Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 2 of 43 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 1056
  1. #26
    Senior Member gonzohill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    My Bikes
    Surly LHT, Trek never ride it
    Posts
    73
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The point he is making is that the study doesnt say what the dangers are. The average cyclist could be running into light poles and fire hydrants not haveing collisions with cars. However if you have accidents of any type more often in one place than another it might be reasonable to conclude it is more dangerous on the sidewalk!!

  2. #27
    genec genec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    san diego
    My Bikes
    custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
    Posts
    22,534
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by nick burns
    Are there really that many people riding regularly on the sidewalk instead of the road? I've been riding an awfully long time & the only people I see on the sidewalk are kids.
    I think most adults realize that sidewalks were made for pedestians not bicyclists.
    I see a number of sidwalk riders in my area... Not quite a dense urban environment, but a well developed older neighborhood with long standing sidewalks. The streets however tend to be somewhat narrow and the connecting boulevards are 35-45MPH roads with cars parked alongside. The sidewalks tend to run full block lengths often without driveways along the boulevard. I often see sidewalk riders in an around the local shopping center/mall (bigger than your basic shoping center, smaller than the average mall). I see one old guy all the time... riding slowly, smoking cigarettes... obviously in his element.

    A fellow co-worker occasionally rides from my neighborhood to work on his bike on the sidewalks and has expressed that "those guys that ride in the streets are nuts..."

    I prefer the streets, simply because I prefer to go fast.

    I have ridden the sidewalks on occasion on my cruiser bike... but rarely... just to pop down to the store and such... it's fun... and I don't have to change shoes to do it.

    I personally think the biggest danger is the motorists turning into driveways from the street... they don't look much past their destination for anything but autos. For a rider like myself... that is fine... I see the situations setting up, and avoid them. These situations also exist when riding VC on the streets. Motorists do not look for cyclists, and/or underestimate their speeds. Thus "turns into driveways," are probably the biggest danger.

    For a non VC rider or non driver (i.e. kids) they will not see or look for the situations and therefore are in the greatest danger.

    Don't ask for my credentials... just find a busy street near a shopping center and watch some time... see what you see.

  3. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Montreal
    My Bikes
    Peugeot Hybrid, Minelli Hybrid
    Posts
    6,521
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I ride on sidewalks and in the wrong direction on one-way streets at times, but as I know this is more dangerous, I exercise much higher level of care.

  4. #29
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It is against the law in LA County and believe in California to ride your bicycle on a sidewalk let alone in the wrong direction. Anyway, it is way better on the road.

  5. #30
    Sumanitu taka owaci LittleBigMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    8,945
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleBigMan
    I-Like-To-Bike ...
    Please post the scientific studies that justify your position.
    Quote Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
    My position is that by definition a credible analysis of risk REQUIRES evaluation of the probability of mishap/exposure to the mishap(s) AND the severity level of the various mishaps. WITHOUT SEVERITY EVALUATION, you might as well be quoting random numbers; such incomplete raw numbers do NOT provide a basis for evaluating risk, PERIOD. Etc...
    I asked you to post the scientific studies that justify your position. You still have not done that. All you have done is to repeat your position and add detail to it, but the fact that you believe it does not prove it, just like you are fond of saying about those who disagree with you.

    The difference is that they have scientific studies to reference, you do not (yet.)
    No worries

  6. #31
    BikeCop
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    My Bikes
    Specialized Rockhopper
    Posts
    82
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well I for one see benefit to both techniques of cycling. I was trained as a VC rider in a Police Moutain Bike course. I was also trained to use the sidewalks, jump curbs, climb stairs and descend stairs on my bike. These techniques have their place and time.

    When I commute to work on my Patrol MTB I often combine the techniques and keep a watchful eye out. I have 5 lane high speed roads near my house where there are sidewalks on both sides. My MTB is not fast and I also deal with a large number of college students in the area that not only ride the sidewalk but with out helmets and lights at night. When I am on those fast roads at night I much prefer to be on the sidewalk, wearing a helmet and with lots of light. I "feel" safer and aware of the potential downsides. I ride slower than most for the entire commute. 10 to 12 MPH both on sidewalks, trail and roadways.

