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 02-08-14, 12:10 PM   #26
OrionXavier
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Columbia, MO
Bikes: 2012 Trek 7.2 FX
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm not sure why, but every time I choose a commute route to work which happens to have police routinely parked there (speed trap), they either don't come back or show up during the time I'm at work. The day I bike through, the next day they are never there before or after work. Also when passing me they always do so closely instead of giving me a wide berth like most other cars. In every way they've demonstrated that they want to make the roads *less* safe for bicyclists.. The last police car that stopped monitoring traffic was at a dangerous, narrow 2 way road, which I bike through. Every day there's a car that passes me at the TOP of the hill.. I have no idea what they are thinking. I had one car blast past me at what must have been over 70 MPH, in a 35 MPH speed limit.

Most motorists though are considerate. I stop at a 4 way intersection when traffic is there, and at least half of the cars wave me through. But this is Missouri so they're generally more considerate and polite than other states I've lived in, like California.
OrionXavier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-14, 12:55 PM   #27
spare_wheel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NA
Bikes: NA
Posts: 4,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
Uh your reference to intersection/driveway issues... was that in reference to Finland or the US. In Oulu while they do also have intersection issues in some places, they do try to remove some of those issues with below road grade underpasses, something that is very rarely found in the US. Also bear in mind that Oulu Finland has a 20% modal share, something like well over 10X the modal share of the US. (even Davis only has something like just over 6%).

the city of davis' mode share is ~24%. and as many have pointed out, ACS mode share counts only a fraction of total bike trips (students, people who use mixed modes, and non work-associated trips are not counted).
spare_wheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-14, 07:38 AM   #28
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,693
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 298 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by spare_wheel View Post
the city of davis' mode share is ~24%. and as many have pointed out, ACS mode share counts only a fraction of total bike trips (students, people who use mixed modes, and non work-associated trips are not counted).
I did some research... and the numbers vary... but I did find this:

Quote:
The important metric in achieving platinum status relates to how many people ride bicycles for daily transportation. Davis, California, for example had a bicycle “mode share,” of 24% in the 1990 census. As Davis grew, though, and became less of a university town and more of a bedroom community to Sacramento that share dropped to 16% in 2000 and it fell to 14% in 2010. At the same time towns like Boulder and Fort Collins increased their bicycle mode share during those years to 10.5% and 6.7% respectively as these towns encouraged bicycle use and as they built their bicycle infrastructure. Portland’s bicycle mode share, according to the LAB stands at 6.3% while the national average is less than 1%.
http://bicyclesafetyinstitute.org/20...rt-collins-co/

Still, Davis has a modal share greater than any other city in the US. And that declining modal share mentioned in the quote above should not be viewed as much as a decrease in cycling in the area, but more of an increase in motoring, as the city grew and more people arrived with cars to commute out of the area as Davis became more of a bedroom community to Sacramento.

Now honestly, having ridden bicycles in both Davis and Oulu... I would argue that Oulu has a far better network of better quality bike paths. Davis does a nice job of connecting their residential dead end branch like layout with paths, but the paths are "park-like" in design... and Davis further depends heavily on bike lanes... putting cyclists at the same intersection conflict points that tend to be dangerous. Oulu has these intersection points too... but in the less densely driven residential areas... and they try to avoid conflict in other areas with below street grade underpasses on their wide less "park-like" paths. Those underpass paths remove all potential conflict between cyclist and motorist, thus are quite a bit safer than "bike lanes."

The difference in the areas is interesting... Davis bike paths are extensions of their street network, whereas the Oulu bike path network is separate and intertwined, often going under and over the street network where the two may meet.

I've posted this before... but here it is again... This Oulu bike path is quite typical of quite a bit of the Oulu separate bicycle path network... a network that is laid out such that getting "there" by bike is often shorter and easier than driving, as the motor vehicle network (streets) tend to "go around," meaning if you drive, you may drive a bit further to get somewhere than if you were to bike... but then who cares... when you drive all you do is push a gas pedal. The longer street network for cars also ends up providing room for parking a car... so it works out.

