Roads Made for Cars,
So Bicycles Should Stay Off
Reprinted from Chattanooga Times/Free Press (Tuesday, June 27) Letters
to the Editor on the Times side of the editorial section.
I can hardly believe the words I just heard on TV-3 news from Mr.
Dominici. It was an interview about bicycles on the roads of Chattanooga. Mr. Dominici
said, "People who drive automobiles think the roads
belong to them!"
Well, hello, they do belong to us.
We pay taxes to our local governments for those roads, we pay gas tax to maintain those
roads, and those lanes are 10-feet to 12-feet wide for automobiles, not 3-feet or 4-feet
wide for a bicycle!
On numerous occasions I have met people on bicycles going up the W-Road
and on Roberts Mill Road on my way home to Signal Mountain. These folks ride in the middle
of the road at about 10 mph. It is unsafe for drivers to pass them and it is unsafe for
the cyclist.
If you attempt to pass them and a car meets you, you have a choice
— either hit the car or hit the cyclist. I’ll forewarn them. I’ll choose
the bicycle.
Injuring one on a bicycle is better than injuring an entire family in
an automobile.
If you want to ride a bike, go to the Riverpark, Chester Frost Park, or
a shopping mall. Stay off the roads. They were built for automobiles.
All you will do by riding a bike on a road with 45 mph and 55 mph speed
limits will contribute to the financial gains of … funeral homes. I’ll hit the
bike before I’ll hit a car.
ARLOS DEMPSEY
Signal Mountain
From Rick Loggins: printed in the Letters to the Editor
several days later.
Rick began with quotes from the above article.
Mr. Dempsey drives the W Road and Robert's Mill Road on a regular basis
(I guess driving to and from his cave). He lives at 5400 Sawyer Road.
Let's be careful out there...
Rick Loggins
From Tom Baker: Never printed in the paper - they
acknowledged that they had received several other responses to the article but only
printed the one from Rick Loggins.
This was finally printed on July 19 after Tom wrote another letter to
the Editor (not the column) and David Rathbone had talked to someone in the department
(see last two letters).
TO: Letters to the Editor Column
This letter questions Arlos Dempsey’s unrepressed anger of having
to be delayed due to bikers on "his" road, in the June 27th Letters
to the Editor column. As a biker of 25 years, I have seen many drivers who, like Mr.
Dempsey, are intolerant of bikers and feel they "do own the road," as he stated.
Share The Road is a catchy slogan which has been out for many years, yet there are
some who will never follow this advice. From a legal standpoint, bicyclists have the same
rights as motorized vehicles—except they are banned, thankfully, from interstates!
Yet simply having a legal right to ride on the road doesn’t make us equal to any of
the cars and trucks we meet. We know that if there is any contact whatsoever with a
vehicle, the biker loses.
With this in mind, I found it disturbing that Mr. Dempsey blatantly
said he’d hit a biker rather than risk a crash with another vehicle! His example of
this scenario was if he were passing a biker and met a car head on. This scene occurs more
than I would like to admit, but usually ends in only honking at each other, as the cars
yield and return to their lanes. It appears Mr. Dempsey has forgotten an important premise
of driving: Before passing, insure that you have enough room to do so without endangering
anyone else.
Alas, we can’t teach attitude, and driver education has been
deemed a frill in the schools. It is unfortunate that some will identify with Mr.
Dempsey’s letter and thus contribute to more hostilities hurled at the biker.
Like it or not, bikers are here to stay. Chattanooga offers an ideal
variety of roads and sights for the cyclist—among the best in the country. Whether we
are climbing a mountain, watching hang-gliders take off or riding alongside the Tennessee
River, you can bet we "chose" this area to live. With P.E. being phased out of
the schools (another "unnecessary" frill), and the major sport these days is a
tie between watching wrestling, TV or mud bogs, an active hobby has redeeming qualities.
I’m sure even the Mr. Dempseys of Chattanooga could benefit!
From Lynn Seeger - printed on the Free Press side of the editorial section on
Tuesday, July 4, 2000
Cyclists Have Rights, So Be Considerate
I was very saddened to read the letter on June 27 from Mr. Dempsey of Signal Mountain.
I hope he is in the minority regarding his opinion on sharing the road with
cyclists.
I wanted to let Mr. Dempsey and other residents of the tri-state area know cyclists pay
taxes too! We also have families. Believe me, we do not ride on bikes on roadways with the
sole intention of being a hazard to motorists, pedestrians or other cyclists. As cyclists,
we realize how vulnerable we are when we are on the roads with trucks and automobiles.
