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 03-17-14, 11:51 AM   #51
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 spdracr39 View Post
I have never seen a gun just randomly go off and kill someone nor has a car ever just jumped up and pummeled anyone to death. Cars don't murder people other people do. Don't blame the tool blame the operator. I could just as easily kill someone with my bicycle so this argument is rediculous.
Your analogy sucks. Is it legal to fire guns randomly in the middle of densely populated urban areas?
spare_wheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 11:53 AM   #52
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 I-Like-To-Bike View Post
"Pro" at what?

Probably the most foolish argument being made on this thread is about costs of motorized transportation from individuals who apparently wish to return transportation options for commerce and individuals back to 1900 or earlier. If that is not what is being advocated by the rhetorical ranters, then what is being advocated?
Nice straw man but this argument you are concocting is entirely your own. I was simply challenging the dubious statement you made above -- a statement that you have failed to support with a single piece of evidence (even dubious internet evidence). As someone who constantly goes after others for making stuff up as they go along it's hilarious to see you hoisted by your own petard.

PS:

Mass-produced gasoline motorvehicle: Benz Motorwagen -1885
Mass production of electric cars: Electric Construction Corporation - 1888
Mass-production of chain-driven dunlop tire bicycle: 1889

Last edited by spare_wheel; 03-17-14 at 12:14 PM.
spare_wheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 11:54 AM   #53
RPK79
Senior Member
 
RPK79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SE MN
Bikes: Fuji Roubaix Pro & Fuji Track Classic
Posts: 8,724
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 885 Post(s)
Death Puppies: Why Pit Bulls Will Kill 25 Americans a Year
RPK79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 11:55 AM   #54
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 KonAaron Snake View Post
With some of the most inane commentary I've ever seen. Even for a group of ideologues like this one, this is bordering on comedy of the absurd.

Cars, which were a novelty in 1910 with no supporting infrastructure, are now judged by status in 1910...and the cheaper manufacture and infrastructure improvements by 1930 were just the results of propaganda.

After all - it's self evident that autos offered no improvement in transportation and the only way "they" got people to buy into them was propaganda and government programming.

...nope - it was evil brain machines constructed by the murder lobby, since anyone who disagrees with this vocal minority must be duped idiots.

Maybe the government backed motorized transport so the 30,000 murders could push their illuminati leaders into heaven!
I think we can agree that the statements you made are completely absurd. But I'm curious where you see others making similarly absurd statements ?
spare_wheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 12:21 PM   #55
wphamilton
rugged individualist
 
wphamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Posts: 10,419
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 443 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by howsteepisit View Post
Also, to actually comment on the OP headline, DOT estimates that the total annual miles driven is in the neighborhood of 3,000,000,000,000 (Note thats 3 trillion), 30,000/3,000,000,000,000 = 1 death /100,000,000 miles driven.

Or

since there are about 2,500,000 deaths per year total in the US (Census data) 30,000/2,500,000 = .012 or 1.2 per cent of all deaths are due to traffic accidents.

thats why as a society we "accept 30000 deaths per year.
That's an interesting perspective. Let's look at the other leading causes of death and see if the same thing holds true. The included number represents deaths in one year. This is from the CDC:

  • Heart disease: 597,689
  • Cancer: 574,743
  • Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080
  • Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476
  • Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859
  • Alzheimer's disease: 83,494
  • Diabetes: 69,071
  • Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476
  • Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097
  • Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364

Fatal car accidents are on the same order as suicides, and somewhat lower than Influenza and Pneumonia. Would it be accurate to say that we "accept 38,000 to 50,000 deaths" from each of these causes because they're such a low percentage of the total? It seems to me that it's not, that we expend quite a bit of effort and resources in prevention of suicide and influenza. So I am skeptical of your surmise, and I think there must be some other reason for our relative apathy over automobile fatalities.
wphamilton is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 12:38 PM   #56
howsteepisit
Senior Member
 
howsteepisit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Eugene, OR
Bikes: Mecian
Posts: 3,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 245 Post(s)
WP I see your point, and to some extent I think we as a society just accept the traffic deaths as a cost of dong business, however there are substantial resources expended on trying to reduce traffic deaths, including PSAs, traffic law enforcement (crappy as it is) development of auto safety devices and the like. I'd guess, that if all costs various auto safety initiatives, research and development were summed they would vastly exceed the amount spent on suicide prevention.