Last edited by genec; 02-09-14 at 07:55 AM.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-14, 08:04 AM   #29
rydabent
Senior Member
 
rydabent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Cruiser
Posts: 5,706
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 123 Post(s)
Too bad there arent stats that show a comparson between the invincible roadies that run stop lights, filter up at stop lights and generally dont obey traffic rules, as compared to cyclist that ride for fun and exercise. IMO I think the former would account for most of the cycling accidents. I am among the latter, and follow traffic laws, stopping at stop signs and lights. Because of this I dont feel that cycling is any more dangerous that any every day activity.
rydabent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-14, 08:33 AM   #30
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,693
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 298 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rydabent View Post
Too bad there arent stats that show a comparson between the invincible roadies that run stop lights, filter up at stop lights and generally dont obey traffic rules, as compared to cyclist that ride for fun and exercise. IMO I think the former would account for most of the cycling accidents. I am among the latter, and follow traffic laws, stopping at stop signs and lights. Because of this I dont feel that cycling is any more dangerous that any every day activity.
I'd love to agree with you... but my personal anecdotal evidence tends to disagree. When I was a bit younger and a bit of a scofflaw... I had few issues with motorists... as I became more experienced and actually cycled more and became fully dependent on a bike for transportation and rode in a more vehicular manner, I had three collisions... two of which were while I well obeyed the laws. In both cases, motorists failed to yield to me. The third collision was a right hook.

I tend to think that the thinking of Hurst (The Art of Urban Cycling) is well served here, that in spite of the laws, the cyclist is better off doing what is best for the cyclist. Hurst mentions cycling messengers as a prime example... although I tend to feel messenger cycling is a somewhat extreme example. Forester largely suggests that the "rules of the road for drivers of vehicles" will serve cyclists well... yet when motorists do not treat cyclists as drivers of vehicles, Forester's logic falls apart quickly. Further, Forester himself also suggests techniques such as "road sneak" for cyclists, to avail themselves of all the road, thus dismissing his logic of "being treated as drivers of vehicles."

While I don't condone the regular running of stop lights and stop signs, I am prone to think that the longest mileage, most experienced cyclists tend to ride in a manner that involves using the "rules of the road for drivers of vehicles" when it suits them, and "acting the messenger" when it best suits them... a hybrid method that somewhat scoffs at the written traffic laws for cyclists and motorists (which tend to favor motorists)... seeking instead to take advantage of the nimbleness of the bike and the better ability to see and hear traffic by the cyclist, to thus avoid potential harmful situations.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-14, 08:59 AM   #31
dclout
Junior Member
 
dclout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Bikes: Brodie Ronin, Bike Friday Folder, Trek T200 Tandem
Posts: 17
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I look at these statistics and wonder if it can be explained by infrastructure. The graph suggests that countries with a higher percentage of bicyclists are safer to cycle in. Do these countries have more bicyclists because they have good, safe, places to ride?
dclout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-14, 11:33 AM   #32
spare_wheel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NA
Bikes: NA
Posts: 4,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
I did some research... and the numbers vary... but I did find this:



http://bicyclesafetyinstitute.org/20...rt-collins-co/

Still, Davis has a modal share greater than any other city in the US. And that declining modal share mentioned in the quote above should not be viewed as much as a decrease in cycling in the area, but more of an increase in motoring, as the city grew and more people arrived with cars to commute out of the area as Davis became more of a bedroom community to Sacramento.

Now honestly, having ridden bicycles in both Davis and Oulu... I would argue that Oulu has a far better network of better quality bike paths. Davis does a nice job of connecting their residential dead end branch like layout with paths, but the paths are "park-like" in design... and Davis further depends heavily on bike lanes... putting cyclists at the same intersection conflict points that tend to be dangerous. Oulu has these intersection points too... but in the less densely driven residential areas... and they try to avoid conflict in other areas with below street grade underpasses on their wide less "park-like" paths. Those underpass paths remove all potential conflict between cyclist and motorist, thus are quite a bit safer than "bike lanes."

The difference in the areas is interesting... Davis bike paths are extensions of their street network, whereas the Oulu bike path network is separate and intertwined, often going under and over the street network where the two may meet.

I've posted this before... but here it is again... This Oulu bike path is quite typical of quite a bit of the Oulu separate bicycle path network... a network that is laid out such that getting "there" by bike is often shorter and easier than driving, as the motor vehicle network (streets) tend to "go around," meaning if you drive, you may drive a bit further to get somewhere than if you were to bike... but then who cares... when you drive all you do is push a gas pedal. The longer street network for cars also ends up providing room for parking a car... so it works out.