The reasons for riding a bike vary from the sheer pleasure of using the healthy body
God has given us, enjoying the beautiful countryside of the greatest nation on earth, or
sharing the benefits of exercise and quality time with our family and friends.
Some people use bicycles as their main form of transportation since it is so
economical, healthy, and good for the environment. If you ever have a chance to travel to
the western United States, you will see that bicycles are an accepted, even promoted, form
of transportation.
America's dependence on the automobile is an unhealthy one -- unhealthy for Americans
and unhealthy for our Mother Earth. Hopefully, before it is too late, Americans will end
their fascination and abuse of the automobile and replace it with a much healthier,
cleaner, and safer form of transportation.
I believe we can all share the road and get along peacefully. Let's respect each
other's rights (cyclists do have rights) and be more considerate of each other. We all
have to share the same planet.
LYNN SEEGER
From Tommy Majors printed on Wednesday, July 5, 2000.
Cyclists Who Get in Way of Cars Deserve Tickets
Arlos Dempsey's letter on June 27 was on target of a problem that many of us face.
Living in the county, bicyclists seem to think they are licensed and have the same right
of way as cars do.
A few days ago on Birchwood Pike and Highway 60, I encountered two bicyclists. They
would not move over, practically stopping traffic. no one could pass them. This is a real
problem around the Highway 58 Ooltewah/Georgetown area.
The police should give them tickets for unsafe operations. One of these cyclists
probably will be badly injured before something is done about this growing problem. These
narrow county roads, with no shoulders for bicyclists to move, can hardly handle the auto
traffic.
TOMMY MAJORS
Birchwood, Tenn.
From Lucy W Taylor, printed Wednesday, July 12, 2000
Grouping Letters Unfair To Their Authors
While your editorials have been very supportive, I wish you had published
the 10 letters you characterized "pro-bicyclist" and just listed the names of
the writers. In addition to refusing these people an equal opportunity to express their
views, you falsely characterized their core position, which is not pro-bicyclist as such,
but pro-transportation alternatives.
In the last 20 years, gasoline and diesel-powered vehicles on our roads
have tripled in volume. This increase is not due to a tripling of our population. Runoff
and fumes from the fuels pollute our water and air. ... Expanding and building more roads
to keep up with the volume does nothing to remedy the increasing pollution.
Transportation alternatives to the car, such as bicycle lanes,
electric-powered buses and sidewalks for pedestrians, are not being advocated for reasons
of recreation but out of realist concern for the health and quality of life of all people.
I must also add that publishing a letter that suggests deliberately hitting a bicyclist
could be justified is deeply troubling to everyone who respects life.
Lucy W. Taylor
From Tom Baker - just being mailed at this time (July 12)
Dear Editors:
After reading an angry letter to the editor from Arlos Dempsey, in which he stated he
owned the road and would run over a biker rather than risk being hit by another car, I
submitted what I thought was a poignant rebuttal on June 28, 2000. Alas, my letter was
censored and not printed.
It is my opinion that a newspaper that prints only one side of an issue fails its
responsibility to its readers. To do such implies agreement with the printed article, and
constituents concur that the newspaper finds no basis of reason to allow another response,
other than the one given. What you have done in this instance is akin to printing a huge
article pertaining to a rally by the KKK, and then not publishing letters that have a
differing opinion. This example would create by omission (of the rebuttal letter(s)) a
powder keg--indeed a dangerous situation that could have been toned down by proper
protocol.
Here we have an irate, out-of-control driver who threatens to run over--(which
inherently implies killing)--any biker that impedes his progress while in his 3,000-pound
vehicle. You are being taken to task because, by not printing my letter, you have in
actuality condoned such behavior, and are even in agreement with it (Mr. Dempsey's
letter). While you do so, you have put all bikers within eyeshot of the Chattanooga
Times in jeopardy. Even before Mr. Dempsey's letter, bikers have been subject to
misdeeds from vehicle operators, from epithets, curses, honking, backfires done
purposefully to objects hurled at us--drink cans, tools, trash, etc. Vehicle operators do
not need an excuse to further endanger the lives of bicyclists; but after reading Mr.
Dempsey's caustic letter, they have plenty of fodder. An already unbalanced driver, after
reading such nonsense you deemed reader-worthy, could vent his frustrations on the next
biker he approaches. Part of the blame could directly be attributed to the Chattanooga
Times. Simply by stating "...ten letters have been submitted to our newspaper
which were pro-bicyclist..." will not let you off the hook. All ten letters
should have been printed!