Would be some interesting comparisons to be made for sure. My personal observation is the amount spent on the prevention of any death/injury is more related to the strength and attractiveness of the lobbying organization than to the actual number of deaths or death rates.
howsteepisit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 01:04 PM   #57
wphamilton
rugged individualist
 
wphamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Posts: 10,419
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 443 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by howsteepisit View Post
WP I see your point, and to some extent I think we as a society just accept the traffic deaths as a cost of dong business, however there are substantial resources expended on trying to reduce traffic deaths, including PSAs, traffic law enforcement (crappy as it is) development of auto safety devices and the like. I'd guess, that if all costs various auto safety initiatives, research and development were summed they would vastly exceed the amount spent on suicide prevention.

Would be some interesting comparisons to be made for sure. My personal observation is the amount spent on the prevention of any death/injury is more related to the strength and attractiveness of the lobbying organization than to the actual number of deaths or death rates.

That's probably right, on both points.

Maybe we're asking the wrong question. Why do we spend so much on making the equipment safer in order to mitigate crashes, but resist changes to prevent crashes?
wphamilton is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 01:10 PM   #58
howsteepisit
Senior Member
 
howsteepisit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Eugene, OR
Bikes: Mecian
Posts: 3,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 245 Post(s)
I think thats a fair question, and from my perspective, at least here in the US the answer runs something like we want "sound bite" solutions which require no actual effort to solve problems. If we can install seat belts and air bags to keep (some of) us safe in accidents, why have law enforcement, skills testing, alternative transportations and so on. So to say, Its the American way, sadly.
howsteepisit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 01:24 PM   #59
spdracr39
Senior Member
 
spdracr39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Cabot, Arkansas
Bikes: Lynskey Twisted Helix Di2 Ti, 1987 Orbea steel single speed/fixie, Orbea Avant M30, Trek Fuel EX9.8 29, Trek Madone 5 series, Specialized Epic Carbon Comp 29er, Trek 7.1F
Posts: 1,537
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by spare_wheel View Post
Your analogy sucks. Is it legal to fire guns randomly in the middle of densely populated urban areas?
That is exactly what validates the point. A person must fire the gun or operate the vehicle and make decisions to cause the problem. The gun or car cannot and will not ever produce injury or death without human interaction. It is the careless HUMAN that is the issue not the tool being utilized. Increase the penalties for people that can't drive within the boundaries of the law to a point severe enough to force compliance. To ban the use of the tool because some people are to lazy/dumb to use it safely is asinine.
spdracr39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 01:26 PM   #60
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: 24,103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by wphamilton View Post
Maybe we're asking the wrong question. Why do we spend so much on making the equipment safer in order to mitigate crashes, but resist changes to prevent crashes?
What "changes" do you, or the shocked, shocked ranters advocate to restrain/prevent the so-called murder rate of cars besides wailing and gnashing of teeth?

Did you find any useful or practical changes advocated in the OP or follow on posts on this thread?

Prefer to read suggestions for practical changes rather than simple utopian solutions that sound good late at night in a hipster bar, college dorm, or on a wacka-doodle Internet site.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 01:39 PM   #61
wphamilton
rugged individualist
 
wphamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Posts: 10,419
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 443 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
What "changes" do you, or the shocked, shocked ranters advocate to restrain the so-called murder rate of card besides wailing and gnashing of teeth?

Prefer to read suggestions for practical changes rather than simple utopian solutions that sound good late at night in a hipster bar, college dorm, or on a wacka-doodle Internet site.
Off the top I'd say lower urban speed limits, repeal of right turn on red, and everybody's favorite, stronger enforcement of distracted/aggressive driving laws would be a start.

In the realm of infrastructure, there are a number of traffic calming strategies that are well tested. In my local area, traffic calming would be seen as an infringement on individual liberties. Or worse. So I'd advocate changing those perceptions.

Technologically, you probably don't want to go this deep into the rabbit hole but I advocate for event data recorders to be accessed by insurance companies and law enforcement in the event of traffic incidents. I think that a lot of bad behavior is rationalized simply by the fact that they expect to get away with it and usually do.

