyone who uses the roadways can not be patient and wait ti safely pass, especially in no passing zones, regardless of what type of roadways users are on the road should not be on the roadways.

I do not know how many cyclists sommute to/from work by bike. I can try and get those numbers but they will be based on the number of people who signed up and registered for the Bike To Work Week this past May. May is National Bike To Work Month and one week is designated as Bike To Work Week. The number of people who register stating they will do so is used to prompt businesses and law makers to provide for better facilites because it proves cyclists use the roadways to commute to and from work.

6 million dollars for 26 miles of trail is a heck of a deal, in fact pretty cheap considering I have seen some trails cost a million dollars a mile. You admit the cost of this trail is funded by a DNR grant, thus meaning no tax dollars. This proves my point all that much more. I never said all of the funding comes from grants and donation. Or that none of it comes from tax dollars. I did get the impression from you that you think all funding comes from tax dollars. You just said it doesn't. What is with what seems like the double standard? I am no longer part of the trails foundation so I am not privy to the current data on trails they have funded recently. I do know in the past they did donate $10,000 to a community for a trail extension as part of a fund matching program. The web site that may have the info. you're asking for is; http://www.siouxlandtrails.org/index.html By all means provide me with stats and a web link showing the proof you speak of.

I ride my bike more then 4 months of the year. I start in March and stop in November. At most I am off the bike for 3 to 4 months of the year.

Here is a stat you may be interested in when it comes to roadway funding;

Fishing is your hobby, wonderful. I used to fish a lot too. One of the things that bothered me the most is the amount of litter on the bank and out in the water that others would throw. I lost count of how much I picked up and tossed in the trash in these public fishing areas. You have no doubt seen the ltiter as well. I wonder if it is a big of a problem as it once was. In the past there were a few areas that were closed to public fishing because of it. How would you like it if a group of concerned environmental advocates got together to ban fishing in all public areas in Iowa because of the litter problem? And to do so they put it on the 2010 ballot. How would you feel? What would you do? Would you have a problem with the democratic process of letting the people decide by a vote? How would you view such an ridiculous issue as a ban like this?

Cyclists have to abide by rules too. they are called traffic laws. As legal roadways users we are subject to the same laws as motorists. Before yo go off on a tirade on how you never see a cyclist obey a single traffic law think about this. Do you know what the laws are for cyclists? Do you even know all of the laws for motorists? I suggest you read the Iowa code concerning both. Especially since your group is trying to ban cyclists from the roadways. Part of the problem is motorists think cyclists are breaking the law by say riding 2 abreast. That is NOT illegal. We are allowed to do that on the roadways. There are a lot of wrong assumptions that motorists have about traffic alws and cyclists. Most of the drivers are not educated in the facts and most don't want to be. They think they what they assume to be true is fact, when it isn't. Please tell me you are NOT one of those and you are at least willing to educate yourself on the matter. I can also guarantee you that there are way more motorists who break the traffic code then cyclists. I bet I see more motorists violating more traffic laws in one day then I do in an entire season of cycling. In fact I know I see it. Everythign from speeding, running red lights, following too close, not signaling a turn or lane change to cutting others off. This is just what motorists do amongst themselves, never mind what I see them do to cyclists.

No, trails do no always go where I want or need to go. For example when I want to ride from Sioux City to Le Mars I use K22 to hwy 3 then take Hwy 3 into Le Mars. There is no trail I can ride on to do this.

There is a recent article in the Des Moines Register stating the war between motorists and cyclists is silly. Well the author is correct, it is. I'll also be the first cyclist to admit I am partially responsible in fanning the flames in this war. Your group is also no doubt partially responsible for the same as well. I only hope people in your group has the courage to admit this fault of theirs. Here is a link to the article;
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20090825/NEWS03/908250357/1025/COMM01/Hansen--Bicyclist-motorist-war-is-silly
The ironic thing is despite the article stating this is silly and people need to come together with cool heads and use logic to come to an equatible resolution the comments suggest otherwise. Well I am willing to take this a step further. This silliness needs to stop. Why not sit down for a face to face over a cup of coffee/soda or even a beer to discuss this in a civil manner? Is your group willing to sit down with the IBC and discuss a resolution that will work for everyone? Enough of the foolish knee jerk reactions. Let's use diplomacy and cool level heads to resolve this. Will you please pass this to whom ever in your group and put me in touch with them so some sort of face to face summit can be organized? I am going out on a limb here and am willing to admit to my faults in how I personally feel about this and extend an invitation to discuss this. I am not speaking on behalf of the IBC, but if the ball can get rolling on this I think they would be more the willing to sit down for a face to face with your group. So what do you say Gary? The meeting can even be in a neutral location if it gets that far.

There are couple of books I recommend you and your group reads. One is titled; Asphalt Nation; How The Automobile Took Over AMerica and How We Can Take it Back, written by Jane Holtz Kay. Link; http://www.amazon.com/Asphalt-Nation-Automobile-Took-America/dp/0520216202 The other book is titled; Traffic; Why We Drive The Way We Do (And What it Says About Us), written by Tom Vanderbilt. Link; http://www.amazon.com/Traffic-Drive-What-Says-About/dp/0307277194/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1251303379&sr=1-1 Both are well written and are eye openers on the real problems with traffic in the United States. Please do not judge these books by their cover. Read them to understand what is truly happening in America with our traffic and roadway systems. If you do not want to buy them and your public library does not have a copy I am willing to loan you mine. As long as you return them to me in the same condition I loan them out in. I am even willing to pay for shipping both ways. Let me know.

About 7ish years ago there was a group of cyclists LEGALLY riding on a divided 4 lane state hwy, I forget which one. They were single file and when they were on the shoulder where it was not full of crap and debris, otherwise they were in the right travel lane where they were legally suppsoed to be. Adjacent to this highway is a trail. The trail turns and then terminates a little further up then they were when this incident happened. A former state senator who shall not be named came upon these cyclists and pulled over and stopped in front of them, forcing them to stop. He then demanded they get on the trail. They poliltley refused. He then tried to pull the crap of I am a state senator and you will do what I say. Then again refused. Citing they were legally riding on the PUBLIC roadway and the trail does not go where their destination was. The now former senator sped off in a huff because he was told no. apparently he does not like and is not used to being told no. Shortly after this happened he wrote a bill to ban cyclists from the roadways when there is a trail adjacent to the roadway. What happened was totally unexpected. Cyclists from all across Iowa and the nation banded together, the League of American Bicyclists even got involved. What happened was this bill ammended to say if cyclists were banned frmo roadways, thus changing our status of legal roadway users, facilities and infrastructure would have to be provided, at tax payers expense. The bill was dropped and never made it to discussion during the legislative session that year. No tax payer was willing to pay for such facilities when they realized such infrastructure already exists in the form of the roadways. Had it gone through any law maker who would have been favor of it would have lost in the next election.

So you see Dan this has been tried before and it didn't work. Even the bans that resulted from the 2004 death of a RAGBRAI rider have been repealed. The proposed bans in other counties have been dropped and never continued forward. What your group is doing is very old news.


Let me know if you would like to borrow my copies of the 2 books and seriously let me know if you or anyone in your gruop is willign to sit down with your choice of beverage to discuss this in a civic manner and leave the knee jerk reactions to it aside.

John

Let's see how he responds and if he accepts my invite to sit down and discuss this in a civil manner. Or if anyone from his group does. If they do not then that tells me a lot about this safety group.

The war is silly.

In a recent article in the Des Moines Register talks about the silliness with the current issue of cyclists vs. motorists, rights to the roadways, etc. I admit to being a part of the silliness and to fanning the flames. I agree this is getting silly and out of hand. Cooler heads need to prevail and everyone involved needs to sit down over a beer/soda/coffee and discuss this calmly.

Here is the text from the article and the link;

Say what you will about unpredictable, self-absorbed bicycle riders. At least they aren't text messaging as they dart in front of you.

And when it comes to accidents with cars, trucks, SUVs and other armored vehicles, cyclists are almost always the big losers.

So what's the problem, motorists? You have something against colorfully attired, physically fit friends of the environment?

Yes, cyclists can be arrogant and superior and careless. Too many zip through stop signs and stray too close to the center line and think they own the road.

But get used to them. In 20 years, everyone will be wearing stretchy, tight-fitting outfits and football-shaped headgear (or the 2029 equivalent) and sharing the street with smart cars not much bigger than the bikes they're trying to avoid.

OK, time out. I'd like to keep fanning the car-vs.-bike flames and banging the war drums. It's fun and easy.

Too easy, in fact. This long-running cyclist-motorist feud has gone too far and grown too ugly for no good reason. It must stop.

You'd think everyone was screaming about a public health care option or gays in committed relationships becoming Lutheran pastors. This isn't the end of the world like that.

But groups of people don't just have honest disagreements anymore. Their similarities must be minimized and their differences overemphasized and exaggerated until extremists on both sides drown everyone else out.

So why should something as innocent as bicycle safety be any different from a raucous town hall meeting?

Neither cars nor bicycles are going away. It doesn't have to be like this.

Last spring in rural Cumming, a truck hauling anhydrous ammonia hit a bicyclist while trying to pass. The rider suffered critical injuries but survived. The driver, a farmer who'll turn 78 in a few days, suffered emotional trauma.

The cyclists held a rally at the Statehouse, pushing for a change in the law.

The friends of the farmer held a meeting in support of their friend. He's a good and compassionate man, they said, who didn't deserve the harsh criticism he received. It was a terrible, regrettable accident, but he isn't a terrible man. Just the opposite.

Timothy McCoy, a cyclist from Des Moines who was riding nearby at the time of the incident, had a strange reaction.

He wanted to get the victim, Doug Smith, and the driver, John Lynch, together when both were feeling better. It never happened. Neither was ready to meet, but McCoy was on the right track.

When the noise gets too loud, it might help to remember that most drivers don't hate cyclists and most cyclists don't believe all drivers are out to get them. So take the noise with a ton of road salt. Though relatively peaceful coexistence is the norm, you'd never know it.

There's a petition circulating that would allow Iowans to vote on banning bicycles from rural highways. There's a counter-petition asking lawmakers to support a ballot initiative prohibiting all motor vehicles from using farm-to-market roads.

On Monday afternoon the Des Moines City Council met to further consider painting bike lanes on Ingersoll Avenue. Business owners in the neighborhood against the plan worry about losing money and gaining congestion. At least this time the debate hasn't been overly contentious.

Not like the aftermath of the Cumming accident when some people accused Lynch of intentionally hurting Smith.

"I've been with cyclists who have the us-vs.-them mentality," McCoy said. "It's a form of tribalism. We have our colors. You have yours. We're different from everyone else. And that just contributes to more of the same."

At least one person called Smith names and said he got what he deserved. McCoy wanted to meet that guy.

"He'd never say that if he knew Doug," McCoy said. "I wanted to talk to him because, when he gets to know me and those like me, that helps create a place where we can coexist and even help one another be safe.

"I don't know where the anger comes from. But if we could sit down over a beer, that kind of stuff would go away."

Sitting down over a beer wasn't a cure-all for the black Harvard professor and the white cop, but it's a start.

Hansen: Bicyclist-motorist war is silly

Update 12; A safety coalition wants to ban cyclists from all Iowa roadways.

I emailed the so called safety group and got a response from one if its members.

Here is what I wrote;

Dan,

I'd like you to take some time to read what I posted in my blog about your group and the proposed ban regarding cyclists. First you should know I regard people like you as the biggest hypocrites. The reason is you are a gun owner and a firearms dealer. No doubt you appreciate the freedoms afforded you by the government to own, carry and deal in firearms. Yet you want to restrict the LEGAL RIGHTS of others to use PUBLIC roadways. How would you like it, if because guns kill more and more people every year there was a group trying to completely ban the ownership of all and any type of firearm? How would you like it if your livelihood, i.e. your gun business was shut down because a safety group does not want anyone to own a gun because they kill? You'd likely hate it and would do everything you could to stop it. Well this is how cyclists in Iowa feel about you and your group banning us from the roadways. We hate what you and your group is trying to do.

