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.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-12-14, 01:20 PM   #26
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: 23,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
Just what is "overtaking" if not nearly any situation when the cyclist, maintaining a steady position on the roadway, is taken down by a motorist from behind... be it directly or in a sideswipe situation.
It is a word whose definition often varies widely as required by the agenda of the "safety advocate" using it. Overtaking metrics may be downplayed, ignored or manipulated if the agenda requires low numbers to promote a bicycling program that poo-poos overtaking accidents as only an "irrational fear" or a "superstition" of "incompetent cyclists."
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-14, 01:23 PM   #27
Jiggle
Senior Member
 
Jiggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Somewhere in TX
Bikes: CAAD 9
Posts: 1,833
I knew two people before they were killed by being struck from behind. Both were struck by utility trucks that had something hanging off of the side of the truck far enough to hit them as the truck passed.
Jiggle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-14, 02:03 PM   #28
Null66
Senior Member
 
Null66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Garner, NC 27529
Bikes: Built up DT, 2007 Fuji tourer (donor bike, RIP), 1995 1220 Trek
Posts: 2,103
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMACH 5 View Post
It's controversial because it makes riding on the street seem more dangerous than it is.

The study doesn't account for any non-fatal accidents. It is based entirely on news reports and blogs.
We live in a culture of fear.
Culture of fear - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The data is clear, the decrease in heart attacks alone vastly offset the risk of getting killed on a bicycle. Yet people are afraid to ride a bike. There's a line in all the fast "food" places at lunch...

1/3rd of deaths are cardiac related. Doesn't take much of a decrease in that to offset a whole bunch of things.

Many of the cycling related deaths are not cyclists. 1/2 of deaths involve these things, each: drunk rider, riding on sidewalks, riding against traffic... Yes each death may involve overlap. But still, that's a hell of a pattern.
Null66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-14, 03:39 PM   #29
spare_wheel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NA
Bikes: NA
Posts: 4,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
It is a word whose definition often varies widely as required by the agenda of the "safety advocate" using it. Overtaking metrics may be downplayed, ignored or manipulated if the agenda requires low numbers to promote a bicycling program that poo-poos overtaking accidents as only an "irrational fear" or a "superstition" of "incompetent cyclists."
So no criticisms from you over the methodology used by the LAB?
I guess collating media reports is a valid statistical sampling approach in ILTB-landia.

spare_wheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-14, 04:46 PM   #30
dougmc
Senior Member
 
dougmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Bikes: Giant OCR2, Bridgestone RB-T, Bike-E, Vision R-40, Novara Safari
Posts: 3,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMACH 5 View Post
The study doesn't account for any non-fatal accidents. It is based entirely on news reports and blogs.
The reason that most studies look at fatal collisions only is that those are the situations that are well documented and reported.

"Mere" injuries are reported far less reliably and consistently.

As for the study itself, this would give a lot more detail on it. Given that they were trying to show that FARS could be improved, they had to get their data from somewhere.

From their report --

Quote:
Our Every Bicyclist Counts dataset is limited to fatalities and depended upon public sources and input. The majority of the information captured by Every Bicyclist Counts came from newspaper reports (56% of all reported sources), TV reports (25%) and blogs (19%).

Through these sources we collected information on 76% of the bicyclist fatalities reported in FARS in 2012. Since the Every Bicyclist Counts dataset is limited to fatalities it does not contain any information on injuries, near-misses, or general exposure to risks.
Personally, I'm surprised that they didn't get any from police press releases -- our police releases such things every time somebody dies.

But ultimately, I don't have any real problems with their methodology. Its not perfect, but this sort of thing never is.
dougmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-14, 06:15 PM   #31
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: 23,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by spare_wheel View Post
So no criticisms from you over the methodology used by the LAB?
I guess collating media reports is a valid statistical sampling approach in ILTB-landia.

Anytime I do not provide a comment on whatever topic YOU are thinking about, feel free to fabricate an imaginary straw man response for me if it pleases you. So much for rational arguments.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-14, 06:23 PM   #32
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: 23,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by Null66 View Post
Many of the cycling related deaths are not cyclists. 1/2 of deaths involve these things, each: drunk rider, riding on sidewalks, riding against traffic... Yes each death may involve overlap. But still, that's a hell of a pattern.
Do you mind providing your definition of a "cyclist"?
What kind of non cyclists were involved in the cycling related deaths?
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-14, 06:53 PM   #33
buzzman
----
Thread Starter
 
buzzman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Newton, MA
Bikes:
Posts: 4,570
Quote:
Originally Posted by FBinNY View Post
I spend most of my time in the mechanic forum, rather than here, but there's a parallel here.

When trying to solve a problem, it's important that the solution is directly responsive to the actual problem. This is equally true for infrastructure problems as it is for bicycle repair.

Aggregate data combining urban and rural riding may mask the fact that different conditions breed different types of accidents. It's very possible that a large percentage of "from the back" accidents happen on open roads while more intersection accidents happen in cities (not saying this is a fact, just a realistic possibility).

Then, if based on this misleading (possibly) data, we apply a solution more suited to the open road in an urban setting, we may not get the benefit we're hoping for. As a matter of fact, if that solution solves a highway problem at the expensive of worsening city problems, then not only won't we see benefits, we might actually make things worse.