    There may statistical evidence to indicate such riding has a higher potential of accident but at what point does the risk overcome the benefit. I was trained as a private pilot and realize my chances for death or serious injury is far greater in a car. I drive a lot more than I fly. I also realize that head injuries are the most common cause of death in car accidents but I limit my protection to seatbelts and air bags. Maybe one day I will start wearing a helmet in the car to overcome the statistically significant threat of death due to head injury in a car wreck. Maybe not.

    In my limited exposure to "serious" cycling I have been very happy to find a great group of people that have helped me both professionally and privately with my biking needs. This battle between the "VC" and non "VC" seems to be a little on the extreme side. There is a place where both techniques have a purpose and the cycling community has enough variety to insure it will never run out of arguments.

    Bottom line is this...with out the VC studies (that some have quoted) showing me how the added risk might negatively impact my riding on a sidewalk occasionally (as opposed to simply saying it is more risky) then I will continue to evaluate my own experience and do what I think is safer for me. Even if it means taking on more risk for a better perceived return on personal safety or value.

    Life is a risk in all things and your perception of risk and the return of value will guide your actions.

    For some such as serious roadies with the special shoes and pedals looking for long distance and speed I see VC as being the preferred method but that does not necessarily apply to everyone else. Conditions, equipment and circumstance will always require the need to improvise and make do. Including the need to take on extra risk to meet your objectives or make you “feel” better.

  7. #32
    Been Around Awhile I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Burlington Iowa
    My Bikes
    Vaterland and Ragazzi
    Posts
    19,576
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleBigMan
    I asked you to post the scientific studies that justify your position.
    What dang position are you talking about? That risk can not be credibly measured, assessed or compared by totaling accident events, independent of assessing accident consequences (severity)? That "Studies" relying on such methods are only useful for those wishing to gull others who are clueless (and apparantly proud of it) about risk assessment, risk analysis and/or risk management?

    No study, scientific or otherwise, is necessary to "justify" the observation that such statistical/analytical deception about risk assessment finds fertile ground among so-called cycling safety advocates happy to be duped, as long as the conclusions are in sync with their own. If in doubt just read this thread again.

  8. #33
    Been Around Awhile I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Burlington Iowa
    My Bikes
    Vaterland and Ragazzi
    Posts
    19,576
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by gonzohill
    If you have accidents of any type more often in one place than another it might be reasonable to conclude it is more dangerous on the sidewalk!!
    It would be reasonable to draw that conclusion, IF you ranked/assessed ALL accidents as equal in severity and made no distinction at all about accident effects; i.e. a bent rim or skinned knee accident is identical in consequences to an accident that results in paralysis, crushed internal organs or shattered bones or bodies.

    Though some of the studies, oft quoted by self-appointed VC "safety experts, do use such inadequate methods to categorize risk, no credible safety person would rely on, or even pay attention to, such statistical doo-doo for the purpose of risk analysis/risk management. Obviously, as this thread demonstrates, there are those who are quite content to believe in what they want to believe, regardless of lack of reliable/credible evidence.

  9. #34
    Sumanitu taka owaci LittleBigMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    8,945
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
    What dang position are you talking about? That risk can not be credibly measured, assessed or compared by totaling accident events, independent of assessing accident consequences (severity)? That "Studies" relying on such methods are only useful for those wishing to gull others who are clueless (and apparantly proud of it) about risk assessment, risk analysis and/or risk management?

    No study, scientific or otherwise, is necessary to "justify" the observation that such statistical/analytical deception about risk assessment finds fertile ground among so-called cycling safety advocates happy to be duped, as long as the conclusions are in sync with their own. If in doubt just read this thread again.
    You use so many words to repeat one simple mantra:

    "I am right and everyone who disagrees with me is wrong. The proof that they are wrong is because I am right."

