2. Reps propose banning bikes on large section of roads.
How is that not knee jerk? How does that represent their constituents' views beyond the people who complained?
I'm not supporting the proposed ban, but only point out that smarmy comments and emails from "educated cyclists" about the education level of the representative, his"lack of smarts" and/or being "unqualified for office" are not going to defeat this proposal but if sent to the representative in question are more likely to get his dander up.
Some eloquent Missouri cyclists need to get on that pronto. I was able to help successfully defeat proposed mandatory shoulder and bike lane laws in Washington state by writing solid rejections of the proposals to all the sponsors of the bills, bike advocates and rallied local outrage among other cyclists. It worked in Washington state, the bill got dropped.
Interview with Rep. Korman: http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dai...n_missouri.php
I find it interesting that he doesn't mention the 800 or so motor vehicle fatalities that occur every year in Missouri. Apparently it is only impacting if a car and bike collide - not if a car and car collides (or a car hits something else). Cyclists fatalities are pretty rare in Missouri, usually < 10 a year.Quote:
Originally Posted by excerpts from Riverfront Times Article
He just doesn't understand that its incredibly dangerous when CARS use the road, and decides to try to ban bikes instead.
Repubs: Keepin' Missouri fat is our job!