Davis' cycling mode share in 2010 was 22%.
http://www.bikeleague.org/content/bi...commuting-data
http://www.bikeleague.org/sites/lab..../files/375.xls
spare_wheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-14, 12:10 PM   #33
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: 23,732
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rydabent View Post
Too bad there arent stats that show a comparson between the invincible roadies that run stop lights, filter up at stop lights and generally dont obey traffic rules, as compared to cyclist that ride for fun and exercise. IMO I think...
You don't need no stinkin' stats. In the absence of stats (or references), you can believe and post whatever you think is the "truth".

In the future, stats may be produced to confirm your "truth", or stats may be produced to cast doubt on your "truth", either way, you no doubt will keep repeating your personal "truth" ad infinitum.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-14, 12:27 PM   #34
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,693
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 298 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by spare_wheel View Post
Either way it is the highest mode share in the US. And I think THAT is the important part of this thread. Other cities can do much better.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-14, 01:25 PM   #35
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
snips
I tend to think that the thinking of Hurst (The Art of Urban Cycling) is well served here, that in spite of the laws, the cyclist is better off doing what is best for the cyclist. Hurst mentions cycling messengers as a prime example... although I tend to feel messenger cycling is a somewhat extreme example. Forester largely suggests that the "rules of the road for drivers of vehicles" will serve cyclists well... yet when motorists do not treat cyclists as drivers of vehicles, Forester's logic falls apart quickly. Further, Forester himself also suggests techniques such as "road sneak" for cyclists, to avail themselves of all the road, thus dismissing his logic of "being treated as drivers of vehicles."
Genec doesn't know what he is writing about, be it how traffic operates, how it is supposed to operate, and what I have written. When a driver wishes to change lanes, he has to yield to traffic in the new lane or line of travel. Yielding means waiting until there is no traffic in the new law approaching so close as to constitute a danger. In the lane-changing situation, the straight-ahead driver has the right-of-way over the laterally-moving driver. This is true whether the drivers are driving cars or driving bicycles. When a driver who desires to change lanes finds that all lanes are occupied by a platoon of cars, he typically delays his move, probably slows down a bit, until the platoon of cars goes ahead and the lanes are less occupied, so that changing lanes is easier. My advice to cyclists is to do the same.

Genec claims that this is not acting like the driver of a vehicle, or not being treated as the driver of a vehicle. That argument is clearly false, because it refers to one of the lawful ways by which drivers handle this situation. I jokingly referred to this as being a road sneak, acting just like cyclists who don't believe in their right to use the roadway. That was long before I realized the hatred of my advice that allows critics like genec, and those who probably have led him (since it is not in my writing), to delight in propagating biased criticism based on false reading of the work.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-14, 04:34 PM   #36
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,693
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 298 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
Genec doesn't know what he is writing about, be it how traffic operates, how it is supposed to operate, and what I have written. When a driver wishes to change lanes, he has to yield to traffic in the new lane or line of travel. Yielding means waiting until there is no traffic in the new law approaching so close as to constitute a danger. In the lane-changing situation, the straight-ahead driver has the right-of-way over the laterally-moving driver. This is true whether the drivers are driving cars or driving bicycles. When a driver who desires to change lanes finds that all lanes are occupied by a platoon of cars, he typically delays his move, probably slows down a bit, until the platoon of cars goes ahead and the lanes are less occupied, so that changing lanes is easier. My advice to cyclists is to do the same.

Genec claims that this is not acting like the driver of a vehicle, or not being treated as the driver of a vehicle. That argument is clearly false, because it refers to one of the lawful ways by which drivers handle this situation. I jokingly referred to this as being a road sneak, acting just like cyclists who don't believe in their right to use the roadway. That was long before I realized the hatred of my advice that allows critics like genec, and those who probably have led him (since it is not in my writing), to delight in propagating biased criticism based on false reading of the work.
Try it the other way around John... try several cars in a line and you the cyclist also in the same line acting as the driver of a vehicle, even keeping speed (which then does not require FRAP in most states...) and a driver that desires to change lanes does so into you the cyclist... because that motorist drives a large vehicle and feels they can push the cyclist over. This has happened to me and other cyclists here on BF... I believe noisebeam has even posted video of that happening on a much earlier thread. This is a case where a cyclists is NOT being treated as the driver of a vehicle, in spite of acting like one. This is not a driver making a mistake, but moving over deliberately to claim ROW that was not theirs.

