Cyclists, share rules, costs II
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Friday, April 26, 2013, 8:57 p.m.
I read with interest the news story “Filling gap in Great Allegheny Passage could bring more cyclists to Pittsburgh” regarding bicycle riders requesting barricades be built to separate lanes for bike-only use. I'm not a bicyclist, but I'm all for it as long as those requesting this pay for the construction.
I'm reminded that I pay an annual registration for my car and a certain amount of tax, every time I purchase a gallon of gas, to be used to construct, repair and improve roadways.
Tell me what the bicyclist pays to use existing roadways. I'm thinking zero!
Yet we all have to abide by the demands of those riders who, in many cases, disregard stop signs, red lights and established transportation laws simply because they don't feel those apply to them.
So, you bicyclists want hundreds of thousands of dollars spent to keep you safe and away from motorized vehicular traffic? Get off your wallets and quit expecting everyone else to pay for your wish list!
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Lebo’s coyotes
- Saved her life
- About U.S. media
- We pay to keep poor warm
- Conspicuous by absence
- Corbett’s budget claim
- Apollo-Ridge excellence
- Beneficial, irreplaceable
- Orwellian redefinitions
- Behavior counts
- Keep Laurel Point