I realize that your question is likely a rhetorical one, but it's a good question in my opinion. I'd like to give it a better treatment than this, but this isn't really the right time for it. Maybe later.
wphamilton is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 01:49 PM   #62
howsteepisit
Senior Member
 
howsteepisit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Eugene, OR
Bikes: Mecian
Posts: 3,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 245 Post(s)
ILTB, Not sure I understand your point of view on this. Are you thinking the accident/death rate is sufficiently low as to not need additional action? Or is your post a reply to earlier rantings? Did you have any proposed actions, or is status quo fine with you?

Personally, I not into much handwringing, but better and more consistent enforcement of all traffic laws would go a long way in my opinion. Or, as many of my Econ professors liked to take about, it you want to see better driving, mount a 6-inch spike in the center of the steering wheel pointed directly at the drivers chest. Driving habits would change overnight. I am not sure that in the long run they would stay changes, because nobody actually thinks they are going to hit something/someone, but that would need to be seen.
howsteepisit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 01:53 PM   #63
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: 24,103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by wphamilton View Post
Off the top I'd say lower urban speed limits, repeal of right turn on red, and everybody's favorite, stronger enforcement of distracted/aggressive driving laws would be a start.

In the realm of infrastructure, there are a number of traffic calming strategies that are well tested. In my local area, traffic calming would be seen as an infringement on individual liberties. Or worse. So I'd advocate changing those perceptions.

Technologically, you probably don't want to go this deep into the rabbit hole but I advocate for event data recorders to be accessed by insurance companies and law enforcement in the event of traffic incidents. I think that a lot of bad behavior is rationalized simply by the fact that they expect to get away with it and usually do.

I realize that your question is likely a rhetorical one, but it's a good question in my opinion. I'd like to give it a better treatment than this, but this isn't really the right time for it. Maybe later.
Your suggestions seem reasonable or at least plausible. Whether if implemented they would have any significant effect on the so-called "murder" rate is subject to debate.

However if/when reasonable suggestions for change such as your own are allowed to be framed/"owned" by hot-headed ideologues (as seen on this list) more interested in inflammatory rhetoric than productive advocacy, rational proponents of such changes can count on zero public support.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 02:00 PM   #64
howsteepisit
Senior Member
 
howsteepisit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Eugene, OR
Bikes: Mecian
Posts: 3,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 245 Post(s)
"to fight, the impossible fight, To dream the impossible dream"

ILTB's future on A&S

Note to ILTB I agree with you way way way more often than not, I am just jabbing at cha.
howsteepisit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 02:00 PM   #65
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: 24,103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by howsteepisit View Post
ILTB, Not sure I understand your point of view on this. Are you thinking the accident/death rate is sufficiently low as to not need additional action? Or is your post a reply to earlier rantings? Did you have any proposed actions, or is status quo fine with you?
Howsteepisit, I think my response to Wphamilton answered your question. My previous posts on this thread were directed to the inflammatory anti-motorist, anti motoring rantings without any suggested proposals being passed off as some sort of bicycling safety or advocacy topic.

My view is that such anti motorist/anti-motoring threads should be redirected to Foo or P&R since the bicycling content is zero.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 02:02 PM   #66
howsteepisit
Senior Member
 
howsteepisit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Eugene, OR
Bikes: Mecian
Posts: 3,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 245 Post(s)
Yes it did, there are often timing issues on internet forums.
howsteepisit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 03:49 PM   #67
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 wphamilton View Post
Off the top I'd say lower urban speed limits, repeal of right turn on red, and everybody's favorite, stronger enforcement of distracted/aggressive driving laws would be a start.
An enforced standard urban speed limit of 20 mph would largely eliminate fatalities caused by motorvehicle collisions .

Last edited by spare_wheel; 03-17-14 at 03:59 PM.
spare_wheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 03:58 PM   #68
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 spdracr39 View Post
That is exactly what validates the point. A person must fire the gun or operate the vehicle and make decisions to cause the problem. The gun or car cannot and will not ever produce injury or death without human interaction. It is the careless HUMAN that is the issue not the tool being utilized. Increase the penalties for people that can't drive within the boundaries of the law to a point severe enough to force compliance.
Being "careful" does not eliminate the risk of using a dangerous tool in an urban area (whether it's a gun or a motorvehicle). Moreover, you are ignoring the indirect harm that motorvehicles cause to human health.