BTW John... my opinions are mine alone... gained over some 40+ years of cycling, which includes 7 years of living car free and several long distance tours, as well as riding experience in several different countries... I am not "led" by anyone to spread any sort of "propaganda." I only speak the truth of what I have experienced. I find that while your "theories" have some merit, the reality of the real world tends to be somewhat different from that of your idealized vision.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-14, 04:52 PM   #37
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
Try it the other way around John... try several cars in a line and you the cyclist also in the same line acting as the driver of a vehicle, even keeping speed (which then does not require FRAP in most states...) and a driver that desires to change lanes does so into you the cyclist... because that motorist drives a large vehicle and feels they can push the cyclist over. This has happened to me and other cyclists here on BF... I believe noisebeam has even posted video of that happening on a much earlier thread. This is a case where a cyclists is NOT being treated as the driver of a vehicle, in spite of acting like one. This is not a driver making a mistake, but moving over deliberately to claim ROW that was not theirs.

BTW John... my opinions are mine alone... gained over some 40+ years of cycling, which includes 7 years of living car free and several long distance tours, as well as riding experience in several different countries... I am not "led" by anyone to spread any sort of "propaganda." I only speak the truth of what I have experienced. I find that while your "theories" have some merit, the reality of the real world tends to be somewhat different from that of your idealized vision.
Genec challenges my aphorism "Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles". His challenge is that even when a cyclist is obeying the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles, some or other driver may unlawfully push into his right of way. That does not invalidate the aphorism. Just because some motorists act unlawfully toward other motorists, does nothing to discredit the principle that motorists are required to obey the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles. The illogic of genec's position ought to be obvious.

I see now that genec is claiming credit for inventing the road sneak nastiness all by himself, so that its use by others is copying his work. Based on the publishing times of the various copies, I suggest that, as I suggested earlier, genec copied that nastiness from the published work of others.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-14, 05:15 PM   #38
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,693
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 298 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
Genec challenges my aphorism "Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles". His challenge is that even when a cyclist is obeying the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles, some or other driver may unlawfully push into his right of way. That does not invalidate the aphorism. Just because some motorists act unlawfully toward other motorists, does nothing to discredit the principle that motorists are required to obey the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles. The illogic of genec's position ought to be obvious.

I see now that genec is claiming credit for inventing the road sneak nastiness all by himself, so that its use by others is copying his work. Based on the publishing times of the various copies, I suggest that, as I suggested earlier, genec copied that nastiness from the published work of others.
John your aphorism "Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles" is all fine and good when in fact cyclists ARE treated as drivers of vehicles... but the reality is that far too many motorists feel that cyclists are an aberration on "their" roadway, and thus may not extend to cyclists the courtesy of treating them as drivers of vehicles, but as obstacles to overcome or conquer. This is not the case for all drivers, I will readily admit... but the odds of encountering a driver that chooses to treat cyclists poorly on the road is just too great and unpredictable to blindly expect positive or even equal treatment. And BTW as you have so often mentioned... traffic engineers and lawmakers do not hold to your notions... which means the deck is stacked against cyclists by the nature of the design of roads and written law. That alone shows that cyclists will tend to NOT fare best, no matter how well they act as drivers of vehicles.

As far as "road sneak..." I am afraid I first encountered that term through your use... I lay no such claim to it's invention.

I claim to only honestly report what I have encountered in my years of cycling... and not to rely on "blind theories."
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-14, 07:40 PM   #39
rydabent
Senior Member
 
rydabent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Cruiser
Posts: 5,706
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 123 Post(s)
I like

So you dont believe that a "real cyclist" that disobeys traffic laws by running red lights etc, is just as safe as I am when I obey all the traffic rules and stop at all red lights and stop signs? Sorry just not logical.
rydabent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-14, 09:23 PM   #40
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,693
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 298 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rydabent View Post
I like

So you dont believe that a "real cyclist" that disobeys traffic laws by running red lights etc, is just as safe as I am when I obey all the traffic rules and stop at all red lights and stop signs? Sorry just not logical.
The problem is real life isn't a game of logic. Otherwise I never would have been hit by a driver that was stopped at a stop sign. On two different occasions.