    I don't accept your supporting evidence, because you have none. You just keep repeating that you are right.
    No worries

  10. #35
    Been Around Awhile I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Burlington Iowa
    My Bikes
    Vaterland and Ragazzi
    Posts
    19,576
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleBigMan

    I don't accept your supporting evidence, because you have none.
    LBM's declaration that he is unwilling to "accept" that his favorite "risk" stats are not to be trusted due to the improper/dishonest method used to arrive at them, and that sophomic, sloppy use of the term "risk' doesn't indicate doo-doo to someone not logically impaired, is of little consequence. If LBM prefers to "accept" an apparent belief that understanding risk assessment fundamentals is irrelevant when discussing risk, good for him and he should continue to successfully preach about "risk" (to include statistical gibberish) to those who share in his set of beliefs.
    Last edited by I-Like-To-Bike; 04-21-05 at 03:58 AM.

  11. #36
    JRA
    JRA is offline
    Senior Member JRA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    St. Louis
    Posts
    945
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There is no body of evidence that sidewalk riding is inherently dangerous.

    People can "reference" studies and claim that there's a body of evidence but it simply isn't true. The studies do not show what some people claim they show.

    A statistic doesn't mean a whole lot unless you know how the study was conducted, what population was studied, what data was collected and how it was collected. For example, comparing children who ride on sidewalks to adults who ride on the roads may not be a particularly meaningful comparison. A greater rate of injuries for the first group may be an indication that riding on sidewalks is dangerous but it could just as well be an indication that children who ride bicycles are more prone to accidents than adults who ride bicycles.

    There simply isn't a lot of accurate and meaningful data on sidewalk riding. There's a good deal of evidence that riding on sidepaths is dangerous. I don't dispute that but data from studies of sidepaths says little or nothing about the dangers of riding on sidewalks.

    In particular, there's no significant body of evidence that riding on sidewalks at pedestrian speed is dangerous. People can and many probably will accept the party line on sidewalk riding without questioning it. There are no advocacy groups for sidewalk riders that I'm aware of, so the politically correct (among cyclists) view that sidewalk riding is inherently dangerous will continue to go pretty much unchallenged.

    I'm not advocating sidewalk riding but I am advocating a choice. I'm concerned about laws against sidewalk riding - laws which, ironically, some so-called cycling advocates either favor or don't oppose.

    BTW, I see lots of people riding on sidewalks in some places. Aside from children, I see college students, college professors and the like. (And, yes, the police.) There's nothing particularly dangerous about it. To force them to ride the half mile or so from their apartment to class seems a little unnecessary to me.
    Last edited by JRA; 04-21-05 at 05:58 AM.
    "It may even be that motoring is more healthful than not motoring; death rates were certainly higher in the pre-motoring age."- John Forester
    "Laws cannot be properly understood as if written in plain English..."- Forester defending obfuscation.
    "Motorist propaganda, continued for sixty years, is what has put cyclists on sidewalks." - Forester, sociologist in his own mind
    "'There are no rules of the road on MUPs.' -John Forester" - Helmet Head quoting 'The Great One'

  12. #37
    BikeCop
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    My Bikes
    Specialized Rockhopper
    Posts
    82
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It seems to me that one side (little Big Man for example) is against sidewalk riding due to the "risk" being greater for "accidents" based on published reports indicating this is so. The other side (I-Like-To-Bike, and JRA in that corner) seem to purport that the studies have used flawed methodology to arrive at the conclusions and as such the conclusions are not valid due to statistical infidelity.

    This has caused an argument that I as a new member to the "serious cycling community" do not understand. one side refuses to examine the study for flaws and admit there might be some discrepancies as to how risk is determined while the other does not seem to consider that risk is still risk even if undefined.

    I for one will be happy to concede that maybe sidewalks "Can" be more dangerous but until the risk vs. reward can be shown to infer death or serious bodily injury will be the likely result unless I stay off the sidewalk I tend to support the honorable opposition to the study.

    I agree that side B does not have any need to provide a rebuttal study when the study in question has an obvious bias and does not quantify its results with risk management guidelines.

    If this Internet exchange was designed to show the "VC" way as being the "better way" In my case it has not. it has merely shown me that there are proponents that are dogmatic in their belief structure.

    As for me...The jury is definitely still out. I will continue to use those roads where I in my experience believe myself to be safer and the sidewalks when in my opinion the risk is the lesser of two evils.