Quote:
To ban the use of the tool because some people are to lazy/dumb to use it safely is asinine.
Strawman.
No one has proposed banning cars. In fact, I suspect a transition to driverless cars will be what really causes active transport to take off in the USA.
spare_wheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 05:46 PM   #69
02Giant 
Home School Valedictorian
 
02Giant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Iowa
Bikes: 13 Orbea Orca 02 Giant Cypress 88 Mongoose ATB
Posts: 1,549
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 108 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by spare_wheel View Post
An enforced standard urban speed limit of 20 mph would largely eliminate fatalities caused by motorvehicle collisions .
What is your definition of urban?
Between 1998 and 2007 57% of traffic fatalities happened in rural areas, from year to year the statistic remains very consistent.
02Giant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 05:57 PM   #70
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 02Giant View Post
What is your definition of urban?
Between 1998 and 2007 57% of traffic fatalities happened in rural areas, from year to year the statistic remains very consistent.
any incorporated area with a significant population concentration. (i'm provisionally OK with higher speed limits on limited access roads or rural highways.)

but according to the fhwa only ~25% of pedestrian/cyclist fatalities occur on rural highways.

Factors Contributing to Pedestrian and Bicycle Crashes on Rural Highways - FHWA-HRT-10-052
spare_wheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 06:23 PM   #71
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: 4,724
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by spare_wheel View Post
An enforced standard urban speed limit of 20 mph would largely eliminate fatalities caused by motorvehicle collisions .
I see that as reasonable on 2 lane roads or where street parking is allowed, but multi lane arterials and roads that support safe mixed use should be able to maintain their higher limits or at least higher than 20 mph.

I suspect that within the next ten to twenty years advances in vehicle safety technology will make a significant reduction in accidents.
kickstart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-14, 08:48 PM   #72
KonAaron Snake 
Fat Guy on a Little Bike
 
KonAaron Snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Bikes: Two wheeled ones
Posts: 15,568
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 363 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
Howsteepisit, I think my response to Wphamilton answered your question. My previous posts on this thread were directed to the inflammatory anti-motorist, anti motoring rantings without any suggested proposals being passed off as some sort of bicycling safety or advocacy topic.

My view is that such anti motorist/anti-motoring threads should be redirected to Foo or P&R since the bicycling content is zero.
The problem is that the truly ridiculous lack the experience, maturity, knowledge and general perspective required to understand that they're extremist demagogues who think the world revolves around their convenience. They typically take the same pedantic approach to whatever issue or group they identify with that year - extremist idiots are extremist idiots, regardless of cause. Hence people who think all speed limits should be adjusted to fit the wants of 1% of the population and believe that cars and car infrastructure became predominant because people are sheep who were all brain washed by the nefarious auto Illuminati.
KonAaron Snake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-14, 03:56 AM   #73
02Giant 
Home School Valedictorian
 
02Giant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Iowa
Bikes: 13 Orbea Orca 02 Giant Cypress 88 Mongoose ATB
Posts: 1,549
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 108 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by spare_wheel View Post
An enforced standard urban speed limit of 20 mph would largely eliminate fatalities caused by motorvehicle collisions .
Quote:
Originally Posted by spare_wheel View Post
any incorporated area with a significant population concentration. (i'm provisionally OK with higher speed limits on limited access roads or rural highways.)

but according to the fhwa only ~25% of pedestrian/cyclist fatalities occur on rural highways.

Factors Contributing to Pedestrian and Bicycle Crashes on Rural Highways - FHWA-HRT-10-052
I missed the part where you specified pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...62922401,d.aWc
02Giant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-14, 08:42 AM   #74
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 KonAaron Snake View Post
Hence people who think all speed limits should be adjusted to fit the wants of 1% of the population and believe that cars and car infrastructure became predominant because people are sheep who were all brain washed by the nefarious auto Illuminati.
Strawman.


Also: *yawn*.

Last edited by spare_wheel; 03-18-14 at 08:51 AM.
spare_wheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-14, 08:48 AM   #75
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 02Giant View Post
I missed the part where you specified pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...62922401,d.aWc
Contrary to the pathetic whining on this page about anyone who dares to challenge autocentrism, I'm not against low occupancy vehicles. I am against the negative environmental, social, and economic impact of low occupancy motoring. And I'm not going to sugar coat these negative impacts. What is really galling is that all of these issues are addressable *NOW* (via a mix of approaches).
spare_wheel 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 08:55 AM.