The Logging Truck

I usually ride my bike early when temperatures here in South Carolina are still tolerable. On the rural roads I ride on, I encounter quite a few logging trucks, probably one of the heaviest loads to be found on the roads anywhere.
The reason for these logging trucks being, any undeveloped land in this part of the South is coved with dense forest with many old growth trees. The first steps to clearing the land for development, is to cut down the trees and transport them to a local paper mill.
Riding with my wife the other morning, I was aware of a logging truck coming up from the rear. The sound of the engine is unmistakable. This one was slowing. I could tell by the deep descending note roar the engine made as the driver shifted down his gears. At least three separate gear changes to get down to our speed of about 18 mph. or so.
The reason for his slowing. There was a steam of opposing traffic, maybe six or eight cars, and the driver obviously didn’t think it safe to pass. Actually he could have passed, this was a wide stretch of road, with a bike lane. (Which we were in.)
Instead this driver chose to err on the side of caution and wait, and I appreciated that. When the opposing traffic passed and the road was clear, I heard the engine rev as the process of shifting up through the gears to regain speed started. The driver took his truck clear over to the opposing lane to pass.
I gave the driver a thank you wave to let him know that I was aware of what he had just done, and how much I appreciated it. He gave a friendly “Toot-toot” on his incredibly loud truck horn, as if to say “You’re welcome.”
My wife remarked, “Now that’s what I call sharing the road.” “Damn right,” I replied.”
Rights and Privileges
As cycling becomes more and more popular, more people choose to ride a bike to work each day rather than drive. We start to hear calls for cyclists to be licensed, or a tax imposed, in the same way automobile drivers are licensed and taxed.
The idea of licensing cyclists usually comes from city governments rather than on a state or national level. The argument is usually along the lines that bike lanes and other facilities cost money, and it only seems fair that cyclists should pay some of this cost.
However, in practical terms any attempt to tax or license cyclists in the past has always turned out to be a bureaucratic nightmare. It always costs more to implement such a plan than the income generated. Plus law enforcement and the court system has to then impose fines on those not having a license.
Sidewalks have been in place in cities everywhere since before the beginning of the last century, and no one has ever suggested that pedestrians should pay for sidewalks. Sidewalks make it safer to walk, bike lanes make it safer to ride a bicycle. And anyway revenues from drivers’ licenses or even road taxes do not pay for roads. So really that should be the end of that argument.
When automobiles first appeared there were no laws or regulations, you could simply buy a car, jump in and drive it. Pretty much in the same way as we can buy a bicycle today and ride it anywhere.
Later because of wholesale carnage on the roads, laws were passed and licenses issued to drivers. As a result, driving is a privilege, one that can be taken away, whereas cycling like walking is a right. Although cyclists and pedestrians are still subject to the laws of the road. It appears no one can be prevented from walking or riding a bike, even if they break the law.
So what is a right? There are so called God given rights, but as people have the right to choose whether they believe in God or not, how does that work? If you don't believe in God, do you not have any God given rights? Are you obliged to respect other people's God given rights? As it is, the only God given right I can think of is our right to live.
If you look at The Bill of Rights there are very few actual rights. I don’t see a right to ride a bicycle mentioned. There is the right to bear arms, the right to practice a religion of your choice, etc.
After that it appears the function of government (In theory anyway.) is to leave us alone, and we are free to do as we please as long as we follow certain laws wherever they apply. It appears to me that rights are rarely granted, they are simply taken for granted. Is riding a bicycle on the highway is a prime example this?
I know to even suggest such a thing will cause outrage among a great many cyclists, but before we all get our anti-bacterial padded shorts in a twist, let’s think about this. In recent years cell phones have become available and some assume it is their right to own one and talk and send text messages whenever they please, including while driving.
It turns out this is not such a good idea so in some places this practice is being outlawed. Have people lost a right, or was it just an assumed right in the first place?
A few years ago, people had the right to smoke just about anywhere they pleased. However, that right infringed on everyone else’s right not to breathe secondhand smoke. So, now that right has gradually been taken away, and smokers are now privileged to smoke in fewer and fewer places.
Because riding a bicycle on public roads is for the most part not a danger to other road users, it is doubtful than anyone will stop us doing it. Cycling is a good idea. It cuts down on congestion in our cities, it is better for the environment, and it should be encouraged because it is good for the physical and mental well-being of the participant.
My question is, are there any true rights or privileges? Or is this just an ongoing daily debate among millions of people, on the streets, on the talk shows and in the courtrooms? We all have certain rights, and we get to keep them as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others. If they do we may lose those rights, it is happening all the time.
In which case there is little difference between rights and privileges, either can be taken away. We should all remember this and in particular those cyclists who blatantly and regularly flout the laws of the road.