City
Saturday Brew: Wedding Scam, Real Estate Rise, Real Beating, the Dome, Tragic Cyling Accidents, Exchange Students Missing
Around a dozen GTA couples have had their wedding plans compromised by event decorators, Affairs with Flair, according to an investigation in the Star. Using the "didn't you get my email" trick when informing the couples of their impending bankruptcy, most were left scrambling at the last minute and now find an already expensive event even more so. I know couples can be over-the-top about wedding preparations, but this is pretty shitty.
Residential real estate in the GTA is booming again (did it ever take a real break?), with news that home sales rose 28% compared to last years numbers. The spike is attributed to low inventory, with 36% less homes available on the market during the same period.
As had to be expected, Real Madrid stomped Toronto FC in their friendly last night. The 5-1 tally sounds more like a hockey score. Despite the home side's loss, the crowd of over 22000 at BMO field certainly got their money's worth, with mega-star Ronaldo delivering the goods in the form of a pretty goal.
Sticking with sports, in commemoration of the Blue Jays championship winning teams in 1992 and 93, Globe writer Brad Wheeler sings his praises of the Dome (er, Rogers Center). Never having been much of a fan of the monolithic structure, I remain unconvinced. But he does rightly point out that it's not as bad as some make it out to be.
Two cycling-related accidents have has disastrous consequences. A 56 year old woman is dead after a collision with a cyclist riding on the sidewalk. And police are seeking tips after a cyclist was hit near Yorkdale mall. Also riding on the sidewalk, the collision occurred when the rider and the driver both attempted to turn at the same time. It was just the other day that commenters noted the dangerousness of riding bikes on the sidewalk regarding my post on Toronto's worst roads for cycling.
In other potentially bad news, two young (11 and 15) Chinese exchange students are missing as of Wednesday, when they were last seen by their host families. Having been in Canada for only a week, police are justifiably concerned. I sincerely hope that they're just staying with friends or family rather than the other alternatives.
Photo by louise@toronto, member of the blogTO Flickr pool.
Discussion
10 Comments
Sort By Oldest First / Newest First
Subscribe
And guess what, if he'd hit me, causing damage to my car, unless I was able to apprehend him and then take him to Small Claims Court, I would have been out several hundred dollars for a new fender because they don't carry insurance or have any visible plates. (This actually happened on the main street in Collingwood about 15 years ago to me!)
In an increasingly over-taxed road system in this city (an entirely different discussion!), some sort of licensing/education system must be put in place for cyclists if they insist they have the same rights as motorists.
Because right or wrong, cyclists lose nearly 100% of the time.
If you mean that we lose in the sense that cars (and pavement) are hard and we are soft, then, yes that is true. I would not go into the ring with you in your car.
So doesn't that make the point more that everyone should be smart and careful, but also that, because cyclists are more vulnerable, that motorists have to be aware of their power? That goes beyond laws and right and wrong, sure--you can kill us, we probably won't kill you.
There are absolutely a lot of cyclists who do dumb things, just like a lot of motorists.
As far as the rights we insist on having: Well, I for one think it's not best that we are classified as vehicles, as we have nowhere near the power of cars and are human propelled devices. A separate classification would be better I think.
So some "rights" are forced on to us and aren't useful or practical, given that we are not cars.
As to the teenager riding on the sidewalk story: Man, they should really change that rule about tire size. It's meant to be there to allow little kids to ride on the sidewalk, but people ride those BMX bikes and the ones that just have small tires quite a bit now, so it's a weird loophole.
That being said, licensing cyclists is idiotic because of a list of practical reasons too long to debate in blog comments.
If you want the same rights on the road, why don't you obey the same rules and regulations too?
I've had dozens of instances when I'd almost hit someone on a bike (or rather, they'd run into me out of nowhere) just because they didn't obey the traffic signs or laws.
I mean, if you're gonna cut in between the cars like a stunt bike rider, cross intersections on red lights when there's no incoming traffic just because you're not a car and are not obliged to stop, and pull off all kinds of dumb maneuvers around the cars to get through the traffic, or even ride too far off from the curb and interfering with the regular traffic... well, guess what. You either get hurt in the process by the car drivers who are not expecting you to do dumb sh1t like that, or you obey the rules like we all do and nobody gets hurt.
Is that too much to ask?
And then there is the issue of unsafe roads. I don't know what the road near Kennedy and Sheppard is like (accident with teen on bike), but the area of Dufferin the car/bike accident happened is totally unsafe for bike riders. There is no way that I (an experienced rider in TO for almost 20 years) would ride on the road there. Of course, I would also avoid being up in that area on my bike in the first place, but sometimes there isn't a safe route option when biking from one place to another. I call it Dufferin Highway. I drive a car too, and avoid Dufferin even when driving.
I pay $1,400 a year in insurance that, along with air bags, ABS, etc, protects my interests when I drive the mean streets of Toronto. This is what I do to protect my safety and my family.
Those who cycle on the same by-ways do not have the same vested interests in protecting their own safety. Rather, they demand others cede to their 'rights.' As usual, it results in the 'dumbing down' of everyone else's rights.
