The Chainlink

New state law makes it a crime to drive close to bicyclists

Active Trans is excited to pass on the news that yesterday the IL Senate passed a law that makes it a crime to drive unnecessarily close to, near or toward a bicyclist, pedestrian, or person riding a
horse, or driving an animal driven vehicle.

This law, in conjunction with the state’s three-feet passing law for bicyclists, will continue to clarify safety issues for enforcers.

The full text is here

Thank you to state Sen. Ira Silverstein who championed this bill.  


Thanks, Ethan, with Active Trans

Views: 95

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by spacemodular on March 19, 2010 at 11:52pm
Maybe he is riding his bike, willy nilly to a "tea party"?
Permalink Reply by Joe TV on March 19, 2010 at 11:53pm
A bit of an aside here - but I just had a thought - what will the world be like when we all have our personal equivalent of "dash cams" - cams that roll constantly that can be referred back to for legal, or other reasons. I don't think it's too far off. Just act natural.

File under: Things that make you go hmmmm.

Matt M. said:
Do you have a helmet cam I can borrow? I'd snag at least 10 violators by next Friday.
Permalink Reply by Craig S. on March 20, 2010 at 8:07am
Excellent, H3N3, an internet argument and ad hominem attack. Didn't I read you in a discussion not long ago decrying the lack of civility displayed towards others with differing opinions? I seem to recall it in a discussion about the last North Side Critical Mass which I thought was kind of fun.

I don't believe I cited anywhere what you're claiming I might believe, it's interesting you can divine all that info from your computer screen. Nor did I mention anything demeaning towards cyclists rights or cycling advocacy, I was berating our wonderful state government and musing on the enforcement of the 3 foot ruling.

More laws are not going to protect any of us from the douche-tastic drunk Cubs fans who try to run riders off the road with their Hummers (I speak from personal experience). It's up to the individual rider through their riding skillset and situational awareness to protect themselves and be the best cycling ambassador to any motorists we encounter. Education of drivers and riders seems to me to be more important than another law that brings us closer to a nanny state, however, this is an exercise in futility as there are just as many dim-witted douchebags on two wheels as there are driving 4 wheels.

Just my opinion and again, your mileage may vary.

H3N3 said:
If Craig finds the strength to enjoy his cycling by pretending cyclists never die on Illinois roads, and that he is immune from ending up under a car because he wears a little helmet mirror or carries a rabbit's foot blessed by Lance, I say let him.
Permalink Reply by Bob Kastigar on March 20, 2010 at 8:53am
Craig S. said:
I should think that our esteemed state government could be spending their valuable time debating other more pressing issues, like this state's crushing debt load and unemployment.

Choosing between being dead and being in debt, I think I'd rather be in debt.

Now we're complaining about the legislature passing traffic laws?
Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on March 20, 2010 at 10:11am
Not taking sides here, but a bit of civility can go a long way towards keeping this forum a better experience for all of us. Just sayin......
Permalink Reply by Duppie on March 20, 2010 at 2:54pm
Can someone explain why this bill is needed? Is the 3-foot law not working? Will this bill give us additional security on top of that 3-foot law?
I'm not a legal expert, so I'm wondering what the difference is.
Permalink Reply by Brendan Kevenides on March 20, 2010 at 3:58pm
The new bill adds criminal penalties, including making it a felony to pass close to a cyclist where doing so causes serious injury.

Duppie said:
Can someone explain why this bill is needed? Is the 3-foot law not working? Will this bill give us additional security on top of that 3-foot law? I'm not a legal expert, so I'm wondering what the difference is.
Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on March 20, 2010 at 3:11pm
The problem with posts like this is that the people you're addressing are always going to think you're directing your lecture at the other guy. They don't really add anything except declaring a fight has broken out where there really is none.

Anne Alt said:
Not taking sides here, but a bit of civility can go a long way towards keeping this forum a better experience for all of us. Just sayin......
Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on March 20, 2010 at 3:17pm
I'm a bit baffled at some of the questions here. Maybe I'm missing something but I think most can be easily answered by reading the first post from Active Trans and clicking on and reading the bill text?

Duppie said:
Can someone explain why this bill is needed? Is the 3-foot law not working? Will this bill give us additional security on top of that 3-foot law?
I'm not a legal expert, so I'm wondering what the difference is.
Permalink Reply by Dr. Doom on March 20, 2010 at 3:17pm
I tend to think vague, redundant laws like this are actively harmful because legislators can point to their support for them as evidence of their commitment to the 'cycling community' while demurring on more effective measures that might actually interfere with drivers. A law is just a law—I mean, it's illegal to fish while sitting on a giraffe's neck in Chicago—and I can't think of a reason why making it illegal to drive like a douchebag would make a single person not do so.
Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on March 20, 2010 at 3:20pm
Dunno, it looks pretty specific to me.
One of our problems is that a lot of what we think is clearly criminal is actually not chargeable under any specific law-- I'm glad someone is doing the work to make sure those laws are on the books so there are actual legal consequences to purposely endangering a cyclist.

Dr. Doom said:
I tend to think vague, redundant laws like this are actively harmful because legislators can point to their support for them as evidence of their commitment to the 'cycling community' while demurring on more effective measures that might actually interfere with drivers. A law is just a law—I mean, it's illegal to fish while sitting on a giraffe's neck in Chicago—and I can't think of a reason why making it illegal to drive like a douchebag would make a single person not do so.
Permalink Reply by heather s on March 20, 2010 at 3:51pm
I think from the beginning, the only way for the 3-foot law to be enforced would be if/when someone hits you. Because then they obviously did not leave you three feet of space. I have actually found it really helpful when I confront a driver who has passed me unsafely (at the next stoplight or something)-- saying, "hey, you need to leave three feet of space when you pass a cyclist, that's the law" sounds better than "hey, that was rude of you to pass so closely." even though both are true.

Cricket said:
Any stats on how effective the 3-foot law is in IL? Where, oh where, is it enforced? Until the police obey and enforce existing laws, I am not going to get excited about yet another law that will do nothing to protect me or other people.

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service