Granted an online petition has no chance in a court of law or legislative session. But they are effective at garnering interest to see how many people might support such an issue if it ever made it to a ballot or legislation. That said have you seen the Iowa Bicycle Coalition web site? You should take a look at ti if you haven't. It took less then 3 days to obtain over 2,000 online signatures then it did for your groups petition to obtain 700 signatures. If you look at just those numbers alone the cyclists are going to win this one.

Just so you know I am one cyclist who, if by some small margin this is passed will violate the ban. This is one law I WILL NOT OBEY!

I recommend you read this information and think about dropping this. You and your group are in for one heck of a fight, one that you will lose.

Here is the main link. Just scroll down to read from the beginning to update number 10;
http://bicycleadvocacyandsafety.blogspot.com/

Here is the response I got from someone named Gary;

John

This is not Dan but I would like to respond to your comments.
1. Hypocrites, you who can not ride on a bike path because the moms pushing strollers slow you down. Are you kidding me, this is supposed to be your relaxing hobby, yet you can not give up 10 mph, yet you expect me to give up 50 mph. during my work { bikes only go uphill at 5mph., the herd is no faster then its slowest member}

2. Livelihood, come drive my truck, yes it is what I do for a living, Iowa law says the longest truck is around 85 ft.{ 20 bicylist strung out for a 1/4 mile. } You make that decision when to pass. Keep in mind it is just a Hobby.

3.Online petition, yes we know it can not go to a legislative session, a legislator told us to get the petition out, get the numbers, then get a legislator to sponsor it. We think we have one. How many members in the IBC..? So you sent an e-mail and they all signed, so what. How many bicylist in IOWA, 5000? 10000? . No one knows because you pay no license and reg. There are 3 million people in Iowa.
What is wrong with a vote of the people? You have already said we don't have a chance. So, let's do this the good old fashion way, a vote of the people. WE just want it on the 2010 ballot. By the way, we have 800 on the web, but you have not counted our signed petitions.

4.No John, you will obey the law.

5. This is our first try, unlike the IBC., we are brand new to this, if we lose this time we will learn from our mistakes and start over.
There are 14 bike accidents on the cover of the IA. Bike. Coalition, just the front page. Times change, you can not go with the flow of traffic.
Hickman rd., Waukee to DM., In 2000, 4700 cars a day, in 08, 8000. Horses have legal rights to our roads, when was the last time you saw 20 cowboys on the highway?

6. I don't know why you think it is so important to read your blog stuff? Is this a threat? You have your opinion, we have ours.
Numbers, the IBC. says they bring in 24 million per yr. Where does that number come from? Their own study. LOL . Do you know that in 2006 IOWA drew in 19 billion dollars from ag. I know 08 would be way higher because of grain prices. This number came from the IA. reg.of finance. Do you know that there were 700 bike accidents in 2008, if there are 5000 bike riders on our highways, that is 14%. That is more then when 3 wheeled ATV's where banned by the fed. gov.

7. Do you realize you have the only free hobby I know of. Boating, fishing, hunting, camping, snowmobiling, all require a donation to the state of IOWA. I am waiting on these numbers, how much all the above paid the state, and how much we spent on bike trials. Do not tell me you have a car, I have 4 of them, and they still charge me for my boats.LOL . Nice disagreeing with you.

Thanks, Gary

Not sure why Dan did not respond, but I think it cowardace on his part that he didn't as he is the spokesman for this group. Here is what I replied back with;

Gary,

First I am calling Dan a hypocrite because he operates a firearms business and no doubt enjoys the freedoms of doing so. Well cyclists enjoy the freedoms of riding on PUBLIC roadways. Did you know that today's modern roadway system and DOT's are thanks to a bunch of cyclists? Ever hear of the League of American Wheelmen? They are now called the League of American Bicyclists. The LAW were responsible for roadway improvements thus leading to the modern improved roadway design and the DOT's that oversee them. Don't believe me? Look it up, this is historical fact. You people should not be cursing us, you should be thanking us. For without cyclists modern roadways would not exist as they do today.

Don't talk to me about driving a truck for a living. My father is an OTR driver. Though I am not one myself because of a promise I made to my dad, He does respect cyclists rights as well as other roadway users, to the PUBLIC roadways. I know what Iowa law is regarding length of a truck. I also know you can be longer and heavier if you have the proper permits for it. What is wrong with slowing down when passing? The comment you make about this leads me to believe you, while driving an 80,000 truck, wants to go speeding down the highway. Here is a good suggestion, slow down, safely pass with no less then 3' for passenger vehicles, 6' for larger vehicles. If it is not safe to pass slow down and wait until it is. Yu won't be delayed that darn long so be patient. It is a virtue you know.

My blog is not a threat. It is my opinion.

I do way more then just ride my bike as a hobby. I commute to and from work almost daily. I also run errands on my bike as often as I can. I am fortunate enough to have more then one commute route option to choose from. I actually have about 4 or 5. Some of them are on county and state highways. I sometimes choose to take the scenic route as I am fortunate enough to live in Sioux City where the beautiful Loess Hills are. It is much more fun and enjoyable to ride a bike through the hills then it is to drive a car.

My wife and I have one motor vehicle. A modest Jeep Compass with a 4 cylinder engine. We only need one. Do you really need 4? I mean really? How many are status symbols and how many are actually needed. Tell me what are your vehicles used for? Why so many? Are you materialistic?

Do not argue with me that cyclists do not pay taxes. The hell we don't. You point out we are in Iowa, more then once in fact. Iowa has 4 seasons. Cyclists in Iowa do not ride bike year round, at least most of us don't, because of the weather. Every cyclist I know of has at least one car. Guess what? We pay to register and license our vehicle and we pay to fuel and maintain it. Therefore we pay taxes! Most if not all of us own or rent property in Iowa so we pay a property tax, even renters do, though not directly. We also work in Iowa so we pay an income tax and we spend money on consumable goods, so we pay sales tax. All of these taxes help pay for roadways.

Oh and most new trail construction are NOT paid for by taxes. Taxes might pay to maintain them after they are built by the governing body of the trail, but look above to see the list of taxes cyclists pay and that will tell you what likely helps to pay for roadways. You have probably seen on the news stories about bond issues to pay for things like new schools, hospitals, fire/police stations. When was the last time you remember one being voted in favor of? don't remember? That is because it has likely been a long time. I can't remember when the last time was. Perhaps this does not happen as often in central Iowa as it does in my area. But I do know this, every time a new trail is brought up as a bond issue it is ALWAYS voted down. So do not tell me taxes pay for trail construction. New trails are typically built with grants and donation funding. How do I know this? Well I am a founding member of a trails foundation in the tri-state area. Every trail we have helped to have built brand new or added on to has been through our fundraising efforts. Not a single dime has come from taxes. So please spare the rhetoric on that.

Cycling is far from a free hobby, believe me. I spend hundreds, if not not thousands of dollars a year on it. Every time I have to drive somewhere to do an organized bike ride, a majority of which is in Iowa, I pay for gas, food and lodging. I have to pay to keep my vehicle maintained so I can transport myself and bike to these events. My next one will be in September. It starts and ends in Pella, Iowa. And let us not forget RAGBRAI. People spend thousands of dollars every year in Iowa to participate in it. I think it is second only to the state fair.

This past weekend I did a ride called ONABIKE. It starts/ends in Onawa, Iowa. Goes through Turin, Soldier, Moorhead, Pisgah, Little Sioux and Blencoe. The entire ride is on state and county highways. Not once in the history of this ride or since I have been doing it has a motorist had any problems with the hundreds of cyclists on these roadways. It truly is a great ride.

Remember at the beginning of this I mentioned I commute to/from work? I use a combination of trails and roadways. I have no problem with other trail users but yes I love to ride fast. I ride a bike called a Vision Recumbent. As far as I'm concerned the best bike one could ever ride. As an on road machine it is built for commuting, errand running, touring and recreational riding. In other words its an all around bike.

Let me ask you something. What is your favorite hobby? The thing you enjoy most and perhaps have some sort of passion for? How would you like it if some group was wanting to restrict your legal right to take part in it? Please do not say that your hobby is not done on public roadways. Leave that out. Just focus on how you would feel if someone said I am going to try and pass a law to ban you from it, regardless of the reasons why. How would you feel? Let me know what you would do to stop it, or would you?

Oh and as far as you saying I'll obey the law. No I won't don't tell me what laws I will and will not obey. I am not the only cyclist will violate this law if it passes, that I can guarantee you. Besides what makes you so sure that I will? Trust me when I say I won't!

I do not know how many members in the IBC and I do not know where the numbers come from for their funding, etc. That is something you'd have to ask them. I know we do have more then one state Senator and Representative on our side though.

Iowa has more then 30,000 miles of rural roadways. Trails do not go every where cyclists need or want to go. As I stated above I commute to work and run errands on my bike as well as use it for recreational purposes. I know of other cyclists who only commute and run errands and nothing else, while others are only recreational riders and others are bike racers. So why should we be restricted? As a tax payer are you willing to pay for bicycle facilities and infrastructure to ensure we have safe routes on which to travel if this ban is voted in? This is what will be required if this ban is put in place? This is not a rhetorical question. Please answer it.

Do you know how the IBC was formed? It is an interesting story. It has to do with a former state Senator who got pissed at a group of cyclists. I'll tell you more in my next email.

John

Lets see how he responds back.

Update 11; A safety coalition wants to ban cyclists from all Iowa roadways. Correction.

I made an error. I listed the wrong email address in the previous update for the safety coalition. That has been corrected.

Update 10; A safety coalition wants to ban cyclists from all Iowa roadways.

I have recently obtained an email address where dan jones, the hipocrite gun owning/toting spokesman for the safety organization that wants to ban bicycle from Iowa roadways. He can be reached at; cfscofiowa1@yahoo.com. I am asking that all cyclists please email him and ask that he recind this proposed ban and that he stop this ridiculous crusade.

To date the safety group has obtained 783 signatures for thier online petition. The IBC has obtained 2000 on their online counter petition. If you look at the numbers of those who signed both, the cyclists are winning.

Bicycle and Motorist Safety, Where does the Responsibility Lay?

First I am going to start by saying that, in my opinion, a majority of motorists choose not to hit a cyclist while on the roadways because they do not want to damage their precious vehicles. I think they feel their cars and trucks are extensions of their body. Perhaps some of them suffer from sort of inferiority complex. I'll let the readers of this make up their minds on that one. I also think another reason is because they do not want to have to deal with the police report, insurance claims, etc. In other the headaches and hassle they would have to endure if they hit a cyclist. I think courtesy, respect a just being a safe person while driving has nothing to do with the decision a driver makes when they encounter a cyclist. Notice I said a majority, not all. If I had to assign a statistical number to it I would guess 90% are as I described above, while 10% are not. I have nothing to back this up, this is just my opinion, based on my observations while riding on the public roadways when I encounter and see the behavior of motorists. One type of behavior I notice every time I ride is how a dirver passes me. A lot of them get real close, then gun the engine to go around me and some swerve just in fronting me almost cutting me off. In all cases this is not necessary or appropriate. In a lot of the situations where motorists pass me there is no oncoming traffic, they have plenty of time and room to get over, pass at the posted speed limit then get back over once they pass. Or if it is on a 4 lane roadway, move into the left lane, pass then change back to the right lane. Another observation I have seen is motorists don't even treat each other with respect and drive dangerously and recklessy around one another. What makes people think they will do any better when when encountering a cyclist?

There have been 2 incidents that have happened in the last day or 2. One is a story in the news, the other is not. The first incident is a co-worker told me he almost hit a cyclist heading west on Military who crossed the intersection of Military and Riverside Blvd on red as he was turning right from Riverside on to Military on green. Had a collion occured, based on the info. my co-worker gave me I would say the cyclists would have been at fault. In this case I believe what my co-worker told me to be true, and have no reason to doubt it. However in most cases, unless it is someone I know I never believe what a motorist tells me to be true in a case like this. I have had motorists who have told me they almost hit some cyclist because of something they said the cyclist did, or something they perceive the cyclist to have done, of course only telling me one side of the story. I more or less say to the person with out all of the facts, not just half of them I do not believe what they say. Sometime this pisses them off, sometimes not. I don't really care if it pisses them off or not. In this case tht my co-worker told me about I have to say the responsibility is with the cyclist. He ran the red light and had he collided with or been collided with anyone he would have been responsible.