  13. #38
    Been Around Awhile I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Burlington Iowa
    My Bikes
    Vaterland and Ragazzi
    Posts
    19,576
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by FotoTomas
    This has caused an argument that I as a new member to the "serious cycling community" do not understand. one side refuses to examine the study for flaws and admit there might be some discrepancies as to how risk is determined while the other does not seem to consider that risk is still risk even if undefined.
    I consider "risk is risk", in the same sense that injuries are injuries; i.e. a skinned knee and a smashed body are both injuries; competent evaluation of injuries AND risk require defining severity. Dogmatists often do not make such distinctions as it might call into question the basis of their rigid beliefs.

  14. #39
    Chairman of the Bored catatonic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    St. Petersburg, FL
    My Bikes
    2004 Raleigh Talus, 2001 Motobecane Vent Noir (Custom build for heavy riders)
    Posts
    5,825
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
    It would be reasonable to draw that conclusion, IF you ranked/assessed ALL accidents as equal in severity and made no distinction at all about accident effects; i.e. a bent rim or skinned knee accident is identical in consequences to an accident that results in paralysis, crushed internal organs or shattered bones or bodies.

    Though some of the studies, oft quoted by self-appointed VC "safety experts, do use such inadequate methods to categorize risk, no credible safety person would rely on, or even pay attention to, such statistical doo-doo for the purpose of risk analysis/risk management. Obviously, as this thread demonstrates, there are those who are quite content to believe in what they want to believe, regardless of lack of reliable/credible evidence.

    Evidence has been presented...it's just easier to wave off anything that's not agreed upon...that's human nature. Heck even when the world was proven to be round, people still didn't beleive it for over a hundred years.

    Now, the proof may not be proving exactly what the person was trying to convey, but it does make a point.

    That point was the chance of incident goes up on a sidewalk...couple that with sidewalks being one of the few places where a cyclist/pedestrian collision is at it's highest, and that's where people start off with this.

    My main gripe is the group that treats the sidewalk like it's a road, and goes 15-20mph down it....part since that is not a bike path...it's apedestrian path....that's akin to someone taking a mototrcycle down the street at 200mph (based on a traffic speed of 50mph) while claiming "well we aren't cars, so we don't have to follow rules".

    Basically there has to be rules of some sort for their sake.....regardless of if any are on the sidewalk or not....road speeds don't vary depending on traffic (school zones are the only exception), and a bicycle is a vehicle.

    To me it has to do with also doing the right thing as well as safety....if the pedestrians feel threatened about someone's speeding bike down the sidewalk...well that person needs to find something other than a sidewalk to use. If the sidewalk is used, ride at a pace that gives plenty of time to deal with pedestrians, and stop at intersections and look both ways. It's at intersections where sidewalks are the most dangerous, since most people just barrel through it without looking...so the driver usually doesn't see them, and POW...it's not the driver's sole fault in that instance...it's both parties...since the rider was not on the road, so they have to check before getting on it, even if just to cross.

    To make it short....sidewalk basically equals driveway....treat crossing the street from a sidewalk as if you were exiting a driveway. It has to do more with preventing an accident than anything else.

  15. #40
    Immoderator KrisPistofferson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    POS Tennessee
    My Bikes
    Gary Fisher Simple City 8, Litespeed Obed
    Posts
    7,596
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In larger cities,(New York, Chicago, LA,) isn't it illegal to ride on the sidewalk? I mean, in Iowa it probably isn't all that much more hazardous, but a metro area is a completely different story. Another example of the intellectual dishonesty some forum members accuse others of perpetrating...
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikeforums
    Your rights end where another poster's feelings begin.

  16. #41
    Sumanitu taka owaci LittleBigMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    8,945
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by FotoTomas
    It seems to me that one side (little Big Man for example) is against sidewalk riding due to the "risk" being greater for "accidents" based on published reports indicating this is so. The other side (I-Like-To-Bike, and JRA in that corner) seem to purport that the studies have used flawed methodology to arrive at the conclusions and as such the conclusions are not valid due to statistical infidelity.
    This is a very clear picture, sir.

