Originally Posted by John C. Ratliff
Really, it does not matter what I respect. This is happening, and I simply wanted you to be aware of it. Singapore has some very different laws, and I do not necessarily want those laws here (something about caning and spitting). But at the same time, this thread was about the science of bike lane advocacy. If this is published and available, it is better for you to know about it than not to know about it. Saying it is "irrelevant" does not make it go away, and people in Singapore may have to live with decisions made, and not necessarily in a democratic manner, concerning bicycling in that country.
Now for the other question; since Singapore has no bicycle infrastructure, why are they having problems with bicycle injuries. It seems that alcohol is a major problem, and on the helmet thread we are discussing whether cyclists riding after drinking should also be factored into the equations. It was suggested there that alcohol is a problem for cycling in Canada and probably also in the USA, so perhaps this could explain some of the accident statistics we see.
John
Actually John, you have a valid point... why is vehicular cycling not "flourishing" in that country? Why should bike lanes even be considered? Singapore is a country of high control and disipline, it would seem that their drivers could be mandated to properly follow the rules of the road which should be an inducement to cyclists to ride perfectly vehicularly without even facing "motorist superiority" issues.
Vehicular cycling should work perfectly in such an environment... and yet there is a suggestion for bike lanes... why would such a foolish notion even arise?