Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-10-15, 03:02 PM   #76
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 24,864
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
I suppose we should just not bother responding to the questions asked over and over again on the safety forum... after all, apparently without "credible support" such things just don't matter and those newbies should just find out for themselves.

BTW it appears that there is at least some form of credible support regarding the potential risk of portable electronic devices while cycling...
The use and risk of portable electronic devices while cycling among different age groups C. Goldenbeld a, ⁎, M. Houtenbos a , E. Ehlers b , D. De Waard c
Journal of Safety Research, 11 January 2012

But hey, perhaps you should investigate it and then deny their statistical methods or something.
I read the abstract, nothing there to read about their statistical methods and it appears the method used is strictly a questionnaire and the main research questions concerned age differences in the self-reported use of electronic devices while cycling, self-reported crash involvement and risk, and self-reported compensatory behavior. Again the same old creaky study bugaboo arises about measuring risk based only on number of undefined "crashes" (self reported ones at that) with no regards for injury severity. The abstract specified "electronic devices", not listening to devices with headphones. Presumably a goodly number of electronic devices are cell phones which users likely do not use with headphones.
And then there is the little item that the questionnaire only dealt with NL and may or may not have any relevance at all to North American cyclists on North American MUPs or anywhere else in North America.

Have YOU read it? What "obvious truth" was confirmed or revealed to you?
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 03:13 PM   #77
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 24,864
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 350htrr View Post
I would expect him to stay right, but if he doesn't hear me because of the headphones he could meander left instead of right to avoid a rock, glass, pothole, because he doesn't know/isn't aware that I am passing... What are the chances? I don't know, but the chance is certainly there...
And if any cyclist does hear the "on your left" refrain what are the chances he could meander left in response? Or cyclists (or pedestrians) on a MUP, with or without headphones, might meander any which way at any time whether they are aware of other cyclists or not.

If comments and posts on BF reveal any "obvious truth" it is that pedestrians and cyclists do not necessarily respond to bicycling jargon or speedy cyclists' "communications" as intended.

Cyclists who want to pass safely on crowded MUPS have the responsibility to give sufficient lateral clearance to others and adjust speed accordingly and not depend on "communications" to shave the clearance distance to make high probability unsafe passes.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 03:16 PM   #78
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 25,330
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2062 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
I read the abstract, nothing there to read about their statistical methods and it appears the method used is strictly a questionnaire and the main research questions concerned age differences in the self-reported use of electronic devices while cycling, self-reported crash involvement and risk, and self-reported compensatory behavior. Again the same old creaky study bugaboo arises about measuring risk based only on number of undefined "crashes" (self reported ones at that) with no regards for injury severity. The abstract specified "electronic devices", not listening to devices with headphones. Presumably a goodly number of electronic devices are cell phones which users likely do not use with headphones.
And then there is the little item that the questionnaire only dealt with NL and may or may not have any relevance at all to North American cyclists on North American MUPs or anywhere else in North America.

Have YOU read it? What "obvious truth" was confirmed or revealed to you?
Didn't have to read it... didn't care one bit about the stats or lack thereof... my opinion about this whole thing was expressed in post 52...
Headphones & Cycling? well after you jumped in on the first page and started with your typical denial style.

Hey... if it isn't obvious to you that trying to walk and chew gum can be distracting to some people... then SFW. But it IS the truth... Is it something to worry about... only if you are one of those easily distracted people.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 03:25 PM   #79
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 24,864
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post

Hey... if it isn't obvious to you that trying to walk and chew gum can be distracting to some people... then SFW. But it IS the truth... Is it something to worry about... only if you are one of those easily distracted people.
I have no doubt that some of the safety nannys are driven by their own inability to simultaneously chew gum and walk or ride a bike or a fear that somebody/somewhere might not be able to handle this task.