    My "case" is simply that proponents of the safety of sidewalk bicycling, as compared with road cycling, refuse to support their arguments with any sort of data. Instead, they just keep saying that data they disagree with is wrong.

    In fact, they go as far as to totally dismiss the opinions of those who our legal system recognizes as "expert witnesses" in cycling-related crashes (Allen, Forester) simply because they say these men are "biased." Again, they give no evidence to support their accusations against these gentlemen. Instead of giving facts, they claim these men are part of a larger conspiracy which includes everyone who falls into a category they call "VC's."

    I have posted the credentials of John S. Allen, a highly-respected cyclist and advocate in the cycling community. In response, his character was attacked. This is a typical mud-slinging tactic when you have no evidence to support your claims.

    The other tactic of making the false accusation that there is a conspiracy against people who ride on the sidewalk and bicycle facilities is repeated over and over so that it appears to be a fact, but it has never been supported. The accusation is, in fact, ridiculous.
    Last edited by LittleBigMan; 04-21-05 at 11:06 AM.
    No worries

  17. #42
    Senior Member sggoodri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cary, NC
    My Bikes
    1983 Trek, 2001 Lemond, 2000 Gary Fisher
    Posts
    3,068
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I can think of three levels of description that a government or organization might use to describe an activity such as sidewalk use by bicyclists.

    (1) Dangerous enough to prohibit. I personally do not think that sidewalk cycling is so dangerous to other sidewalk users or roadway users that it warrants outright prohibition in many or most places, particularly where pedestrian volumes are very low. Opposition to sidewalk cycling prohibition may be justified in conservative terms related to minimizing government interference with harmless activity.

    (2) Safe enough to endorse. I believe outright encouragement of sidewalk cycling may be unethical, primarily due to the potential hazards at driveways and intersections. In the city where I live, a dispropotionately large share of car-bike collisions involve contra-flow sidewalk cyclists at intersections. I don't think it's possible to endorse sidewalk cycling without setting up cyclists for unexpected conflicts at intersections.

    (3) Safe enough to require. Many cities and some states have mandatory sidepath-use laws that require cyclists to ride on a designated sidewalk path if one exists. These laws were written with the assumption by the regulatory agencies that the sidepaths would be as safe or safer than using the roadway, but we now know that the collision hazards on these paths are significant - enough that some DOTs and the AASHTO guide recommend against designating sidewalks as bike paths, and cyclist education organizations discourage sidewalk cycling in favor of roadway cycling. There are also many situations where sidewalk cycling is less convenient than roadway cycling, and roadway cycling creates minimal danger for other road users. For these reasons, most cyclist advocacy organizations recommend against statutes and ordinances requiring cyclists to ride on sidewalk-type facilities, and seek the repeal of existing laws to this effect.

    Vehicular cyclists avoid sidewalk cycling because it is usually more hazardous and less convenient than roadway cycling. However, many habitually vehicular cyclists will occasionally use a sidewalk in some specific situation where it seem advantageous and reasonably safe to do so. I believe the biggest concern that most vehicular cyclists have about sidewalk cycling is the prohibition of safe and convenient roadway cycling that often comes with promotion of sidewalk cycling, particularly when the government is behind that promotion. This was a significant problem in the city where I live, where the city had a mandatory sidepath-use law and proceeded to designate some sidewalks as bike paths. After cyclists opposed these actions, the local government changed its policy to endorse and accommodate (via education, enforcement, and engineering actions) roadway cycling while still building certain priority sidewalks wider to accommodate whatever bicycle traffic they might see.

  18. #43
    The King of Town manboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    My Bikes
    Haro Backtrail 20" (MISSING), Fuji Berkeley fixie, Huffy cruisercommuterdeathmobile
    Posts
    682
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've said it before, and I'll say it again. It depends on what road you're on. If we're going to talk about studies, I want to see a study that differentiates between urban roads where a bike can mesh with the car traffic and roads that are basically interstates with stoplights. You can't tell me it's the same, and I don't think it's possible to cycle vehicularly on a 5-lane highway without bike facilities and full of aggressive 50-60mph drivers, especially if you're only moving at a moderate cruising speed. This kind of thing is why they don't let bikes, animals, mopeds and horse-carts on the interstate: they all just get in the way. On divided highways that are like interstates, I feel like I'm about to cause an accident or incur road rage even when I'm courteous. Also, it doesn't help if there's a curb directly to the right of your tire and you have no "out."

