Chris L

This issue really has been done to death on these boards and elsewhere, and it will never be properly resolved here because you're dealing with egos, and egos refuse to "lose" the argument. On the one hand you have the "vehicular cycling" types, who have learned how to use the roadways and interact with traffic, but don't want to accept that there are others who can't/won't do that for whatever reason. On the other hand, you have the "separated path" types, who think that because they have a conveniently located path, and the time to use it, that everyone else has the same luxury. In a sense, both types are a lot like religious zealots who have just discovered their "true path", and automatically regard everyone else's ideas as lunacy regardless of whatever "proof" is put before them. Just go and look at the VC sub forum, and see how many people there (on both sides) have been posting the same crap year in and year out.

I've ventured to a few different countries on various continents in recent years, and have seen it from both sides. In the real world, people who really want to ride a bike will find a way, regardless of whatever infrastructure is put there. People who don't want to ride will find a reason not to, again, regardless of whatever infrastructure is put there (or not put there). In the real world, we aren't as hide-bound as we appear on this forum. I've ridden on bike paths before -- I did it on occasion in Europe last year. The issue here for me is simply one of time. Last year in Europe I was on holiday, and had time to do it. When I'm riding to work, or riding to a doctor's appointment, or to an airport, I don't have time to do it. It's that simple. If I lived in the Netherlands or somewhere like that, I'd probably just buy a car for those trips, and save the bike for recreation. Now I don't particularly care if the segregationists get their facilities. Hey, let them be the judge of how dangerous the situation is, and we'll see who's still riding in 10 years' time. What does irritate me, is when these segregationists try to legislate the rest of us off the roads because they perceive a danger in some place they've never ridden before.

There are only two things that will actually motivate someone to ride a bike. Either some basic desire to do it, or the other options somehow becoming less attractive than they once were. Contrary to apparently popular belief, building or removing "facilities" won't actually influence these factors. A rise in fuel prices (as we've seen in recent years) might, and this is probably what accounts for the "almost doubling" if cycling numbers that some people in this thread have cited. The idea that people will simply turn up if you build a bike path has never been conclusively proven, and as I said before, I really have the ego to care whether another 0.4% of the population feel the need to get on a bike.

The real issue here as far as Living Car Free is concerned (isn't that the name of this sub forum?), is whether people can actually use their bike to get from A to B. From the looks of this thread, it appears as though some of the people who "advocate" the loudest for car free living are also the ones who want to pass legislation to make it more problematic just so they can have their recreational paths.