Is that a good reason why everybody/anybody else should refrain from a relatively safe activity?
Care to define "SFW"?
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 04:02 PM   #80
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 24,864
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
Didn't have to read it... didn't care one bit about the stats or lack thereof...
Of course you don't care, just quote some stats or a reference to some study somewhere and it is irrelevant if it has any relevance or not if the intent is to impress another know-nothing; or just don't bother with stats or evidence or references or facts or anything else that may give credence to your "obvious truths" about bicycling safety. Just state the "obvious truth" with the certainty that self appointed bicycling safety experts exude.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 05:08 PM   #81
kickstart
Senior Member
 
kickstart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Posts: 5,445
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 376 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
What exactly do you expect a headphone wearing cyclist who is riding to the right on an MUT or bike facility to do after being "communicated to" by a speedier cyclist approaching from behind?
Nothing specifically, the point of communicating is so they're aware of anothers intentions to avoid any possible conflict or surprise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
What additional responsibility would you like to assign to that already "safe cyclist"?
To do whats necessary to facilitate the responsibilities of others to share public resources on a safe and equitable basis. Being members of a somewhat civilized society, it would be nice if they would exercise some basic common courtesy by acknowledging their awareness, rather than their right to be a curmudgeon, forcing others to play a guessing game with them.


BTW, even us slow, cautious cyclists do encounter others who are even slower, the desire to sometimes pass another isn't limited to "speedy" cyclists.
kickstart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 05:17 PM   #82
350htrr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Canada, PG BC
Bikes: 27 speed oryx with over 38,000Km on it, 10,000Km with a BionX assist on it
Posts: 2,929
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 474 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
And if any cyclist does hear the "on your left" refrain what are the chances he could meander left in response? Or cyclists (or pedestrians) on a MUP, with or without headphones, might meander any which way at any time whether they are aware of other cyclists or not.

If comments and posts on BF reveal any "obvious truth" it is that pedestrians and cyclists do not necessarily respond to bicycling jargon or speedy cyclists' "communications" as intended.

Cyclists who want to pass safely on crowded MUPS have the responsibility to give sufficient lateral clearance to others and adjust speed accordingly and not depend on "communications" to shave the clearance distance to make high probability unsafe passes.
Don't know, but if I was a betting man I would bet the odds are most cyclists understand... Now pedestrians...? I have actually had more than one move left... But not yet a cyclist...
350htrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 05:22 PM   #83
NoviceJohn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Orlando, FL
Bikes:
Posts: 184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Earbud on right ear to hear people coming from behind when riding alone
No earbuds when riding in a group
NoviceJohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 05:35 PM   #84
kickstart
Senior Member
 
kickstart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Posts: 5,445
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 376 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 350htrr View Post
I would expect him to stay right, but if he doesn't hear me because of the headphones he could meander left instead of right to avoid a rock, glass, pothole, because he doesn't know/isn't aware that I am passing... What are the chances? I don't know, but the chance is certainly there...
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoviceJohn View Post
Earbud on right ear to hear people coming from behind when riding alone
No earbuds when riding in a group
Th question of headphones is like "taking the lane", in reality its the how, when, and where, plus the attitude of who's doing it that makes all the difference.
Those who understand they're sharing a public resource, and are willing to make compromises in their desires are not the problem. The problem is those who dig their heels in, "taking", "controlling", "blinding", or "insulating" as they see fit in their space on the road, with the demand that others deal with it on their terms.

It stands to reason that if these acts were always entirely benign and reasonable as a few claim, others wouldn't take exception to it.

Sharing takes "we", not just "me".

Last edited by kickstart; 05-10-15 at 05:38 PM.
kickstart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 05:53 PM   #85
350htrr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Canada, PG BC
Bikes: 27 speed oryx with over 38,000Km on it, 10,000Km with a BionX assist on it
Posts: 2,929
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 474 Post(s)
I think this topic is exactly the same as the helmet topic, depending what side you look at the odds...

1; You increase the chance of bad things happening if you wear headphones...
2; The chance is so small that it doesn't need to be considered...
350htrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 06:12 PM   #86
catonec 
Senior Member
 
catonec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: burlington VT.
Bikes:
Posts: 2,472
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus_Ti View Post
I don't see it as heated at all......

5 pages later...... not heated at all.
__________________
2010 Kestrel RT900SL, 800k carbon, chorus/record, speedplay, zonda
1997 Trek ZX6000, 6061w/manitou spyder, xt/xtr, time atac
catonec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 07:32 PM   #87
NoviceJohn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Orlando, FL
Bikes:
Posts: 184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kickstart View Post
Th question of headphones is like "taking the lane", in reality its the how, when, and where, plus the attitude of who's doing it that makes all the difference.
Those who understand they're sharing a public resource, and are willing to make compromises in their desires are not the problem. The problem is those who dig their heels in, "taking", "controlling", "blinding", or "insulating" as they see fit in their space on the road, with the demand that others deal with it on their terms.