    Maybe you guys should travel a bit more and start re-thinking your strict categories.

  19. #44
    JRA
    JRA is offline
    Senior Member JRA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    St. Louis
    Posts
    945
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleBigMan
    My "case" is simply that proponents of the safety of sidewalk bicycling, as compared with road cycling, refuse to support their arguments with any sort of data. Instead, they just keep saying that data they disagree with is wrong.
    Speaking for myself, my case is not that the data is wrong but that it is inconclusive. There's a big difference.

    I have also not claimed that sidewalk riding is safe. Asking me to support something I haven't claimed with data is a bit silly.

    I have claimed that some people are biased which, contrary to popular opinion, is not an attack on their character, their honesty or their qualifications. Everyone is biased. Everyone has had slightly different experiences and sees the world through a slightly different lens. There is nothing wrong with.

    I have said I respect John Allen. I would not hesitate to recommend his book, "Street Smarts" to anyone. But the fact that I respect a person does not mean that I accept everything that person says without question. I can respect a person and still think they are quite wrong about certain things. (I have to respect Mr Allen; his name bears a striking similarity to mine)

    There are people who have a definate "ride on the roads or don't ride at all" agenda. Some people bad-mouth sidewalk riding every chance they get, all on the basis of some rather flimsy evidence. They point to studies that are at best inconclusive. I've read a number of the studies (not recently, but I've read them). I claim that they do not show that sidewalk riding is inherently dangerous. That's really about all I'm saying.

    I suspect there's a lot of support in these forums for the opinion that sidewalk riding is just so incredibly dangerous that no one should ever attempt it. I also suspect that I am tilting at windmills in this crowd. That's just fine. I have an opinion and others have theirs. You know what: I don't really care. The future of cycling won't be decided on an internet message board anyway. Arguing back and forth is fairly pointless. On top of that, there are things I'm considerably more interested in than sidewalk cycling.

    And so it goes.
    "It may even be that motoring is more healthful than not motoring; death rates were certainly higher in the pre-motoring age."- John Forester
    "Laws cannot be properly understood as if written in plain English..."- Forester defending obfuscation.
    "Motorist propaganda, continued for sixty years, is what has put cyclists on sidewalks." - Forester, sociologist in his own mind
    "'There are no rules of the road on MUPs.' -John Forester" - Helmet Head quoting 'The Great One'

  20. #45
    Been Around Awhile I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Burlington Iowa
    My Bikes
    Vaterland and Ragazzi
    Posts
    19,576
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JRA
    Speaking for myself, my case is not that the data is wrong but that it is inconclusive. There's a big difference.
    Ditto

    Quote Originally Posted by JRA
    I have also not claimed that sidewalk riding is safe. Asking me to support something I haven't claimed with data is a bit silly.
    Ditto

    Quote Originally Posted by JRA
    But the fact that I respect a person does not mean that I accept everything that person says without question. I can respect a person and still think they are quite wrong about certain things.
    Ditto

    Quote Originally Posted by JRA
    I also suspect that I am tilting at windmills in this crowd. That's just fine. I have an opinion and others have theirs. You know what: I don't really care. The future of cycling won't be decided on an internet message board anyway. Arguing back and forth is fairly pointless.
    Certainly true about expecting reasonable dialog, rather than rigid dogma and self-righteous whining from a few individuals who seem unable to recognize themselves as ideologues. For the most part I have stopped wasting time responding to the worst; several more joined my list of windmill/time wasters as a result of this thread. Just let them rant on and continue to channel the Words/Statistics of their Guru.

    Quote Originally Posted by JRA
    On top of that, there are things I'm considerably more interested in than sidewalk cycling.
    I haven't ridden on sidewalks in over 40 years, but I don't criticize or object to those who do for their own reasons; none of which, I am confident, involve giving a dang about what VC ideologues "accept."