The second incident was on the news last night. It is about a 6yr old boy who was hit and dragged by a semi truck around the area of 13th and Jennings Streets in Sioux City. Here is the quoted story.;

"A young boy is was seriously hurt Wednesday night when he was hit and dragged by a semi.

It happened at the 900 block of 13th Street, near the intersection of 13th and Jennings at about 5:30.

Police say the six-year-old boy rode his bike out of an alley onto 13th Street and into the path of the semi.

Investigators say the driver didn't see the boy on his bike. A passing motorcyclist saw the accident happen and flagged down the semi driver.

Police say it didn't appear the truck's wheels ran over the boy."

In this incident I have to say the responsibility could lay with 3 or 4 people. One with the child. He made the mistake of popping out of an alley onto a city street. Not a safe thing to do and at the age of 6 he should have known better. The second is with the semi driver. While he likely did not intend on hitting anyone, let alone a child on a bike, why was he driving his semi in this residential neighborhood. Typically semi traffic is prohibited from driving in residential areas of towns and city's, unless it is a moving company truck. Residential streets are not truck routes. I know this area of town and it is residential. The 3rd and 4th responsible parties are the boys parents. Did they teach him proper safe bike riding? If they did not they were responsible for doing so and they should share in the responsibility of him not knowing how to ride a bike safely. If they did teach him then he did follow what he was taught and made a mistake that could cost him his life.

Riding a bike involves much more then just being able to balance and ride in a straight line. It is in part because of what happened to this child that I think Iowa should have a mandatory bicycle safety course taught in all schools, both public and private, from grades K to 8. and the kids should take this course every year they are in school because as they get older their riding abilities change. I also think Iowa should have a mandatory 1 week instruction taught to people in drivers ed. on how to behave and drive when they encounter cyclists. and that after a certain age, say 65, people should have to take a mandatory written and driving test to be able to keep their license. I also think that all drivers in Iowa should be put through a 1 week instruction course on how to behave and drive when encountering cyclists and if they do not take or pass this course they can not have their license renewed.

Update 9; A safety coalition wants to ban cyclists from all Iowa roadways.

KWWL T.V. (Waterloo) just completed an on line survey the week of 3 Aug.
Here are the results:
Do you think bicyclists should be banned from Iowa roadways?

Yes. 29.7%

Only on certain roads. 24.5%

No. 44.2%

I don’t care. 1.6%

That's 54% for some kind of regualtion for cyclists and only 46% against. More evidence cyclists are winning this and it will not come to pass.

Update 8; A safety coalition wants to ban cyclists from all Iowa roadways.

Here is the most recent list of postings of stories and opinions in news papers about this bike ban starting with oldest to newest. Pay particular attention to the comments some of the anti-cyclists/those that support the ban make.

Des Moines Register;
Petition calls for bike ban on rural roads
Cars and bikes should share roads
Guest column: Bicycling should be a two-way street
If bikes are banned, what's next to go?
Please slow down and share the road
If bikes are banned, what's next to go?

One interesting thing about this safety group wanting to ban cyclists from Iowa roadways, besides their hipocrite spokesman being a gun owner/dealer who enjoys the freedom of owning a gun but wants to ban cyclists from the roadways, is there are only 25 people who make this group up and to date they have only obtained 700 signatures for the online petition in 2 weeks time. The Iowa Bicycle Coalition has over 200 memebers and obtained over 1400 signatures for the counter petition in only 3 days. If you look at it from the stand point of number of members and how many signatures in how much time the cyclists are winning this right now.

Another interesting fact of this is a majority of those that want cyclists banned are from central Iowa mainly the area within a 30 mile radius of Des Moines. So I know how they think, originating from there myself. Most of them are selfish, self rightous, all about me, what are you going to do for me and what is in it for me, band wagon jumper people. I should know I used to be this way. It took a few years for me to shed this mentality after I moved to Sioux City over 15 years ago.

They keep saying they want cyclists on the trails. They are basing this on the availability of trails in the central Iowa area. Granted there a lot of trails there. But not in the rest of the state. The central Iowans can not get their puny brains out of their geographical area and think about what is available in the rest of the state. They have blinders on and only see what is in their region of the state. They refuse to look at the big picture and how this will effect the rest of Iowa. Even though there are a lot more trails in the central Iowa region thse trails do not go everywhere cyclists need or want to go. Most of them in fact do not meet our destination objectives. I have ridden several of these trails. The trails in the rural area would not meet my destination objectives if I was riding my bike from say Bondurant to Des Moines. The trails within Des Moines might meet the objectives of cyclists but not always. One good example is there are no trail connecting the south side of Des Moines, I am talking about the area near Fort Des Moines, to the downtown area. Cyclsits who commute to/from work have no choice but to use city streets. If a cyclist lives in Indianola there is a trail that connects to Carlisle, but then a cyclists has to use rural roadways to get into Des Moines. These are but a few examples. In other parts of the state there are even less trails.

Iowa has 30,000+ miles of rural roadways. If cyclists are banned something will have to be done to accomidate us so we can continue to ride and so we are not restricted to just the limted amount of trails that already exist. I have asked several people who support the ban if they are willing to approve and pay for an increase or for new taxes for the 30,000+ miles of bicycle facilities that will be needed. I am still waiting for an answer.

Update 7; A safety coalition wants to ban cyclists from all Iowa roadways.

I have an interesting update to this matter. The spokesman of this so called safety group, Dan Jones of Van Meter, Iowa is a gun dealer and owner. His business phone number is; 515-208-2524. I find it really ironic that a gun dealer/owner, someone who probably is all about the freedom so many others take for granted, is wanting to restrict the freedom of cyclists because he does not agree with our rights to the roadways. He is helping to support something that will take away a freedom, yet he likely enjoys the freedom of dealing in/owning guns.

Hmm, perhaps a new group of safety advocated should be formed to completely ban the ownership of ownership of guns and completely prevent anyone from being a gun dealer. After all guns kill more and more people every year and they are a larger safety risk then bicycles on the roadways. I am willing to bet if someone did a google search they would be able to find a group of safety nuts, like this group, who would love nothing more then to ban guns. Perhaps I should put them in touch with him. I'm sure they would love to "target" him and his gun dealership.

People like Dan Jones are the worst kind of hypocrite. They hide behind so called safety issues, yet own and deal in weapons that kill more people then a lot of other things.

Update 6; A safety coalition wants to ban cyclists from all Iowa roadways.

The Iowa Bicycle Coalition has issued a counter petition against the petition put out by the safety group wanting to ban cyclists from roadways.

You can sign it here;
Sign the Iowa Bicycle Coalition Petition

You can read the comments by people and see who signed it here. So far over 590 people have signed it in less then 48 hours.;
Read the comments on the Iowa Bicycle Coalition Petition

Read about the Iowa Bicycle Petition

The petition to ban cyclists started on or around July 25 and has 650 signatures. It has taken about 2 weeks to get that many. It took less then 2 days on the Iowa Bicycle Coalition Petition to obtain almost 600 signatures.

Update 5; A safety coalition wants to ban cyclists from all Iowa roadways.

I have discussed this issue with several people. Some cyclists, some not, some online and some in person. I have also read most if not all of the comments posted on news story's, the online petition, etc. One of the most common comments refer's to motorists encountering cyclists at the same time as encountering a piece of farm equipment when they refer to these Farm to Market, FtM, roadways.

Let's start with the FtM designation for these roadways. The county's or the state no longer calls or deems these roadways as FtM's. Now they are called secondary, county hwy, state hwys and B level roadways. The FtM used to be used because farmers used to use operate their slow moving farm equipment on the roadways a lot more then they do today.

That brings us to how often the farmers do use the roadways. Farmers used to use the roadways to tow their wagons into town, to the CO-OP to pick up supplies, grain, fertilizer, etc. that need for the coming planting season, then drive back to the farm. These days the CO-OP's deliver with semi trucks, or the farmers drive their own pick ups towing trailers to the CO-OP or supplier to pick up what they need. During the planting season farmers might use the roadways to drive their equipment on to get to a field entrance. Typically the fields are accessed directly from the farm. A farmer might have to cross a roadway to get from one field to another. Granted they also might have to drive a little ways down the road to get to a field entrance.

During the growing season farmers might have to drive their equipment on the roadways, but it does not happen very often.

The next time they operate their equipment is during the harvest. Typically the corn or beans is harvested, transfered to a semi-truck/trailer and hauled away. Farmers no longer haul it themselves to the CO-OP with their slow moving farm equipment. It takes too much time and time is money on a farm. The onmly other time farm equipment might be seen on a secondary county roadway is when and if the farmer is cutting the ditch that borders his farm and only if the county or state does not do this and requires the farmers to do so. Again farmers will not just go out and drive their farm equipment up and down the roadways for the hell of it the way some of the motorists who want bicycles banned are making it sound. Time is money on a farm.

The argument regarding motorists encountering cyclists the same time they encounter a piece of farm equipment is very weak. I would venture to say it almost never happens, or happens very rarely. One reason is usually during the planting season farmers are out very early in the morning, when cyclists are still asleep. The same with the harvest. When the farmer returns from the field it is usually late in the day, often after dark, again when cyclists are not out riding.

Another very weak argument is the funding for trails comes from taxes and that cyclists do not pay to use the roadways. Both of these are largely incorrect.

Every cyclist in Iowa owns some sort of motor vehicle, paying for fuel for their motor vehicle, has a job, is buying or renting a place to live and spends money in Iowa on consumable goods and services. This means they are paying to register and liscense a motor vehicle, paying an income tax, and paying sales tax. All of which in part funds roadways. So WE ARE paying to use the roadways.

The argument of taxes being used for trails is only partially correct. Taxes might be used to maintain trails once they are built. But typically taxes ARE NOT used to build brand new trails. The funding for brand new trails comes from fund raising, grants and private donations. another resource for funding for trails does come from if the trail is part of a larger project, like a flood control, or urband renewal, beautification project, etc. But taxes being used just to build a brand new trail only is false. In fact when ever a ballot mesure is introduced to increase or create new taxes to fund a new trail is always voted down. So this argument is very weak.

The main reason motorists want cyclists banned form the roadways is simple really. Even though they say or support this under the guise of safety it is actually, in this cyclists opinion, so they can be more dangerous on the roadways. Very few if any of these drivers want to be held accountable for their terrible driving habits and actions while behind the wheel of a 1,000+ ound weapon. They want to go flying down the roadways at breakneck speeds, instead of 55 mph, pass in no passing zones and drive as reckless as they can with out any consideration for other roadway users. Hell they barely have any consideration for each other out on the roadways.

Update 4; A safety coalition wants to ban cyclists from all Iowa roadways.

There is a story about this in the Sioux City Journal. Some cyclists are not taking this very seriously. I know of one in particular from SE Iowa. Thing is if this is not taken seriously it will end up biting us in the ass. Which is what has happened in the past. This online petition is just to see how much interest there is from the public. After which it will go to the next step which could be to obtain signatures to get it on the ballot and/or before the legislature. The way it is going right now, almost half of the signatures with the online petition, this looks to not be going away anytime soon.

Story;
Group seeks to ban bicyclists from Iowa roads

Update 3; A safety coalition wants to ban cyclists from all Iowa roadways.

The so called citizens for safety coalition needs to resonate some understanding about something. That is they are attempting to violate a pretty clear cut part of the U.S. Constitution, called the 5th Amendment that states citizens have the right to freely travel within this country. States have the right to require people to be liscense to operate a vehicle, but they have no right to otherwise restrict any mode of travel chosen be people.