It stands to reason that if these acts were always entirely benign and reasonable as a few claim, others wouldn't take exception to it.

Sharing takes "we", not just "me".
I have no idea what you're talking about lol
NoviceJohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 07:57 PM   #88
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 24,864
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kickstart View Post
Being members of a somewhat civilized society, it would be nice if they would exercise some basic common courtesy by acknowledging their awareness, rather than their right to be a curmudgeon, forcing others to play a guessing game with them.
Is this civilized common courtesy responsibility related to the responsibility to wave at every stranger who rides a bicycle so that they don't get a case of heinie-hurt??
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 08:16 PM   #89
AlmostTrick
Yabba-Dabba-Doo!
 
AlmostTrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bedrock, IL
Bikes: 1968 Schwinn Orange Krate, 5 speed stick shift
Posts: 5,341
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 310 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SB739 View Post
As I get into cycling, I've been wondering if it's safe to have earphones in whilst cycling.

What are some of your opinions as you are all more experienced than me?

I have a nice pair of B&W C5 Series 2's which I'd love to enjoy on the bike!
My opinion is wearing headphones while cycling increases risk of crash and injury to some degree. How much, and whether or not this increase is acceptable is up to the individual to decide.
AlmostTrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 08:19 PM   #90
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 24,864
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 350htrr View Post
I think this topic is exactly the same as the helmet topic, depending what side you look at the odds...

1; You increase the chance of bad things happening if you wear headphones...
2; The chance is so small that it doesn't need to be considered...
True, every physical activity involves incurring some degree of risk, even the decision to avoid a physical activity. Mounting a bike and riding down the road, street, MUP, what have you increases the chance of bad things happening on a bike.

Managing risk is based on evaluating the probabilities of various negative events occurring and the likely results if a negative event should occur, then making appropriate decisions. This evaluation does not need to be a formalized procedure and most intelligent people can make these decisions quite well without the assistance of safety nannys braying away with their hyperbolic rhetoric and clichéd safety advice based on exaggerated risk factors/probabilities and unfounded "obvious truths."
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 09:16 PM   #91
AlmostTrick
Yabba-Dabba-Doo!
 
AlmostTrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bedrock, IL
Bikes: 1968 Schwinn Orange Krate, 5 speed stick shift
Posts: 5,341
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 310 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
True, every physical activity involves incurring some degree of risk, even the decision to avoid a physical activity. Mounting a bike and riding down the road, street, MUP, what have you increases the chance of bad things happening on a bike.

Managing risk is based on evaluating the probabilities of various negative events occurring and the likely results if a negative event should occur, then making appropriate decisions. This evaluation does not need to be a formalized procedure and most intelligent people can make these decisions quite well without the assistance of safety nannys braying away with their hyperbolic rhetoric and clichéd safety advice based on exaggerated risk factors/probabilities and unfounded "obvious truths."
Most intelligent people can also make appropriate decisions without the assistance of conclusive studies which are not even available.
AlmostTrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 09:27 PM   #92
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 24,864
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlmostTrick View Post
Most intelligent people can also make appropriate decisions without the assistance of conclusive studies which are not even available.
That is quite true. My point has been all along that some of our well meaning but misguided safety nanny pals are trying to influence other people's decisions by blowing smoke and fabricating facts with no regards for accuracy about comparative risks and alleged dangers of various cycling activities.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 09:35 PM   #93
kickstart
Senior Member
 
kickstart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Posts: 5,445
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 376 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 350htrr View Post
I think this topic is exactly the same as the helmet topic, depending what side you look at the odds...

1; You increase the chance of bad things happening if you wear headphones...
2; The chance is so small that it doesn't need to be considered...
There is a difference in scope. Not wearing a helmet only effects the individual, being hearing impaired by headphones can also also effect others.

Amusing yet disgusting anecdotal example,
A headphone wearing jogger who is unaware a cyclist is passing* decides to launch a snot rocket and hits said cyclist in the leg.




*safely, at an appropriate distance and speed.
kickstart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 09:49 PM   #94
kickstart
Senior Member
 
kickstart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Posts: 5,445
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 376 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
That is quite true. My point has been all along that some of our well meaning but misguided safety nanny pals are trying to influence other people's decisions by blowing smoke and fabricating facts with no regards for accuracy about comparative risks and alleged dangers of various cycling activities.
No matter how you slice it, your claims are in direct conflict with personal experiences to the contrary, and no amount of bluster will change that.