Bikers don't seek special favors. Basically, we simply want to be allowed to ride
without clashing with others. We want to Share The Road, not hog it. Bikers pay
taxes and thereby could also claim part ownership of the roads, as Mr. Dempsey proclaimed
he "...owned the road."
By not printing my letter--which has been published in the Chattanooga Bike Club
newsletter and is on the internet--you have, unwittingly perhaps, caused a dangerous
situation for all bikers in the Chattanooga area. In the future, I advise
you to discern what your printing or censoring of a Letter To The Editor could cause. In
this case, there were glaring errors of commission (printing Mr. Dempsey's letter) and
omission (not printing mine). The bike community needs your support!
Sincerely,
Tom Baker
From David Rathbone printed July 19 after a conversation with one of the Editors.
Letter to the Editor,
I have read repeatedly the letter published on Tuesday, June 27 in the Letters to the
Editor signed by Arlos Dempsey. This person, whoever he is, is very confused on several
points.
According to TCA 55-8-101, a bicycle is a vehicle (read the definition of Bicycle and
Vehicle), and roads are constructed for vehicular traffic. Legally, bicyclists have a
legal right to be on the road.
Additionally, adult bicycle riders own cars and pay taxes. Child bicycle riders have
adult parent(s) who own cars and pay taxes. They own the road as much as any other
citizen. They have an ownership right to be on the road.
So far as passing is concerned, TCA 55-8-117, 55-8-119, 55-8-120 outline how a vehicle
is to pass and require safety in passing. The situation described in this and other
letters violate those laws because the vehicle passing is not doing so safely. Any
resulting accident is, or will be, the responsibility of the vehicle driver passing, not
the one being passed. That responsibility includes any criminal or civil penalties.
Threatening another vehicle operator on the road is Road Rage. Saying, in print, you
will hit someone is a threat. It can also be considered Hate Speech. If the writer of this
letter is later involved in an accident as described, is it intentional?
All this does not mean car drivers who hate bicyclists have no recourse. They should
write and call the Metropolitan Planning Organization. The MPO has a plan for bicycle
lanes and roads throughout Hamilton County and Chattanooga that has not been implemented.
Bicyclists ride the roads because they have no choice. There is nowhere else to ride. Tell the MPO you want more bicycle lanes and roads so bicycle traffic does
not have to mix with automobile traffic.
DAVID RATHBONE
East Brainerd
From Tony Thompson
A Tale of Two Attorneys
(And Their Fees)
By Tony Thompson
It all began on the June 20, 2000 Tuesday night ride. On the last half of the ride,
while on Pitts Road, a motorist attempted to pass me when there was oncoming traffic. I
signaled for him to wait and he returned to the right lane behind me until the oncoming
traffic passed, after which he passed me.
I yelled, "Car back, with an idiot," to warn my fellow
cyclists of the inpatient driver coming up on their rear. The motorist heard this and
stopped his car in front of me. He got out and both he and his wife started yelling that I
didn’t have the right-of-way and had almost caused them to have a wreck. ( It
didn’t matter that I had actually prevented their wreck by warning them of oncoming
traffic.) The motorist "informed" me that he knew he had the right-of-way
because he worked for the city. (I later learned he is a firefighter.) After exchanging
words I got back on my bicycle and started riding away. The motorist then got in his car
to drive away. As he passed me, I was struck by two soft drinks which were thrown from the
car. After the ride I called the Hamilton County Sheriff’s Department and proceeded
downtown to swear out a warrant for assault.
On July 12, 2000 I appeared in court to bear witness for the state in
this case. I spoke with a man from the Fire Department’s Internal Affairs Division. I
found out that the defendant had been suspended without pay since the incident and had
been using his personal leave. I was informed that the man’s job was in jeopardy. Not
wanting him to lose his job, I dropped the charges, which the defendant did not seem to
appreciate.
In retrospect, I wish I had not dropped the charges. The judge informed
the man and his wife that bicycles do indeed have full right of way.
Even though the charges were dropped, the ordeal still cost the man
plenty. In addition to using his personal leave, he had to pay the bonding expenses for
getting himself and his wife out of jail, court costs, and two attorneys’ fees.
In retrospect, would I do it again? Damn right! Will I drop the charges
next time? Probably not!
| 