  21. #46
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There is no danger involved in sidewalk riding that can not be overcome with a little common sense. Average riders are more likely to get into trouble on the sidewalk than the street because they do not understand the special dangers involved in riding there. Sidewalks can be extremely useful but generally require more skill and awareness than riding in the road.

    You may be interested to learn that the author of one of the studies you mentioned (Moritz) did another study which showed that riding on streets with bike lanes is generally safer than riding on streets without.

  22. #47
    Senior Member nick burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Absecon, NJ
    My Bikes
    Puch Luzern, Puch Mistral SLE, Bianchi Pista, Motobecane Grand Touring, Austro-Daimler Ultima, Legnano, Raleigh MountainTour, Cannondale SM600
    Posts
    2,941
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by krispistoferson
    In larger cities,(New York, Chicago, LA,) isn't it illegal to ride on the sidewalk? I mean, in Iowa it probably isn't all that much more hazardous, but a metro area is a completely different story. Another example of the intellectual dishonesty some forum members accuse others of perpetrating...
    That got me wondering if that's the case in NJ, since I rarely see adults riding bikes on sidewalks here. I couldn't find anything that specifically said it was prohibited, however this statement from NJ Motor Vehicle Commision kind of alludes to it:

    "NJ law states that bicycles are vehicles and have both the rights and responsibilities of any other vehicle on the road. Bicyclists must respect the laws as they apply to the rules of the road, and motorists must respect their right to be there."

    This, though off topic, was worth the search for me too, since I've been wondering about it due to the recent bike lane threads:

    "While they should keep to the right, cyclists are not required to use shoulders or bike lanes at all times. They may use any portion of the roadway, particularly if they need to turn."

    I never liked the prospect of mandatory bike lanes. My mind has been put to ease.

  23. #48
    roadie commuter
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Milwaukee
    My Bikes
    specialized elite sport
    Posts
    39
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    cycling on the sidewalk is more dangerouse b/c When you leave the sidewalk and enter traffic cars are not expecting you. A bicycle is faster and cannot react as fast as a person walking off of the sidewalk onto the road.

  24. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    West Palm Beach, FL
    My Bikes
    Giant OCR1
    Posts
    492
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I just started commuting on my bike to school about a week and half ago. Its about a 6 mile ride. I have a choice between a road with no bike lane, 50 mph speed limit, 3 lanes in each direction, and 1 sidewalk on the wrong side for the direction I'm traveling. My other choice is a 4 lane ineach direction road with a bike lane, 50 mph speed limit, and very wide sidewalks on both sides with nothing obstructing the view of a driveway the whole distance. The bike lane and sidewalk both end abruptly and suddenly right before the off ramp to the highway. I can avoid both of these roads for about a mile by cutting down smaller roads.

    I rode on the sidewalk right when I started commuting. As has been stated, this seems like an obvious choice. After reading that riding in the roadway was safer, I tried riding on the road with a bike lane, and almost died at the hand of an escalade whose driver apparantly doesn't like bikers.. Now I know why everyone here rides on the sidewalk.

    I can see both sides and I can see the relevance of the studies. I would love to ride in the road. I believe that here in Palm Beach I'm supposed to ride in the road. It just isn't a feasible practice here though. Especially for my particular route. At a certain point it doesn't matter if you have the right to be on the road. If there are hundreds of angry motorists going really fast who don't want to see a bike on the road and make me very aware of that, I'm gonna ride on the 7 foot wide sidewalk where there is plenty of room and barely any obstructions even if it means I have to go a little slower.

    It doesn't matter how conclusive a study looks, there is usually always an exception to the scenario.

  25. #50
    Senior Member alcahueteria's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Philadelphia
    My Bikes
    Soma Juice
    Posts
    1,020
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In new york it is quite illegal. I live in atlanta, and I ride on the sidewalks most of the time. I ride a bmx bike and I am not going to get in the road with that. I understand that I have to watch for pedestrians and that I have to stop at blind driveways and make sure no one is coming. That's just the way sidewalk riding goes. And it's still a lot faster than walking or a skateboard.

    :edit: I've never gotten a ticket for it here. but I bet it probably is illegal here too.

Page 2 of 43 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •