Originally Posted by Helmet Head
This is pissing me off because it's personal. Both of my parents are in their mid 80s and are pure folk cyclists. My Dad is too blind to ride in the streets vehicularly. I resent the implication that I advocate for something ignores people like my parents.
So, please explain, what is it that "folk cyclists" need, that needs advocacy, and is not part of VC advocacy. If you can't explain this, then please stop making these statements with absurd assumptions that I find offensive.
Sorry, dude, I certainly didn't have you in mind when I wrote that. I'm not aware of any VCers being against "folk cyclists," I was responding to Dianes's assertion that this has happened. I went on to say that I have read negative comments on other forums. I do believe that many folk cyclists in my area (and that would be the vast majority of cyclists in my area) find most safety lectures to be unnecessary. Most of them do their best to avoid all motor traffic. I'm sure that VC training would be beneficial to them, but they probably aren't interested, and that's their option. Again sorry that I inadvertantly offended you or your parents!
There are areas of interest to "folk cyclists" that advocates ignore. Many folk cyclists ride poorly fitted and maintained bicycles. This can be a major cause of cyclist injuries. Their bikes are often poorly equipped, lacking lights, reflectors, helmets, even brakes.