BTW the first incident wasn't reported to the police, but the driver admitted his mistake and paid for the bike... the second incident sent me to the hospital... where the LEO told me he ticketed the driver for failure to yield ROW at a stop.

Real world prevails over "logic."

Last edited by genec; 02-09-14 at 09:27 PM.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-14, 10:15 PM   #41
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: 23,732
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rydabent View Post
Sorry just not logical.
You are going to discuss logic?
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-14, 10:19 PM   #42
spare_wheel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NA
Bikes: NA
Posts: 4,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rydabent View Post
Sorry just not logical.
What you call logic...I call car head.
spare_wheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-14, 07:46 AM   #43
rydabent
Senior Member
 
rydabent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Cruiser
Posts: 5,706
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 123 Post(s)
I like

Actually I am one of the most coldly logical persons on this forum.
rydabent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-14, 08:21 AM   #44
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,693
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 298 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rydabent View Post
I like

Actually I am one of the most coldly logical persons on this forum.
Let's do some quick logic then... some basic stuff.

Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles. Simple statement... now let's break it down into a logic equation.

C=A+B

C is the conclusion: Cyclists fare best. A is one part of the equation: cyclists act as drivers of vehicles. B is another part of the equation: cyclists are treated as drivers of vehicles.

To reach the conclusion (the sum) you need A AND B; This is called out in the statement: Cyclists fare best when they act AND are treated as drivers of vehicles. So the AND is important. If you have A, but no B, you don't reach the sum. So while cyclists can act as drivers of vehicles all day long... If B doesn't occur (being treated as the driver of a vehicle) you never reach the sum... Cyclists don't fare best.

There you go, simple logic broken into it's basic parts and examined.

So are you always "treated as the driver of a vehicle?"

Last edited by genec; 02-10-14 at 10:56 AM.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-14, 05:46 PM   #45
buzzman
----
 
buzzman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Newton, MA
Bikes:
Posts: 4,570
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
Let's do some quick logic then... some basic stuff.

Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles. Simple statement... now let's break it down into a logic equation.

C=A+B

C is the conclusion: Cyclists fare best. A is one part of the equation: cyclists act as drivers of vehicles. B is another part of the equation: cyclists are treated as drivers of vehicles.

To reach the conclusion (the sum) you need A AND B; This is called out in the statement: Cyclists fare best when they act AND are treated as drivers of vehicles. So the AND is important. If you have A, but no B, you don't reach the sum. So while cyclists can act as drivers of vehicles all day long... If B doesn't occur (being treated as the driver of a vehicle) you never reach the sum... Cyclists don't fare best.

There you go, simple logic broken into it's basic parts and examined.

So are you always "treated as the driver of a vehicle?"
Speaking of "I like" where's the "I like" icon for this post.

Well, said.
buzzman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-14, 08:27 PM   #46
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
Let's do some quick logic then... some basic stuff.

Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles. Simple statement... now let's break it down into a logic equation.

C=A+B

C is the conclusion: Cyclists fare best. A is one part of the equation: cyclists act as drivers of vehicles. B is another part of the equation: cyclists are treated as drivers of vehicles.

To reach the conclusion (the sum) you need A AND B; This is called out in the statement: Cyclists fare best when they act AND are treated as drivers of vehicles. So the AND is important. If you have A, but no B, you don't reach the sum. So while cyclists can act as drivers of vehicles all day long... If B doesn't occur (being treated as the driver of a vehicle) you never reach the sum... Cyclists don't fare best.

There you go, simple logic broken into it's basic parts and examined.

So are you always "treated as the driver of a vehicle?"
That treatment of the English language went out with scholasticism. It carries no meaning today. I can't help it if you are still stuck in medieval methods of thought.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-14, 04:51 PM   #47
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,693
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 298 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
That treatment of the English language went out with scholasticism. It carries no meaning today. I can't help it if you are still stuck in medieval methods of thought.
Better go check a local college... they still teach Logic today.

So tell me, do cyclists still fare best if they are NOT treated as drivers of vehicles?
genec 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 03:23 AM.