Letters: The Great Bicycle Law-Enforcement Debate

I APPLAUD columnist Stu Bykofsky for his column on bike-law enforcement.

I acknowledge that there are many motorists who are reckless and pose a hazard to other motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. I also acknowledge that motorists should share the road with cyclists who are responsible and law-abiding.

But it can no longer be tolerated when cyclists blatantly disregard laws of the road. The fact that they are not consistently enforced is NOT an excuse to dangerously ignore laws that cyclists are legally obligated to follow and are intended for their own safety and those around them.

As a motorist and pedestrian in Center City, I have seen firsthand the hazards of reckless cyclists. I see cyclists going full speed through red lights/stop signs without any regard for pedestrians or motorists who have the right of way following a full stop. I see improper use of bike lanes (contrary to popular belief, if a cyclist is continuing straight at an intersection, he is required to merge with traffic as motorists have the right of way to make legal turns at intersections). I see cyclists traveling the wrong way on one-way roads. Cyclists on cell phones. And on sidewalks.

Even worse, I see cyclists brazenly and intentionally instigating poor relations with motorists. This kind of reckless behavior and complete disregard for the rules of the road have to end. I'd like to say that it is a minority of cyclists who are doing this, but when I see five to 10 incidents a day while walking or driving, I have to believe a majority of cyclists are not following the law.

If they want equal rights, they should absolutely have equal responsibility in terms of licensing, insurance and accountability for following laws.

Stephen A. La Monica, Philadelphia

Stu, you have more in common with bicyclists than you think. We too yearn for a time when the streets of Philadelphia offer parity between cars and bikes.

But your definition of parity seems less about equal treatment and responsibilities than about subjecting bikers to laws designed to limit the damage that cars bring to a city. Registration, insurance, traffic laws and parking fees were created because cars are dangerous and consume valuable space. Everyone can surely agree, without being accused of having a morally superior attitude, that bikes are significantly less so.

But even still bikers would gladly pay for parking if the city made any effort to provide some (instead of making us lock to car-related infrastructure like meters and parking signs). We would happily pay for the space our bikes take up for a price proportionate to that devoted to a car space.

In terms of public roads devoted to bike lanes, you rightly point out the "perverted" system that recently created the first bike lanes on Spruce and Pine, allowing bikes to safely(ish) transverse Center City. A fairer system would have provided bike lanes on at least 1.2 percent of all streets in the city since we make up 1.2 percent of all commuters. (And how about also devoting 1.2 percent of the budget spent on car-related infrastructure to bike-related infrastructure!)

And the biking community will surely accept enforcement. Sadly, bicyclists are far more often the victims of vehicular aggression and rule-breaking than the perpetrators.

Susan Shulman

Philadelphia