Any child knows that driving a bicycle on a road is dangerous - or do we not teach our children that these days? Yes, everyone must be diligent, but cyclists need to be more diligent because it is their own life that is in jeopardy. A damaged fender cannot compare to a life, obviously.
So, motorists are mandated to take driver's exams, pass courses, pay exorbitant insurance until they 'prove' they drive responsibly and if they do all of this, they then have 'earned' their right to use the roadway. If cyclists expect the same rights, then why should they be treated any different?
OR IS THIS, INDEED, A TW0-TIER SOCIETY?
I don't get the objections here. I pay thousands of dollars a year, above and beyond my normal taxes, for the privilege of using our (crappy) roads, but cyclists expect a free ride: no insurance, no plates, no license fees - hell, they can even tie up in front of the Eaton Center for free if they want - and that's great for them. However, if our roads are grossly over-crowded (and they are) and cyclists are demanding their 'fair share,' then should cyclists not invest the same amount of time, effort and money if they are to get the same rights? If I run a red light or a stop sign, I can get demerit points and watch my insurance double - a hefty disincentive, indeed. I witness cyclists whizz through stop signs every day, and I can't say I blame them (especially at the bottom of a hill), but equal rights demands equal responsibilitys. No 'ifs' 'ands' or 'buts.'
I mean, c'mon - we are all adults. Can an adult not see that cycling, other than on a park trail, is inherently dangerous? Why would anyone willingly subject themselves to that every day? Exercise? (I don't see a lot of fit cyclists, incidentally!) Carbon footprint? (That is still hotly debated.) Cost savings? (Well, only because they get to use the roads for free.) Time savings? (Rarely.) Feeling good? (Not as evidenced from the fear and anger I read on these pages.) So what gives?
I tried it for 2 or 3 (summer) months along King St. 25 years ago (when it was all Massey Ferguson empty lands!) and decided my life was too important so I went back to the TTC, then bought a car. Of course, I could have ranted and raved that my 'rights' were being infringed upon and demanded bicycle lanes everywhere, but I reasoned that cycling was a fun weekend exercise and not serious transportation.
Of course, I guess this makes all too much sense. I want to create a photo essay and call it 'The Intersection of Wellesley/Sherbourne' to show how ridiculous two major empty bicycle lanes are in August, let alone January.
Flame away.
There hasn't been much clarification on what you're trying to get across, for me at least, nor much in the way of understanding what I was saying I feel, so this is it for me (after this. The other thing wasn't flaming either, just so you know).
So, I am just not sure what you're trying to say here. You start off with how cyclists should have a licensing system etc, and end with OH GOD HOW COULD ANYONE ENJOY BIKING, IT'S SO HORRIBLE! OH GOD! If you actually believe the (counter)arguments you give for cycling, then man, I don't think anyone could convince you otherwise.
Okay. Maybe I'll try.
1) So, bikes are not inherently dangerous. The chance of me dying while, say, biking down an empty country road made only for cyclists is right up there with my chance of having an ACME anvil fall on my animated body.
2) Cars and factories and lots of other things create greenhouse gases, and the levels have increased drastically since the 1700's, or around the time of the industrial era. It is a sure thing, and specifically since about 2007 scientists have said that things people do (like have too many cars on the road) is what is causing global warming. Science is a real thing.
3) The other ones are kinda funny. What can I say? If you think all these people who bike don't like biking and are just unfit, fearful...wealthy (?) people then, I don't know, I guess you just have not seen a lot of cyclists, nor do you have any knowledge about the cycling community. Nor do you probably go downtown that much, which explains a lot.
You wrote: "Any child knows that driving a bicycle on a road is dangerous - or do we not teach our children that these days? Yes, everyone must be diligent, but cyclists need to be more diligent because it is their own life that is in jeopardy."
I like how you mention later that these pages are filled with fear and anger, when there is so much more fear just oozing out of everything you write. Catch-phrases! Like "protect my family"!
You logic for the 2nd part--I give it a thumbs down. Of course cyclists have to be diligent and careful, because we are more vulnerable on out shield-less vehicle of doom (as you'd have it it seems) but the reason we are in more danger is because of cars. That is just a fact, not even a rail against them! You open your door without looking=we die. So maybe you guys should be careful and "diligent".
How is it not valid transportation? I gets people from A to B, plus it's a lovely way to see the city, it is good exercise, it costs less than driving (why, all the things you said weren't true!); it doesn't create greenhouse gases and contribute to global warming AKA A-BIG-DEAL-seriously-please-look-it-up. Plus you don't need to search for parking, you can have baskets and panniers and those cart things behind to carry stuff... Pretty much awesome, is the verdict there.
Now, I realize that your life and mine are so drastically different that this seems mind-boggling, but maybe something in all these terrifying, scary ideas of ways things can be different will get through.
Maybe we should be nicer to cyclists so they aren't so sad and angry. Give them some space on the road, not yell at them for every little thing, and on special occasions make a lane just for them – so they can bike freely without fear of death or persecution. That should cheer them up. Afterall they pay taxes too.