Just another nutball comment from a newspaper in Edmonton Alberta, but I had to let everyone know I did my bit and let him know what I thought of his comments (as did many other cyclists)
What was that old quote? Was it something like, democracy (or government?) is run by those who show up.
Here's a clip of the article with a link to the full story, the next days story and my email and reply from the author.
Cyclists get a free ride
We need to ban them from major roads By Kerry Diotte -- For the Edmonton Sun
The tragic weekend death of a cyclist lends ammunition to my notion bicycles should be banned from major thoroughfares in Edmonton.
A 35-year-old man died Saturday night after colliding with a vehicle near 101 Street and 107 Avenue.
It's the second time a cyclist has died on city streets this year. In May a five-year-old girl died near 147 Avenue and 88A Street after she rode her bike in a crosswalk.
Without getting into a debate about who is responsible for most bike-vehicle crashes, one thing is obvious - bicyclists tend to come out on the losing end of collisions. That is reason enough to consider banning bikers from thoroughfares - for their own protection.
City cyclists fighting back
I'm Public Enemy No. 1 with cyclists. Why that is, I don't fully understand.
All I did was express a very logical argument in a Tuesday Sun column calling for bicycles to be outlawed from major thoroughfares in our city...
Cyclists were not amused. I've received dozens of e-mails and numerous telephone messages from upset cyclists...
The topic was hot enough that I was invited on to the Big Breakfast yesterday to debate John Collier, the president of the Edmonton Bicycle Commuters' Society...
Surprisingly the A-Channel "debate" I had with bicycle society president Collier was fairly civilized. He's a nice guy - for a cyclist.
Collier said he shared my concern that many cyclists don't obey traffic laws and have little or no safety training before jumping onto their two-wheeled steeds.
He acknowledged courier bikers are the worst of all when it comes to infractions - and he would like police to target lawbreaking bikers by giving out more tickets.
Naturally Collier wouldn't go so far as to agree with my view that cyclists should be banned from major roadways.
But increased ticketing of bad bikers would be a great start to getting cyclists banned from major thoroughfares, wouldn't it?
I emailed him (his address is on the web page) and said,
Your logic is flawed. By claiming cyclists should be banned from streets because they come out on the losing end with motorists, the logical extension is banning smaller cars from roads that could be crushed by larger vehicles that share the same roads. Should passenger cars have one set of streets, SUV's another, and dump trucks a third?
The best solution is have all users of the roads follow all the rules of the road. Isn't that a more reasonable, more workable start?
And by the way, don't imply accidents involving young children have anything to do with accidents involving adults. They are not the same thing.
To give him credit, he replied.
Good points but we'll have to agree to disagree.
Care to tell a few more people about this by sending your letter to the Sun as a letter to the editor?
The more the issue gets talked about, the better chance that things will change for the better.
I sent one back, to which he hasn't replied (and I sure would be suprised if he did)
If you wish to forward my letter to you on to the editor, that would be fine, but a better way to change things for the better on the road would be for a newspaper to recognize that printing ignorant, prejudicial diatribe is detrimental to the situation.
Accidents happen for a reason, and those reasons should be shown to try and prevent future accidents. Simply stating bikes should be restricted on roads does nothing from preventing more accidents.
Don't think for a second that the reasons that lead to accidents to people on bikes don't apply to people that drive motor vehicles.
I think you can't be this ignorant, and are just trying to stir the pot by creating readership with sensationalism. This is irresponsible as it does nothing to help the public good.