I wonder how many of these so called safety citizens currently serve in the military or formerly served.? I wonder how many of these people ever held any sort of public government office or served in law enforcement? I ask this because everyone who currently serves in the military or has served in the military, anyone who holds or formerly held public office and anyone one who is or was in law enforcement took an oath to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution.

If any of these people that are part of this safety organization who are trying to prohibit anyone from their own personal choice on method of travel is violating the oath they took to uphold the Consititution. Even after a person is done serving in the military, retired from public office or law enforcement the oath they took can never be reputiated or layed aside and forgotten about. It is just as important as the day they held up their hand and swore, likely on a bible, before God, the American Flag and witnesses, the oath to uphold the U. S. Constitution. These people shold be ashamed of themselves for trying to violoate the 5th Amendment. I think they should think about the oath they once took and consider it's meaning within the words.

Some of you no doubt thinking, wait a minute the right to travel is not in the Constitution. You're right it isn't. The section of the 5th Amendment that is being violated is the Right to Liberty.

Here are some links regarding this issue and the 5th Amendment.;
This first one is about a former U.S. Supreme Court case from the 1950's. Even though it was about someone being asked, (accused) of taking part in communism his travel was being restricted, unlawfully and the U.S. Supreme Court foudn in his favor.;
Kent v. Dulles

Here is more on the Right to Travel.;

The Right To Travel

As the Supreme Court notes in Saenz v Roe, 98-97 (1999), the Constitution does not contain the word "travel" in any context, let alone an explicit right to travel (except for members of Congress, who are guaranteed the right to travel to and from Congress). The presumed right to travel, however, is firmly established in U.S. law and precedent. In U.S. v Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966), the Court noted, "It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." In fact, in Shapiro v Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969), Justice Stewart noted in a concurring opinion that "it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, ... it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all." It is interesting to note that the Articles of Confederation had an explicit right to travel; it is now thought that the right is so fundamental that the Framers may have thought it unnecessary to include it in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.
Thanks to Marko Liias for the idea. Thanks to W.H. van Atteveldt for the note about Congressional travel.

It is from this web site;
Things That Are Not In the U.S. Constitution

So while the right to travel is not specifically listed in the Constitution is is a right under the section in the 5th Amendment that speaks about Liberty and there is legal precedent.

Update 2; A safety coalition wants to ban cyclists from all Iowa roadways.

To counter what this so called safety organization is trying to do to ban cyclists from the Iowa roadways a petition has been started to ban motorists from Iowa roadways. I have signed it and hope it makes it onto the Nov. 2010 ballot. If people think this is a joke, think about how much of a joke it is for motorists to want cyclists off of the roadways. My hope is this brings motorists to the table to discuss this matter with cyclists so an agreement can be reached so no one is banned from any roadways. Until then cyclsits will counter proposals and petitions like the one this safety organization is doing with our own. Cyclists are sick and tired of this abuse from motorists toward us and are no longer going to be passive about it. We are going to take action. One differance though is we will play fair and clean. A lot of motorists like to play dirty and unfair. They could even go as far as using their vehicles as weapons to force us off of the roadways to teach us a lesson that we should heed the petition being proposed and stay of of the roadways. In fact I am sure this will eventually happen. Thing is it will do nothing more then hurt their cause. It is being asked that all who think cyclists should not be banned or think motorists should be banned to please sign this petition.

Here is the link to the petition to ban motorists from the roadways.;
Stop sharing Iowa FM roads

Update; A safety coalition wants to ban cyclists from all Iowa roadways.

The Iowa Bicycle Coalition has issued a response to the so called safety group who is trying to ban cyclists from Iowa roadways. Here is it;

A Bike Ban in Iowa? Not if we work together as bicyclists.
A petition has begun to collect signatures for the Citizens for Safety Coalition of Iowa to place a question on the ballot to ban bicyclists from farm to market roads. The Iowa Bicycle Coalition opposes banning bicyclists, but echoes the need for greater safety.


Iowa governments have tools to address roadway safety for motorists and bicyclists. Safety improvements are accomplished with roadway design changes, improved signage, better enforcement, education programs, and awareness building. Bike bans are not the answer.

Existing traffic laws provide a framework for different modes of traffic to share the road. State traffic laws provide consistent expectations for safe behavior on public roadways throughout the state for all roadway users.

Bike bans would have an extreme economic impact. A recent economic impact study of RAGBRAI showed $24 million during the week-long bike ride. Bicycle tourism, including charity fundraisers, are estimated to generate as much or more than RAGBRAI during the other weeks of the year.

Bicycle bans would have an extreme impact on the health of Iowans. Recent studies by the Alliance for Bicycling and Walking have shown relationships between states with high rates of bicycling have a healthier population including lower rates of diabetes, high blood pressure, and obesity.

The Iowa Bicycle Coalition remains firm that we don't need bicycle bans, but we do need to increase safety. Safety may be increased through better roadway design, better enforcement, more education and awareness programs. Increasing safety for bicyclists and motorists can make a bigger impact on Iowa's economy and health.

Members of the Iowa Bicycle Coalition have defeated bike bans before. If we want to improve safety and defeat this effort, bicyclists need to join the Iowa Bicycle Coalition.

Link to story;
A Bike Ban in Iowa? Not if we work together as bicyclists.

A safety coalition wants to ban cyclists from all Iowa roadways.

A group called Citizens for Safety Coalition of Iowa has a petition asking people to sign for a proposal to be put on the ballot in November of 2010 that, if passed, will ban cyclists from all Iowa rural roadways. I find it rather ironic that a safety organization would rather ban cyclists then work to educate motorists and with the Iowa Bicycle Coalition to make things better and safer for all roadway users.

This group is nothing more then extremists who think they know what is best for cyclists when in fact they don't a damn thing about what is best for us. I am taking steps to try and prevent this from happening even though it is still really early. I have already contact the Iowa Bicycle Coalition to see if they even know abotu it and what they are going to do about it. I will be contacting the League of American Bicyclists, members of the legislature that represent my area and of course posting about it here on the blog.

The groups spokesman is Dan Jones of Van Meter, Iowa. Here is an address and phone number for a Daniel Jones in Van Meter;
Daniel J Jones
1448 Upland Ln
Van Meter, IA 50261-8522
(515) 981-4328

Granted I do not know 100% if this is indeed the spokesperson for this so called safety organization. But as Van Meter is a very small town just west of Des Moines it is very likely that it is indeed him. I am encouraging cyclists from all over to contact Jones to express your disapproval and disagreement over this and explain to him there are better options then banning cyclists from the roadways. I am NOT enciting violence against him or this group. I am NOT encouraging anyone to threaten him or this group is any way shape or form. Let me make this very clear. At no time is any sort of threatening or violent action to be taken against Jones or his group, regardless of how an individual may feel about cyclists rights to the roadways. Contacting him by snail mail or telephone to express concern, disagreement and disapproval is one thing. Threats are another and are illegal.

Here is a news story about this;
Group wants to ban bikes on rural roads

Here are some parts of the story I can easily refute;
"Cyclists aren't tax payers."
Want to bet? Most if not all Iowa cyclists own some sort of property that we have to pay taxes on. Most of us have to work, thus pay the income tax. After all we have to support our cycling some way. We also pay the sales tax when ever we purchase something in Iowa. So we are all tax payers.

Cyclists are all recreational and aren't going anywhere in particular."
Really? So the commuting I do every day, some of it is sometimes on rural roadways, is not going anywhere in particular? Gee and all this time I thought I was going from work to home. Cyclists also ride on the roadways to run errands as well.

"Recreation is not a valid use of roads (that's built into the last one)."
It isn't? Then I guess all this time when a motorcycle club or group just out for a ride on a weekend, albeit on motor vehicles, are doing something other then recreational riding? What are they on their way to work or something? What about the classic car clubs that do the weekend cruises just for the fun of it from town to town on the rural roadways?

"Bicyclists don't obey traffic laws."
I will admit this one has some, albeit not as much as people think, truth to it. Yes some cyclists disobey some traffic laws. Most if not all of these laws are vilated in the towns and cities where there are the lights and signs. Out of the rural roadways, which is what we are talking about here, the only law we might be able to violate is the speed limit and only if we are going down a really steep, long straight hill and happen to maybe his above 55 mph. Cyclists might violate the stop sign law if they come upon one while riding on a rural roadway. What I think Jones and his cronies are refering to here is cyclists riding in the lane of traffic. He probably thinks we are required to be far to the right and not in the travel lane. When in fact the law allows us to be in the travel lane if we need to be and only as far to the right as practicable. There is nothing in the law that says we always have to be far to the right.

Jones states motorists or cyclists don't have any place to get out of the way to avoid problems. on roadways with no shoulders. Well here is an easy fix to that. Build shoulders on the roadways that do not have them. Motorists also need to slow the hell down and not go speeding along the rural roadways. He also states shared roadways are no longer practicable in today's soceity. That is auto-centric comment if I ever heard one.

Something motorists need to resonate some understanding about is if it were not for a group of cyclists a long time ago there would be no paved roadways to ride on. The group known as the League of American Wheelmen, now known as the League of american Bicyclists, were largely responsible for the early roadway improvement. Were it not for this group the early form of what are now the departments of transportation would not have existed and we would likely still be using deep rutted mud paths that horse drawn carts had a difficult time navigating. People like Jones and his group and anyone who supports the attitude to ban cyclists from the roadways should not be cursing us or trying to prevent us, they should be thanking cyclists for the improved roadways.

One last thing in this blog post. If by some chance this does get passed and cyclists in Iowa are banned from the rural roadways I will NOT obey the law. I will be an outlaw/rebel cyclist who will willfully disobey the law in protest against it.

Red Light Cameras

Sioux City has finally had the forward and proactive thinking in joining other communities to make the light controlled intersections safer by installing red light cameras. Right now only a handful of intersections have the cameras, hopefully with more coming in the future. Some fo these intersections I ride or have ridden through on my bike. I do not remember all of the current intersections that have the cameras but the ones I do know abotu and have ridden bike through are; Singing Hills Blvd and the I-29 interchange for the I-29 southbound, Outer Drive and Cheyenne Blvd and South Lakeport and Sgt. Rd. I have had jack ass cagers run a red light as I was crossing through each one of these intersections on my bike on the green light, almost hitting me. This will hopefully help keep this under control and put some fear in people preventing them from running red lights. From what I understand if someone is in the intersection when the light turns green and it then turns red, or of they are making a legal right turn on red they will not get a citation.

Here are the news stories.;
Sioux City fine-tuning red light cameras
Public hearing today on red light cameras
Red light cameras activate Thursday
Red light cameras up and running in Sioux City
Questions answered on red light cameras
Warning period starts today for Red Light cameras

How I wish this were true.

These would be good signs for motorists to have to obey and follow.;

1.27 million cyclists, pedestrians and motorcyclists die every year.

This report basically says a lot of and everything is being done to protect drivers and passengers in cars and trucks, but very little is being done to protect bicyclists, pedestrians and motorcyclists. 1.27 million bicyclists, pedestrians and motorcyclists die every year world wide as a result of poor and inadequate infrastructure and lack of education for other roadways users. In my opinion this is because world wide society has become to auto-centric. Hopefully positive change can occur to correct this.

Article;
Pedestrians, cyclists among main road traffic crash victims

I was hit by a car on my commute tonight!

While on my commute home tonight I was "hit" brushed, collided by, assaulted, call it what ever you want, but a idiot cager motorist who decided to make physical contact with me using their motor vehicle. This person was in too much of a damn hurry to let the one other motor vehicle pass in the other lane before they passed me safely. They decided my safety was not important and decided to put my life at risk. This was on Hamilton Blvd. This section of Hamilton is an 35 mph undivided 4 lane roadway. The lanes are at least 12' wide.

What happened;
I was on Hamilton Blvd heading north between Clifton and 36th St., but before the Perry Creek Bridge. There was me in the right lane, about a foot or so from the curb, in the right part of the right hand travel lane, riding like a legal vehicle of the roadway and where I was supposed to be riding. Behind me was a white car, the one that hit me. Next to the car in the left lane was a blue SUV. There was no one behind either the SUV or the car. The moron driver of the car could/should have waited until the SUV passed, then passed me safely, within at least 3'. Instead the asshole driver passes between me and the SUV. The left tires of the car never went into the left lane or crossed the broken white line. The jackass driver decided it was wide enough to "share" the lane with me. The mirror of this car hit/brushed my left arm. I hit my Air Zound and laid on it so much it drained the air out of the bottle, it holds 100 pounds of air. I also motioned, yelled and shouted at the moron driver to pull over. At the time I did not curse, swear or flip the driver off, this was surprising for me because in the past I would have sweared like a sailor and flipped all kinds of vulgar gestures at them. The idiot kept going.

I saw the jackass driver turn right or east onto 36th ahead of me. I did too because it is the street I live on. I then saw the idiot driver way ahead of me on 36th turn north onto Jackson St.

I was legally riding where I was supposed to be. After it happened I became so pissed off about it I put myself smack dab in the middle of the roadway to ensure other drivers behind would not attempt the same thing. There was another driver who saw what the driver in the white Chevy did and slowed way down and passed me safely after I put myself in the middle of the lane. It is possible that person was going to try to do the same thing and decided against it. That or they slowed down in case I went down and to serve as a witness if they had to stop to help me.

I am not hurt, I did not go down, though I almost lost control of the bike.

When I got home I called the non-emergency number to file a report with the police. The dispatcher took some of my info. and sent an officer to take the rest of it. I did not get a good description of the driver or the plate number. The officer told me he would drive around the area I saw the vehicle turn at Jackson and let me know if he finds anything. I do not expect he will because I did not get the plate number in time.

I am very pissed off about this. If I see this vehicle again I will have words with the driver and get the plate number. Especially if this driver does this again.

Do I think the driver did this on purpose? Hell yes! Do I think the driver will do this again? Hell yes! I will not stand for this. If I catch the moron who did this I won't get violent or use swear language with them, though GOD knows I'd love to. What I will do is yell and scream at them and make sure they are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. This was a hit and run. 9 times out of 10 when a hit and run occurs in this community it is usually an illegal immigrant who commits them. Like I said if I catch the asshole and if they are illegal they will serve their full jail time before they are deported.

What I am going to do about riding on this section of Hamilton Blvd;
From now on I will place myself further from the curb and closer to the center of the particular lane, which is the right lane north bound lane. This will force traffic into the left lane to pass me. If they can not merge into the left lane, then tough, they will have to wait until they can.

One last thing. For those that get way too sensitive about some of the things I post here and go running off and reporting it to certain organizations I belong to, you really need to get over yourselves. Sure I used swear words in this post. Nothing about it is a violation of ANY kind. If anyone is that sensitive to anything I post on this or any other blog of mine then here is a great idea, DON'T READ IT! It really is that simple. I really don't need anyone else monitoring my behavior on the Internet. I am fully capable of doing that myself. So please either grow a thick skin and get over your overly sensitive selves or leave this blog and don't return.

Update 2; It happened to one of their own.

I posted about a collision between a motorist and a cyclist.. The cyclists, a Polk County Sheriff's jail chief was hit and seriously injured by a driver while riding, legally, on a roadway. The driver was finally ticketed for failure to properly overtake a vehicle. While the driver is being charged to the fullest extent allowed by law, it is still not enough of a punishment. Because the Iowa State Legislature failed to pass the bicycle bill into law, thus failing cyclists all across the state motorists are not held accountable for their actions as much as they should be.

Story;
Driver ticketed in car-bike accident that injured Polk sheriff's official

Please note the very nasty comments by the anti-cyclists responding to the story and the comments I have posted.

Stay out of the door zone.

Cyclists should stay out of the door zone when riding bike. The door zone is the area between the travel lane and the parking lane on a public roadway that is meant to accomidate an open door of a motor vehicle. Cyclists should never ride in this zone, even when and if the law says a cyclist is to ride as far to the right as possible. This includes areas where there is no parking/loading allowed. Cyclists should maintain the same line of travel, out of the door zone, even if it means they are in the right side of the travel lane.

Why?

A cyclist in Des Moines collided with the door of a delivery truck and was injured. though the story does not state if he was in the door zone or of the truck was in the close to the curb, though in a no parking/loading zone. If the truck was in close to the curb then at best the driver should be cited for a parking/loading zone violation. If the truck was out away from the curb then the driver should be cited for obstructing traffic and a parking/loading zone violation.

Story;
Cyclists hit by opening door downtown Des Moines

In this case everyone should have kept calm cool and collected.

This is a prime example of what happens when no one keeps their cool. Due to a conflict between 2 cyclists and a motorist, 2 cyclists are injured, one by his own foolish actions and one received a citation. what should have happened is the cyclists should have kept their cool and the motorist would have been the one in trouble. What should also have happened is the motorist should be cited as well for doing what he did, using his car as a weapon after the initial incident was over with. Instead tempers flared and the cyclists ended up on the losing end of this. This does not help our cause in any way shape or form. I am all about ensuring justice is done, but this is not the way to go about it.

Story;
Car/Bike/Bike run-in in Cedar Rapids

Not all Cyclists Receive Justice

A Muscatine recumbent rider was hit, (attacked), by a hit and run driver. Police are asking for help in finding who the driver is in this collision with a cyclist. Until it is found out who this person is justice will not prevail and the violator will remain free to do this again. With drivers like this it is not a matter of if, but when and next time he or she will likely kill someone and continue to do so until they are caught. I have absolute zero tolerance for hit and run drivers. They are, as far as I am concerned the least honest, most dangerous and most despicable drivers on the roadways. In my opinion and amongst motor vehicle drivers they are the lowest for of human excrement on the roadways. I hope when this jackass cager is found he has "has the book thrown at him or her" and serves a long time in prison.

Story;
Hit-and-run mars Bike to Work week

Justice for cyclists.

In Council Bluffs, Iowa 3 teenagers have been arrested and are being held with a fairly high bond awaiting prosecution for attacks on 2 cyclists. It is not clear whether or not these teens would have attacked the 2 cyclists had they not been riding bike, or if it was because they were. Either way it is about time proper justice is finally doled out to those that choose to attack cyclists.

Newspaper Story;
Arrests made in attacks of bicyclists
bikeiowa.com story;
Arrests made in attacks of bicyclists, more to the story

Deal or No Deal? Put Up or Shut Up!

This is for anyone who thinks cyclists should never ride on public roadways and should only be confined to sidewalks and trails. This is for anyone who constantly says to cyclsits get off of the roadways and on the sidewalks and paths. This is light of the recent vulgar, threatening, rude, crude and bad comments made on certain newspaper web sites about cyclists who were hit and injured by drivers.

First I'm going to say; put up or shut up!

Now let me explain that. Anyone with this attitude loves to run their mouths with all kinds of B.S. rhetoric, yet take no action to resolve the problem. Here is an oppurtunity to put your money where your mouths are.

Do I have a deal for you!

If you want me and other cyclists off of the public roadways then do more then just spout your B.S. rhetoric. Here is how you can do that. Push for and get legislation passed that will provide funding at the local, county, state and federal levels to provide for every piece and bit of infrastructure needed to provide for cyclists nationwide. Provide for wide sidewalks paths that will accomidate cyclists and pedestrians in every neighborhood. Provide for crossings with smooth transitions were the paths cross the roadways. Provide for traffic light controlled intersections that work well enough to allow the path users to safely cross, whether they be pedestrians or cyclists.

Keep in mind this may mean the infrastructure may be paid for by your and mine tax dollars. Part of the problem with the people who love to spout their B.S. rhetoric, other then never providing a solution or resolution is they do not want to pay to solve the problem. Well you want this resolved then agree to pay for it as well.

The problem with these idiots who love to spout this B.S. rhetoric is they do not understadn or care that the paths do not go everywhere cyclists need to go. Often it is illegal for cyclists to ride on sidewalks because the width does not allow for safe passing of pedestrians and cyclists at the same time.

Well there you have it, a solution. Put up or shut up, put your money where your mouths are. You want us off of the roadways then agree to provide for all needed and possible infrastructure to stay off of the roadways. I am sick and tired of listening to your B.S. rhetoric. If you agree to this solution then I promise you I will never ride on another public roadway ever again as soon as the infrastructure is done being built. Until then I will ride on public roadways and that is something you'll have to get used to and learn to deal with.

So I ask you; Deal or No Deal?

Motorists need to heed the call!

The Iowa Bicycle Coalition has put out a call to all motorists to stop crashing into cyclists when they pass and overtake us. Motorists really need to heed this call. Cyclists are not going to go away or be discouraged from riding. We know the risks involved. Iowa's laws are pretty clear on this. Cyclists have the same rights to use the public roadways as motorists. This is not going to change so motorists will have the get used to this fact and accept it. Cyclists are going to continue to use the roadways, motorists need to pay attention, pass us safely, not harass us, not throw things at us, not yell at us, etc.

Article on Iowa Bicycle Coalition site;
BICYCLISTS CALL FOR AN END TO OVERTAKING CRASHES

Update 1: It happened to one of their own.

Leesa shoemaker is still in serious condition at Iowa Methodist Hospital in Des Moines. The cager who hit her, Jerry Culbertson, 57, of Bagley, Iowa remains uncharged and thus free from prosecution at least for the moment. No other details are known at this time and I will not speculate on what I think until more details, if any are released.

Story;
Sheriff's official still in serious condition after bike accident

The bad comments continue from idiots who want to ban cyclists from roadways. Coming up will be a post offering these idiots a fair deal. Stay tuned.

Not sure how this happened, but glad it did.

Iowa has risen from 21st to 6th place in the League of American Bicyclists, LAB, ranking of friendliest states to bicycle in. The LAB looks at 6 key areas when giving this ranking to states. They are; legislation, policies and programs, infrastructure, education and encouragement, evaluation and planning, and enforcement. What I am not sure of is if each of these has to be adequetly in place before the ranking is given or if it merely has to be in the process of implimenting each of these.

For example legislation. Currently there is no legislation in place regarding cyclists in Iowa, except the typical cyclists have the same rights as motorists laws. How ever at the 2009 Legislative Session legislation was being worked on for cyclists rights. It stalled out in the House, but did pass the Senate. What I don't know is if this good enough to increase Iowa's ranking as a bicycle friendly state. Let us not forget the legislation passed at the county level that effectivley banned cyclists from certain county's roadways unless they had an insurance policy to ride on them. Granted it was repealed in the 2 counties it was passed in, but the damage has been done. There were also 3 other counties that I know of who were at the very least discussing it, one of those managed to bring it to a vote and thankfully it was voted down.

Another key area is enforcement. I take this to mean law enforcement and prosecutors holding motorists accountable for their actions when they hit and injure or kill a cyclist. I can tell you from the recent collisions in the news between motorists and cyclists that area is very poor. Law enforcement and prosecutors favor the motorist more then the cyclist. The proof is stated in recent stories in the news.

A 3rd key area I have concern with is infrastructure. Sure Iowa has a lot of rural roadways and state highways for cyclists to ride on. But a lot of them are very poorly maintained. they have no shoulder or too narrow of a shoulder to ride on. They have large seams and cracks that can and will grab a tire, thus throwing a cyclist causing injury and death.

I am not sure what they mean by policies and programs. If they mean things like Complete Streets policies, only certain communities have adopted one. The state of Iowa has yet to do so.

Education and encouragement is one area that is really expanding in Iowa. With the Iowa Bicycle Coalition proactive efforts in the Safe Routes To School program and other educational and encouragment methods Iowa has become a forward thinking state in this regard.

I am not sure of any state level evaluation and planning, but I do know certain communities have really good plans in place to better provide for cyclists.

I am not sure if what is happening at the local community level is enough to raise the ranking in Iowa or if it is required that it happen at the state level.

Recent story on Iowa Bicycle Coalition web site;
Iowa Ranked Sixth Best State For Bicyclists

2 more cyclists hit and injured by motorists.

Within the last 1 or 2 days 2 more cyclists have been hit and injured by motorists. One in Davenport, Iowa and one in Des Moines. right now there are few details available in both cases. I am sure there will be very beligerant comments posted in both stories in the online edition of the newspapers and they will be countered by comments by cyclists. I am sure some of those comments, by those who are tracking these kinds of things, will be this is the 3rd instance in a time span of 1 or 2 weeks and that cyclsits should take a hint and stay off of the roadways. My rebuttal to that is NO, we will not stay off of the roadways, idiot motorists like you need to be more aware and more careful when encountering us on OUR roadways!

Here are the stories;
Bicyclist injured in collision with SUV
Cyclist, 47, hit by car in Des Moines taken to hospital

It happened to one of their own.

It has happened yet again. This to a Polk County Sheriff's officer. Leesa Shoemaker was riding her bike, legally and well lit on a hwy near Polk City when she was hit at 4:30 in the morning. She suffered serious injuries and is currently recovering in the hospital.

As I posted and alluded to before I have little to no confidence when it comes to law enforcement or prosecutors charging and prosecuting motorists adequetly for the violations they commit when they hit a cyclist with their 2,000+ weapons of glass, plastic and steel.

The questions I have because it happened to one of their own will the law enforcement body, in this case the Polk County Sheriff's Dept. and Polk county Prosecutors do so this time? Will they hold the driver fo that car accountable for his actions? Will it be because it happened to one of their own, or because it is the right thing to do under the law? Could this change things going forward where when a cyclists is hit by a driver the driver is held accountable by law enforcement and prosecutors? Will law enforcement and prosecutors step up and now understand that since it has happened to one of their own we should now finally do something about it for everyone it happens to?

All I can say is I certainly hope so. I hope that Leesa Shoemaker is a martyr to the cause of justice when it comes to cyclists being hit by motorists. I hate to see it happen this way, but sometimes this is what it takes. I hope and pray for a full and speedy recovery for Leesa Shoemaker and her and her family is in my thoughts and prayers.

Here is the story in the Des Moines Register. Please note the continuing beligerant comments from the anti-cyclists. Some of them have no compunction with bannign cyclists form the roadways and some admit to swerving at and passing cyclists too close with their weapons of glass, plastic and steel.
Update: Polk sheriff's official hurt in car-bike crash

Beligerant motorists

Of late there have been some pretty harsh and brutal comments made by motorists against cyclists. These comments have been mainly confined to news paper articles about bicycle events, when a cyclist has been hit by a motorist, etc. Some of the comments are relatively harmless in nature while some are vulgar and threatening. all of them are stupid and foolish and speaks of the typical uneducated knee-jerk reactions motorists have toward cyclists.

Mark Wyatt, Executive Director of the Iowa Bicycle Coalition posted an article in the Des Moines Register about this. The article does touch base on the attitudes of both motorists and cyclists. When motorists start in on their comments and attitudes the cyclists who take serious offense to the matter comes out of the wood work and the problem just escalates. I have seen comments from cyclists that were almost as bad as some of the ones made by motorists. Nothing threatening but crude and vulgar responses to the motorists. In this context 2 wrongs do not make a right. Mark states that people need to take a deep breath and remain calm and knock it off with the rather appalling comments both sides have made and alludes both sides need to do this, not just one side or the other.

He's right. a long time ago I made the decision to knock it off with the attitude and comments I used to make toward motorists. I used to flip drivers off when they buzzed to passed too close and curse them out and I would post fairly harsh comments on forums and to newspaper articles. Now I have a more level head when dealing with bad drivers and those who think cyclists should be relegated to paths and side walks. I am calm, level headed but assertive. I explain to people cyclists have the right under the law to use the road ways. I deal with bad drivers with the use of my Air Zound horn. When a driver buzzes or passes too close I hit the button on the horn and they move over. It is as loud if not louder then a car horn and higher pitch as well. They likely often think it is a car horn.

One of the most common arguments motists have toward cyclists is about cyclists not obeying traffic laws. This ranges from running stop signs with out coming to a complete stop to ridign the wrong way on the street. I am not saying all cyclists obey all of the traffic laws and I am not saying I obey all of the traffic laws. I'll be the first to admit that I do not. I'll post a list of traffic laws I have violated while riding bike in a moment. How ever if the amount of traffic laws and the frequency at which cyclists violate them is copmared to motorists it is very, very small. Waht does that mean? It means that motorists violate far more traffic laws and with far more frequency then cyclists. Yet you never see motorists complaining about other motorists doing so, only when a cyclist does it. Often times the motorists who complain about cyclists violating the traffic laws are the drivers who violate the laws on a regular basis. The only think I can say to this is "Don't offer to remove the plank from my eye, with out removing it from your own first."

Here is a list of traffic laws I have violated;
1. Speeding. Yes I have at times gone faster then the posted speed limit.
2. Not coming to a complete stop at stop signs. A complete stop on a bicycle is taking at least one foot off of the pedal and the tires are not rolling. what I do is slow way down to maybe 3 mph., look both ways and procede if there is no cross traffic. I never just run a stop sign.
3. Running a red light. I always come to a complete stop at a stop light. How ever if I am the only vehicle in the intersection and there is no cross traffic and it has been 1 min. or more I will go through the red light. The reason is the sensors can not detect my bike. Technically this makes the light defective because they are supposed to detect all road way traffic, including bicycles. If a light is defective and there is no cross traffic then the road way user can go through the red light.

Now here is a list of traffic laws I see motorists violate every day;
1. Speeding.
2. Running stop signs with out slowing down.
3. Running red lights and speeding up to do so.
4. Passing too close.
5. Cutting left turns and not squaring the turn.
6. Driving in the on coming lane on the wrong side of the road way.
7. Stopping after, not before, the car enters the intersection.
8. Tailgating.
9. Cutting other roadway users off.

Here is the story on the Des Moine Register web site, please note the comments made by the anti-cyclists;
Let's focus on safety for bikes, cars

Update; Cyclist attacked in Plymouth County

There is a recent update with the Erin Schroeder attack that occurred in Plymouth County. Erin was attacked by a group of cowards on county hwy K-64. She was knocked unconscious and does not remember anything about the car or it's occupants. A reward has been ofered for information that leads to a conviction.

The update on this is special account set up at Prime Bank in Le Mars and Joe Mizereck - a Florida cyclist donated $500 to the fund.

Here is the story on bikeiowa.com;
Reward in Bike Hit & Run Grows by $500 from Florida Cyclist

More on wearing a bicycle helmet.

Here is an interesting PSA video on wearing a bike helemt. some of it is funny. Some of the content may not be work or child appropriate. enjoy;

"Do Bicycle Helmet Laws Do More Harm Than Good?"

"Do Bicycle Helmet Laws Do More Harm Than Good?" This is a question several cyclists have asked. Soem community leaders take it upon themselves to think they need to save cyclists from themselves by forcing helmet laws on us. I do not agree with that concept. Wearing a bicycle helmet should be a matter of personal choice.

Don't get me wrong. My opinion is all cyclists should wear one, but I do not agree with the helmet laws and do not force my opinion on anyone, it is a personel choice. I wear one and I know they are effective in the even of an impact to my head. I am also no fool and know that at certain speeds a helmet will not do a whole lot of good, usually 35 mph+ speeds, which I have easily obtained while riding. Before anyone says anything about this, no it is not the same as the seat belt laws. Comparing bicycle helmet laws to seat belt laws is comparing apples to oranges. I think law makers need to stay out of this one and understand cyclists do not need to be saved from ourselves.

Here is a web site advocating using helmets. What is not stated is what kind of helmet for what kind of event. It could be riding a motorcycle, bicycle, rock climbing, football or other sports;
AIP

Here is a web site asking if helemt laws do more harm then good and offers other information;
Treehugger.com/Do Bicycle Helmet Laws Do More Harm Than Good?

Cyclist attacked in Plymouth County

On April 11 cyclist, Erin Schroeder was attacked by hoodlums in a car. A full beer can was thrown at her and it is believed she was also hit by the car while riding on Plymouth County Hwy K-64. After regaining consciousness she made it to a nearby farm and received help. Thankfully Erin will be ok and in on the road to recovery. I am not sure she reproted it to the police. Anything I have read about this does not indicate that.

This hits really close to home for me, no pun intended. I do not live too far from where this happened and have ridden on K-64 in the past. Not only is it very disturbing this happened to a cyclist but the scariest part is these hoodlums could be running loose in Sioux City or other areas myself and other cyclists ride on a regular basis.

Here is the story on bikeiowa.com, which originated from the Iowa Bicycle Coalition web site. I am going to comment on this story one paragraph at a time.

On April 11th, Erin Schroeder was struck by a full beer can
and possibly a moving car near Le Mars, Iowa. The impact
threw her from her bike leaving her unconscious and
potentially injured. The Iowa Bicycle Coalition condemns
the behavior of this driver and call for an immediate end to
the harassment, intimidation, and violence towards cyclists.

The call to end this kind of behavior has gone out to legislatures, by the IBC and cyclists all across Iowa. Unfortunatley though it passed in the Senate, the bill to help hold motorists accountable stalled out in the House. I can only hope it will pick up where it left off at the next session.

The Coalition urges the Plymouth County Sheriff and County
Attorney to pursue every means they have to investigate this
incident and identify the assailant. Motorists who threaten
or attack cyclists are committing prosecutable offense. The
difference in a criminal offense and traffic violation is
intent of the offender. It is the responsibility of our
courts to weigh the evidence and determine guilt or innocence.

As I said I do not know if Erin reported this to the police. I hope she has and I hope they take it seriously. Past experience has shown they likely will not take it seriously, I am basing this on what has happened in other county's and jurisdictions in Iowa. As one cyclist stated in something he posted online stated the most they will probalby be charged with is littering, if they are even caught. This is the typical attitude of law enforcment and county attorney's in a lot of the county's in Iowa. Past experince has taught cyclists in Iowa at least this much.

The Plymouth County Cyclists are offering a reward for
information that leads to a conviction. It is assuring to
know that the local community supports bicycling and does
not support the violent behavior that lead to the injury of
Erin Schroeder.

This is probably the the best way to bring these idiots to justice. It is a pretty good incentive to pursue and ensure justice is done and is blind in the process. Even with the incentive I'd provide information, if I had any for free, I could not and would not, in good consious receive a reward for this. I hope others hold themselves to such a high standard and would do the same and do so with accepting an reward. Unfortunatley some people would not do so.

To be clear, bicyclists do have a legal right to use the
public roads of the state of Iowa. The right is upheld by
statutory and common law. Increasing and supporting public
awareness of the right of the legal rights of bicyclists is
important for safe and enjoyable cycling. Cyclists have the
right to equitable legal treatment in cases of cycle/vehicle
collision and in cases of lawful use of the road.

Absolutley 100% correct! How ever no one, except cyclists takes this seriously. Motorists certainly don't and neither do law enforcement or prosecutors. Recent events have shown that.

Fuel efficiency does not buy you more or less rights as a
person. Our roads are public spaces governed by the rights
and duties of the Iowa Code. Investigation and prosecution
should remain unbiased for any individual, regardless of
transportation mode.

Again 100% correct. Just because I ride bike, which does not expel any sort of dangerious emissions I do not have more rights to the roadways as motorists do. Just because motorists drive larger, heavier, faster moving vehicles does not mean they have more of a right to the roadways then me. The roadways are public spaces paid for more then just drivers tax dollars. As far as unbiased investigation and prosecution regardless of mode of transportation, well as I have already stated recent events have proven, more then once it is NOT unbiased.

Because we are Iowans, we can choose to follow our enviable
history of 'taking the high road'. When a traffic conflict
of any kind arises, our instinct should be to take a deep
breath, slow down and react carefully with regard for
safety. It's up to us to drive and ride on our roadways
safely.

I take the high road comment to mean when a cyclist is hit by a driver and the driver is at fault cyclists across Iowa do not accost the driver or other drivers phycially. Or develope the attitude that cyclists have more of a right to the roadways then drivers and ride in a manner reflecting this bad attitude to prove a point to drivers or do something like a critical mass ride which only serves to piss off motorists and law enforcement. How ever I do not see anything wrong with contacting law enforcement departments, county attorney's offices, the state attorney generals office, etc. to ensure justice is done. Even if the cyclist doing so was not directly involved in the incident. It may be up to us to drive and ride on our roadways safely, but it is up to law enforcement and prosecutors to make sure justice is done and blind when a collision occurs between a driver and a cyclist, especially when the driver is at fault and the collision was intentional, which a good majority of them are.

Here is the story on bikeiowa.com;
Cyclistknocked unconscious by beer can thrown from hit and run driver

As stated in this story the Plymouth County cyclists is offering an award for information that leads to a conviction. Here is that story on bikeiowa.com;
Bike club offers reward for information on cycle crash

Update part 3: How many will it take?

I sent an email to the Iowa Attorney General's office stating it is beleived the situation surrounding the collision where John Lynch hit cyclist Doug Smith and the Madison County Attorney's office and Sheriff's Dept. is not doing enough, if anything to prosecute Lynch. I stated in the email there seems to be a conflict of interest because of Lynch's finanical backing of the Madison County Sheriff in the last election and asked what could be done. I await an answer from the AG's office.

Here is the email I sent;
"To whom this may concern at the Iowa Attorney Generals Office,

In the recent past there was an incident in Madison County where a cyclist, Doug Smith was hit by a motorist, John Lynch, who was towing 2 anhydrous ammonia tanks, one of the tanks is what hit Doug Smith. Lynch fled the scene and returned later after dropping the tanks off and picking someone up. Doug was riding with 7 other cyclists who witnessed the collision and called 911.

The Madison County Sheriff's office have failed to adequately charge Lynch and the Madison Count Attorney's office is only going by what is in the incident report, not pursuing other charges despite the eye witness report of the incident.

It is felt by some that the reason for this is what amounts to a conflict of interest. That being Lynch is a financial supporter in the last election for the Madison County Sheriff. As a result Lynch has only been charged with unsafe passing. Not leaving the scene or any other charges, etc.

I contacted Corwin Ritchie of the Iowa County Attorney's Association. he explained to me nothing can be done by the ICAA because there is no conflict of interest. I am not sure there isn't a conflict. Especially when all Lynch was charged for was unsafe passing, yet he left the scene of the collision. Granted he returned, but returning does not undo his illegal act of leaving.

Several cyclists across Iowa are very upset about this travesty of justice and strongly feel justice is not blind in this case as she should be in all cases, no matter how large or small.

I am asking what can the AG's office do to help make sure Lynch is charged with what he should be charged with under the law and what can be done to ensure the Madison County Attorney's office Sheriff's Dept. does their job regardless of any sort of politics involved such as what has happened in this case?

Here are links to info. I posted on a blog that has links to the stories about this incident;
http://bicycleadvocacyandsafety.blogspot.com/2009/04/how-many-will-it-take.html
http://bicycleadvocacyandsafety.blogspot.com/2009/04/update-how-many-will-it-take.html
http://bicycleadvocacyandsafety.blogspot.com/2009/04/update-part-2-how-many-will-it-take.html

Please take the time to read the information about this and advise as to what can be done since Madison County is obviously letting politics cloud their judgment.

Thank you.

freemasoncyclist"

Update Part 2; How many will it take?

I received an email response from Corwin Ritchie, Executive Director of the Iowa County Attorneys Association. Here is what he wrote;

"Dear Mr. freemasoncyclist:(my real name is with held)

Thank you for your email note. As you may know, charging and prosecution decisions in Iowa are, in the absence of a conflict of interest, local decisions to be made by local law enforcement officials. Neither the County Attorneys Association nor the Attorney General has the authority to make or override these decisions.

I apologize for the delay in this note. The last few days of any legislative session can be hectic, and this year is no exception.

I appreciate and share your concern that bicyclists often do not feel safe on the roadways in Iowa and other states and believe that this is an area of legitimate legislative inquiry. I trust that they will give the issues serious consideration.


Sincerely,


Corwin Ritchie
Executive Director
Iowa County Attorneys Association
Hoover Building
Des Moines, IA 50319
515-281-5428
corwin.ritchie@iowa.gov"

I am not sure there wasn't a conflict of interest. It is felt by several cyclists that neither the Madison County Attorney or the Madison County Sheriff is not prosecuting this case the way it should be and is not holding John Lynch more accountable and not charging him with more then just unsafe passing because of his support as a financial backer with the county sheriff. If that is not a conflict of interest I do not know what is. This is truly a travesty of justice.

The Legislatures have already given the bicycle bill all of the consideration in this session they are going to. It passed in the Senate but will not pass in the House this year. But that still does not mean county attorney's and law enforcement officers can not or should not hold dangerous drivers like John Lynch more accountable for their actions when they hit a cyclist, leave the scene with the weapon used to do so, then return later with out said weapon. Legislation already exists for doing these things, yet Lynch is not held accountable for it.

I think my next step will be to contact the State Attorney Generals Office to explain it is felt and believed there is a conflict of interest and why.

In Iowa it will be 5'

Iowa was not the first state to adopt safe passing laws for cyclists. What these laws state is motorists have to pass a cyclist in no less then a certain amount of feet and if they can not to wait until they can. Most states already have laws like this on the books, while others are still trying to get them passed. Most states also have the distance set at 3'. Iowa is trying to have one passed that is for 5'. It will not be passed in the current Iowa Legislative Session this year. It is hoped it will happen next year. The new bill in Iowa passed in the Senate, but not the House. It did not meet some sort of a deadline. I do not know and need to find out of the Bill in the House will be picked up where it was left off at the next Legislative Session in 2010 or if the process will have to start back over again in both the House and Senate.

There are both proponents and opponents of laws like this. Opponents say these laws are un-enforcable pieces of useless legislation that overshadow the real problem-- bikers and drivers will never peacefully co-exist until both sides show each other some respect on the road. Propenants say these laws are long overdue and force motorists to give bikers their space on increasingly congested streets.

I agree with the fact a safe passing law will be very difficult to enforce. The only way to enforce it is if a law enforcement officer witnesses a motorist passing a cyclist unsafely and too close. I understand that. In my opinion what a law like this is designed to do is when, not if, but when a motorist hits a cyclist because they did not want to wait, were in too much of a damn hurry they will be held more accountable for colliding with the cyclist. They will be fined a higher amount and even serve time in jail. These will all be mandatory punishments for drivers who hit cyclists with their cars. Once motorists realize they will be held more accountable for their actions it is hoped they will think twice about being in such a damn hurry and give cyclists the room they need when passing in their glass, steel and plastic cages.

Here is a bikeiowa.com story about other states;
Three feet for bikes?: Bloggers on the bicycle buffer law

Update; How Many Will It Take?

I have learned some more information about the collision between John Lynch and Doug Smith in Madison County. Lynch left the scene of the collision, went home, left the traielrs, picked someone up and then returned back to the scene. He did not stop and render aid and I wonder if he even stopped at all or just kept on driving. Again he has only been charged with unsafe passing. Nothing else. This is because of his political support of the Madison County Sheriff's office in helping to get the current sheriff elected over an incumbent. Perhaps if the incumbent had been elected this would never have happened and Lynch would be charged with much more then just unsafe passing.

Right now there are a lot of upset cyclists in Iowa. A lot of us are saying to boycott Madison County during events like RAGBRAI. While that is a great idea and I hope it happens I say also boycott Madison County for the rest of 2009. If any cyclist is passing through, whether driving or by bicycle do not spend money there and discourage others from doing so. I also say cyclists in Iowa should launch an email and telephone campaign to the Madison County Attorney's office. Call and ask why justice is not being done. I have to travle through Madison County tomorrow when my wife and I are on our way to Des Moines for a bike ride on Saturday. We usually stop to rest and refresh ourselves before we finish our trip into Des Moines. We are not going to do that tomorrow or for the rest of 2009. We'll stop either before we enter Madison County or right after we leave the county, but not in.

Another thing cyclists can do is what I have done. I contacted the Iowa County Attorneys Association, or ICAA. I sent an email to Corwin R. Ritchie, the ICAA Executive Director. Here is the email I sent to Mr. Ritchie;

"Mr. Ritchie,

My name is freemasoncyclist. (I am with holding my real name in this blog post)I recently became aware of an incident in Madison County where a motorist driving a pick up truck while towing 2 anhydrous ammonia tanks collided with a cyclists and seriously injured him. You should know I was not there and did not see this. I am basing this on what I have learned so far about the incident.

The driver, John Lynch was trying to pass a group of 8 cyclists in a no-passing zone, while laying on his horn, he passed way to close and as he came back into his lane the 2nd trailer hit Doug Smith Doug is in Iowa Methodist Hospital with a fractured skull and pelvis. His bike is completely destroyed.

Lynch left the scene, dropped off his trailers and picked someone up and then returned. He has only been charged with unsafe passing.

It is believed the county sheriff and attorney are not doing their jobs at adequately charging and prosecuting Lynch. He should be charged with more then unsafe passing. Isn't towing more then one trailer with a pick up truck illegal in Iowa? He also left the scene. The reason it is believed neither the sheriff or the county attorney are doing a good job of charging or prosecuting Lynch is politics. Lynch is a big financial supporter of the Madison County Sheriff. The current sheriff won the last election over a sitting incumbent.

Here is how cyclists across Iowa view this incident and how we see the options and choices the county attorney and sheriff's office are faced with;

1. File charges against a local farmer or side with a cyclist who doesn't even live here?

2. Files charges against a political backer of the sheriff or or believe the friends of some long haired guy from the city?

3. Listen to the farmer or listen to the 7 other cyclist who don't even live here in this county.

Obviously the county sheriff's dept. and attorney sided with the farmer, did not file charges against Lynch because he is a political backer and did not bother to listen to 7 other people vs. only one, Lynch. How would Lynch know what even happened? He was towing 2 trailers and therefore he could not see what was going on behind him and he left the scene.

Is there anything you can do to help with this? Can something be done to force the Madison County Attorney's office to put their politics aside and ensure justice, which is supposed to be blind, is done?

Cyclists across Iowa are sick and tired of the inadequate job law enforcement and county attorney's offices are doing. Something needs to be done until the bill passes in the House, which will not be in this session, that hold drivers more accountable. Cyclists are not going to stop riding on the roadways. As long as drivers are not fully prosecuted because of politics as in this case more of us are going to be injured and killed.

Do not ban us from the roadways, hold drivers more accountable.

Here is a link to the information in my blog post about this. It has links to the stories and accounts of what happened;

http://bicycleadvocacyandsafety.blogspot.com/2009/04/how-many-will-it-take.html


Thank you.


freemasoncyclist"

His response to me so far is;
"Mr. freemasoncyclist, (Again I am with holding my real name)

I have your email, but have not had time to read and digest it. We will try to respond as best we can within a few days.


Corwin Ritchie
Executive Director
Iowa County Attorneys Association
Hoover Building
Des Moines, IA 50319
515-281-5428
corwin.ritchie@iowa.gov"

This is encouraging. I hope the ICAA can help do something about this an ensure justice is done in this case. I am encouraging all Iowa cyclists to send a similar email to Mr. Ritchie. Let him know we will not stand for inadequate justice in this case. Lynch needs to be prosecuted and if the Madison County Attorney's office does not have the courage to let blind justice prevail and not let politics get in the way then she needs to be sanctioned or replaced, the same for the county sheriff.

2nd Annual Sioux City Ride of Silence

On May 20, 2009 the 2nd Annual Sioux City Ride of Silence will be held starting at 7:00 pm. This years ride is dedicated to Bret (Bubba) Seefeld. Bubba was almost killed in a collision with a motorist in 2008. He made a long recovery is back to riding. Everyone who knows him is glad to have him back and glad he survived.

Here is details on this years Ride of Silence;
2nd Annual Sioux City Ride of Silence; Dedicated to Bret (Bubba) Seefeld

How many will it take?

On bikeiowa.com there is an unscientific poll asking "How many cyclists have to get injured or killed on Iowa roadways before laws are changed?" The options are; 0-10, 11-20, 21-30, 31-40, 41-50, 50-99, 100+. I selected 100+ I honestly think that is how many more will be injured or killed before laws in Iowa are changed. This poll on the bikeiowa.com web site is because of the most recent serious collision between a cyclist and a idiot motorist. I say collision because in ALL cases of a bicycle/motor vehicle collision where the driver of the motor vehicle hits the cyclist it is NEVER accidental, it is ALWAYS avoidable and often intentional.

The most recent case of this happened on Saturday April 11, 2009. Doug Smith was riding on a rural Madison County Hwy with 8 other cyclists when he was hit by an anhydrous ammonia tank being towed by John Lynch of Rural Cumming, Iowa. Lynch was towing 2 of these tanks at the same time with his pick up truck, he passed the cyclists in a NO-PASSING zone and as he merged back into his lane the second tank hit Dave Smith.

From what I have read and understand about this Lynch did stop, but did not render aid and was only charged with unsafe passing. Basically a slap on the wrist. Dave Smith is currently in fair to good condition at Iowa Methodist Hospital in Des Moines with a fractured skull and pelvis.

Lynch is 78 years old and when he was trying to pass he was laying on the horn trying to scare the cyclists.

I have also learned of information as to why Lynch was only charged with unsafe passing. A resident of Madison County and a cyclist contacted the Madison County Attorneys office to see what more could be done. Here is a quote from this resident/cyclist of Madison County as to the conversation that transpired between him and the Madison County Attorney;

"Well, today April 15th, I talked face to face with the Madison county attorney about the incident last weekend where a rider Doug Smith was run over and left for dead in the middle of the road by a local farmer John Lynch. She told me the same story she puts in her emails-"I have reviewed the evidence and based on the county deputy's report, I don't think there is enough there to bring more charges against Lynch. It is entirely her call based on the deputy's report. What she doesn't say is that Lynch was a big financial supporter of the sheriff when he won the last election over a sitting incumbent. Let's see, what are the options here..........file charges against a local farmer or side with a cyclist who doesn't even live here? Files charges against a political backer of the sheriff or some long haired guy fron the city? Listen to the farmer or listen to the 7 other cyclist who don't even live here in this county. Seems obvious as to what choice she made. I can tell you that her "evidence" and the stories told by the other riders are quite a bit different. I for one plan to call the state attorney general tomorrow to see if they can get involved. This just doesn't feel right to me.............."

I hope this resident/cyclist of Madison County, Iowa does contact the State Attorney Generals Office to see what can be done. I also hope at the state level something is done because enough is enough. Too many cyclists have been injured or killed because motorists are not held more accountable for their actions.

The current bill that would improve things for cyclists in Iowa stalled out in the House and will not be passed in this session. It did pass in the Senate.

Here are the mistakes I see being made by Lynch, Madison County and the state of Iowa;
1. Lynch should not have been towing 2 of these very large ammonia tanks, only should have been towing one.

2. Lynch should not have attempted to pass in a no passing zone.

3. Lynch never should never have been laying on the horn.

4. Lynch at his age probably should not be driving or towing equipment such as a pick up truck and ammonia tanks.

5. The Madison County Attorney should put her political concerns aside and do what is right for the victim, Dave Smith, and see that justice is done. It should not matter if Lynch helped the Sheriff win an election or contributed a lot of money for a campaign. Justice is supposed to be blind. Obviously in this case it is not.

6. The Madison County Sheriff's dept. should have charged Lynch with much more then just unsafe passing. He should have been charged with towing more then one ammonia tank.

7. The State House of Representatives should have passed the new bicyclist bill and not let stall as it did.

8. The State of Iowa needs to have stricter regulations on the towing of things like ammonia tanks.

9. The State of Iowa needs to make sure senior citizens who are driving trucks and towing things like ammonia trailers go through a driver safety course and be certified/licensed to do so.

10. The State of Iowa needs to limit the amount of ammonia trailers being towed to only one, if they do not do so already.

A lot of people screwed up here and it was not Dave Smith or the other cyclists. unfortunately it will take a lot more injuries and deaths of cyclists before things change.

Here are the links to the information, stories and the unscientific poll;
bikeiowa.com
Des Moines bicyclist struck by anhydrous tank
Des Moines bicyclist struck by anhydrous tank (DMR Story)
Injured Bicyclist Still Recovering
Injured Bicyclist Still Recovering (WHO Story)
Cyclists Ride in Protest on Wednesday 4/15

Here is more information on what happened to Doug Smith;
Doug Smith's Bike Accident
Man Down, Road Raging Motorist Flees/Goes Home

Bicycle security at work.

Ever since I have been commuting by bike, to and from work I have always locked my bike to something solid and no-movable until now.

The company I work for, (will not name them for certain reasons), has 2 bike racks outside one of the entrances to the building. The building is not owned, but leased by my company. The racks, like the building, are owned by the company my company is leasing the property from.

The racks are not anchored, bolted or fastened in anyway to the ground. Not a good thing. The only place allowed to park a bicycle is in one of the 2 racks. Employees who ride bike to and from work are required to park/lock their bikes to the racks and are not allowed to park/lock them anywhere else. The company who owns the facility will not allow the racks to be anchored, bolted or fastened into the ground. When I asked the facilities manager of the building, (she works for my company, not the company who owns the building), why I got some piss-poor excuse to the effect it requires drilling into the ground, blah, blah, blah. It sounded like just what it was, a company buy-line, that I don't buy for one instant. I call B.S. on it in fact. Of course I didn't say this to anyone at work, I'm not stupid.

What all of this means is while my bike is securely locked to the rack, making it difficult for anyone to steal it, anyone can just steal the whole rack with what ever bicycles are locked to it all in one big piece and later on take their time to cut the locks to get the bikes off. Not a good thing

If anything happens to my bike, while it is locked to the rack I will definitely hold my company responsible and they will pay for what ever damages or replacement for my bike and the company who owns the facility. If they refuse, they will have a law suit on their hands.

I can not believe this comment would come from another cyclist.

A supposed cyclist posted an opinion on the Des Moines Register web site to a story about the current bike safety bill being discussed and debated at the Legislative Session in Des Moines right now. This person, username; Jules1965, wrote;

“I would have no problem hitting a bike if it were in my way and not obeying the law as the road can be shared only by those obeying the law. Those who choose to ignore traffic signals, stop signs, etc. need to be hit to the pavement and the automobile driver needs to get out and share his thoughts as to why he bumped him to the pavement. I know I would and would make it clear that next time could be a lot worse and they should be glad that a considerate fellow bicyclist is trying to help them get their act together prior to serious injury.”

Sometimes comments like this are made to get a rise out of people. Whether or not that was Jules1965's intention is unkown. I also have doubts he or she is a cyclist despite what this person said in the comment. Either way comments like this are to be taken seriously and considered a threat to public safety. This has been reported to the Des Moines Police Dept. and I believe was removed from the Register's web site after it was reported.

Here is the bikeiowa.com story;
Commenter Threatens to Harm Bicyclists
Here is the story in the Des Moines Register;
Probable failure of bill frustrating to cyclists

Who Stops at Stop Signs?

This is video of an intersection, (I think located in or near Iowa City, Iowa), that was watched for only 5 minutes. I counted a total of eleven motor vehicles that did not stop when and where they were supposed to. Some didn't stop at all, they just rolled through the intersection.

The official count is 2 passed by stopping where and when they were suppsoed to and 9that did not, but I counted an additional 2 in the video. It is ironic that bicyclists are chastised for not stopping and yet here we have over 10 motorists not stopping.

The video was created by the Iowa Bicycle Coalition and funding provided by Jacobson Companies. Here it is;

Enough of this "As Far to the Right as Practicable " Crap!

From here on out on certain roadways I am taking the lane. No more of this "as far to the right as practicable" crap! I am sick and tired of being passed too close. The law/ordinance says cyclists have to ride as far to the right as practicable. What this translates to is as long as there is no road hazards, debris, broken pavement, etc. on the right hand side of the roadway cyclists are to be close to the curb. The problem is as far to the right as practicable opens the door for motorists who are in too big of a damn hurry to wait to pass safely to pass too close almost hitting a cyclist. It has happened to me way to many times now on certain roadways and I am sick of it. I am going to take the lane from here on out. What I mean by take the lane is ride in the right hand tire track of the travel lane. This will mean I am about 3' to 4' off of the curb instead of 1' to 2'.

The 2 roadways in question so far are Cunningham Dr. between The Home Depot and the recycling center when going south and the north bound side of Hamilton Blvd between Stone Park Blvd and 36th St. here in Sioux City.

Here is why I am going to start doing this. Today on my ride, on the way back home when I was on Hamilton going north toward 36th St. too many idiot motorists decided to pass too close because they did not want to wait for traffic in the left lane to pass first. This section of Hamilton is an undivided 4-lane roadway. The lanes are 12' wide. At 36th st. it tapers down to 2 lanes after you get through the intersection going north. The 2 north bound lanes turn into one north bound lane through the intersection, one lane that turns right only and a left turn only lane. After this happened on Hamilton I decided, screw it I am taking the lane and riding in the right tire track of the travel lane. When I did this no more motorists tried to pass too close, they all passed within at least 3'. And I made my move into the right tire track of the travel lane, with cars behind me that wanted to pass and that I got the feeling were going to try to pass too close. I signaled by pointing to the right tire track of the travel lane, checked my helmet mirror to make sure it was clear, then made my move into the right tire track and stayed there until I got to 36th st. where I turn to continue to head home.

I am not doing this on all the roadways I ride on. So far only Cunningham and this section of Hamilton. How ever if I get passed to close/buzzed on any other roadway I will take the lane on those roadways as well.

While this is technically violating a traffic ordinance/law it is the safer option. When I ride I am looking for my safety and my safety only. Motorists safety is of no concern to me. Colliding with a car will do little to harm the occupants but will do a lot to hurt or kill me.

This stupid "as far to the right as practicable" crap has got to change. Change is in the work, somewhat at the current legislative session. How ever it is very likely the so called Bicycle Bill Of Rights will not pass the House at this session. It is currently stalled there. It has passed the State Senate though. If it is not signed into law then technically I am violating the specific ordinance or law. So Mote It Be, as I said above I am doing this because it is the safe option. Motorists will have but 2 choices. Either hit me or wait to safely pass, most will wait to safely pass. With riding closer to the curb they, more times then not, pass too close putting my safety at risk.

There are some who read this that may get into a snit and go running off to tell the Grand Lodge of Iowa on me because this could be considered as a violation of my obligation I took as a Freemason to "cheerfully comply with the law". Before you go running off the the Grand Lodge of Iowa read the above paragraphs again and contact me directly for a more in depth explanation of why I am doing this. One thing that would likely be suggested is take steps to change the law. Well, the law is currently being worked on to change for the better for cyclists, ie; the Bicycle Bill of Rights mentioned above. Thing is I can not do anything to make it happen any faster and I need to take steps now to make it safer for me to ride. And before anyone asks or suggests it, no there are not other route options that I can or want to choose from. And not riding is not an option either.

Another reason we need the Bicycle Bill of Rights in Iowa.

A recent crash victim is urging people in Iowa, the House and the Senate to support and pass the Bicycle Bill of Rights. The Sente has passed it, but right now the House version of the bill is stalled and may not be passed this session. That is not a good idea.

When the bill is passed into law incidents like what happened to Ken Sherman will still happen but the driver would be fined for violating the bicycle law along with what ever other fines would apply. I am not so sure I wuld consider what happened to Sherman an accident or that I would not be angry. Sherman had the right of way and the driver still hit him. To me that is not an accident, unintentional or not.

Here is more on the news story;
Crash Victim Urges Law Protecting Cyclists

This cyclist got tired of close calls.

Cyclist Jeff Frings of Milwaukee got tired of "Close Calls" and decided to get proof by filming his violators.

I must say I respect his convictions. At least this is one cyclist trying to do something about it. I disagree with what the motorists and some of the police say about him riding in the travel lane of traffic. At least he consulted a lawyer about the matter instead of confronting police and prosecutors directly.