If your claim was that it can be done safely if thought and effort is put into it, there would be little argument. The thing is, your presentation is that considering the reasons why one should refrain from, or be selective about how, and where its done makes one a "misguided safety nanny". That is nothing more than denial, and a patent falsehood.

Last edited by kickstart; 05-10-15 at 09:58 PM.
kickstart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-15, 10:17 PM   #95
keyven
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Singapore
Bikes: Fully customized 11-spd MTB built on 2014 Santa Cruz 5010 frame; Brompton S2E-X 2014; Brompton M3E 2014
Posts: 1,128
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
What is "accuracy"? How does one formulate an optimal universal cycling strategy between state to state or even area to area?

Given that traffic conditions, road quality, driver attitudes, etc can vary greatly, how does one ever reach an acceptable consensus based on a hodgepodge of "he says, she says"?

Shouldn't most people encourage the inquirer to play it safe and stick to the rules unless they're (intimately) familiar with the route in question?
keyven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-15, 04:52 AM   #96
Robert C
Senior Member
 
Robert C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Salt lake, UT
Bikes: This list got too long: several ‘bents, an urban utility e-bike, and a dahon D7 that my daughter has absconded with.
Posts: 1,920
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 204 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by spare_wheel View Post
Secondly, don't assume that everyone wears helments because they believe they magically eliminate risk of TBI. I wear helments on my commute because I ride very fast and scalp abrasions suck (personal experience).
I wear a helmet when its cold (<30f) because it is warmer.

As far as headphones, like others here, I sometimes wear one in a single ear to listen to the news (morning edition). However, my commute is short so I generally don't bother. On long rides I will sometimes wear headphones.
Robert C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-15, 05:12 AM   #97
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 24,864
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by keyven View Post
What is "accuracy"? How does one formulate an optimal universal cycling strategy between state to state or even area to area?

Given that traffic conditions, road quality, driver attitudes, etc can vary greatly, how does one ever reach an acceptable consensus based on a hodgepodge of "he says, she says"?

Shouldn't most people encourage the inquirer to play it safe and stick to the rules unless they're (intimately) familiar with the route in question?
Some BF posters and A&S posters in specific are afflicted with an unrealistic (and unobtainable) compulsion for providing an "acceptable consensus" answer with an "optimal universal cycling strategy" response to every inquiry.

BF inquirers looking for someone else to make their decisions would be best served with a response along these lines:
It depends on the individual and circumstances and there is no "optimal universal cycling strategy" that applies to your situation. A cyclist might try this way or that way (and this way or that way seems to work OK for the responder) but the inquirer has to use his/her own judgement and make their own decisions.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-15, 06:37 AM   #98
Looigi
Senior Member
 
Looigi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 8,953
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
FWIW: I like/use Westone UM-1 headphones on the bike. With the right tips they seal well and really decrease wind noise. You can adjust volume to a low comfortable level while stationary and still hear it fine when riding at speed.
Looigi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-15, 07:00 AM   #99
rydabent
Senior Member
 
rydabent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Cruiser
Posts: 6,200
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 495 Post(s)
To the pro ear bud users I ask, dont you just love the jogger or biker right in the middle of the trail that cant hear your call "on your left"?

Further, as far as safety goes, my ears and my rear view mirror are my primary safety devices. With sight and sound, I hold myself instantly ready to take to the ditch. Drunk drivers, and fools texting are all around us, and we need to be ready to take action at a moments notice.
rydabent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-15, 08:33 AM   #100
AlmostTrick
Yabba-Dabba-Doo!
 
AlmostTrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bedrock, IL
Bikes: 1968 Schwinn Orange Krate, 5 speed stick shift
Posts: 5,341
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 310 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
That is quite true. My point has been all along that some of our well meaning but misguided safety nanny pals are trying to influence other people's decisions by blowing smoke and fabricating facts with no regards for accuracy about comparative risks and alleged dangers of various cycling activities.
Fair enough, and I hear ya.

Thankfully, BF also has a special police task force that seems quite happy monitoring said safety nannies… tirelessly pointing out their infractions in a never ending attempt to keep them in line. Eh, I suppose someone has to do it. Thank you, Sir!
AlmostTrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:54 PM.


 
  • Ask a Question
    get answers from real people!
Click to start entering your question.
I HAVE A QUESTION