Reducing accidental death and injury, is a laudable goal, but we have to try by using solutions that address the causes of injury where and how they happen. These will be different on open roads than in cities.
The quote below comes from the link in my original post. In a "rural" setting almost 4 times as many accidents occur at non-intersections but that only makes sense doesn't it?- I mean, fewer intersections. And conversely it makes sense, at least to me, that in an urban environment the increase in intersections would mean an increase in accidents at intersections due to greater opportunity of interaction. But still we see a roughly equal number of accidents at interesections as not in an urban environment and that is cause for concern.

Again, I repeat, I believe that LAB is highlighting come from behind collisions in order to isolate and address one problem at a time. As many of you are pointing out there are a mix of conditions and causes of accidents but separating them out, while challenging, helps us to address and prioritize those areas that we need to fix.

Quote:
Where the Accidents Happened
Intersection Non-Intersection
Rural 45 165
Urban. 231 237
Source: 2012 NHTSA Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS)



Quote:
Originally Posted by B.Carfree
I would be more concerned about those 700 if I didn't suspect that most of them were two-thirds drunk/ninja/salmon.

I also have my doubts about LAB's agenda. From their "bike friendly" criteria, it looks like they are more concerned with advocating for segregation than with safety.

Besides being one of the more callous statements I've seen in a while on BF, B. Carfree seems to advocate even more of a "do nothing" response to fatal bike accidents. But based on this logic I guess we should not address teen driving accidents or most driving accidents for that matter since they often involve driver impairment or error. Even if bicyclists were puritanical prohibitionists observing all laws we'd still be sharing the road with impaired, flawed drivers and given that they cause a greater proportion of the accidents I still think these fatalities needs to be addressed.


Regarding LAB's "agenda", having been a member of LAB off and on since 1969 (when it was LAW) I feel the most intolerable and unproductive years were when their "agenda" was to serve a subset of bicyclists whose only interest was in preserving "road rights". While I had much in common with these riders, in that I rode almost exclusively on the road, and had, at the time, little interest in bikeways, bike paths or bike lanes I was astounded at the tactics they were willing to employ to shut down and out any other voices. Those voices were particularly the voices of women, many of whom were interested and supportive of separated pathways for cyclists.

There was also, at the time, little or no effort to encourage voices from outside the realm of white males of relative economic privilege who were club riders, hobby riders and occasionally, mostly suburban, commuters.

The LAB of today, by comparison, seems to have an agenda that is more inclusive, is encouraging of voices that are more diversified and yes, that means that the power and the voice of that old subset of cyclists with a more singular focus on "road rights" has been diminished. Frankly, I don't miss it.

But I am curious what it is that causes such paranoid suspicion about LAB's "agenda". What do you take issue with from the following statement made in response to the date presented?



Quote:

Take Action
Andy Clarke, president of the League of American Bicyclists, offers five ways to stay safe.

Follow the rules.
Cyclists are rarely culpable in accidents, but it does happen. Avoid collisions by signaling your turns, respecting stop signs, and adhering to rules of the road, Clarke says.

Don't ride against traffic.
In nearly one quarter of the crashes in which a cyclist's behavior was a contributing factor, the rider was on the wrong side of the road. Remain visible by riding with traffic.

Get a rear light.
Clarke points out that cyclists were struck from the rear in 40 percent of the crashes. Make sure you're seen day or night by installing a bright, blinking taillight.

Stay off the sidewalk.
Pedestrians are unpredictable, and motorists have a harder time seeing you when you're crossing an intersection from a sidewalk.

Stay alert.
"The accidents you hear about are mostly due to a bizarre set of circumstances," Clarke says. The best way to prevent these is to pay attention and be ready to react quickly.
buzzman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-14, 07:01 PM   #34
Null66
Senior Member
 
Null66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Garner, NC 27529
Bikes: Built up DT, 2007 Fuji tourer (donor bike, RIP), 1995 1220 Trek
Posts: 2,103
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
Do you mind providing your definition of a "cyclist"?
What kind of non cyclists were involved in the cycling related deaths?
Well, one would be court appointed bike riders...

There's a lot of people who ride bikes but aren't cyclists.

And they make up a lot of the bicycle fatalities.
Null66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-14, 07:33 PM   #35
achoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 4,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Null66 View Post
Well, one would be court appointed bike riders...

There's a lot of people who ride bikes but aren't cyclists.

And they make up a lot of the bicycle fatalities.
Wut?

No true Scotsman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
achoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-14, 07:33 PM   #36
buzzman
----
Thread Starter
 
buzzman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Newton, MA
Bikes:
Posts: 4,570
Quote:
Originally Posted by Null66 View Post
Well, one would be court appointed bike riders...

There's a lot of people who ride bikes but aren't cyclists.

And they make up a lot of the bicycle fatalities.
Wow. In my previous post I reference an old elitism I found intolerable in the old League of American WheelMEN.

I guess it still exists when it comes to advocacy today. I prefer advocacy that wants to represent those who cycle for whatever reason, be it economic, legal, hobby, recreation what have you.

To me a cyclist is someone, anyone who is riding a bike.

I remember League members in the 70's who rode exclusively on weekends for club rides and centuries etc, maybe a "Wednesday night ride" too and drove a car to the start of every one of those rides (!), who considered the guys (usually immigrant) who rode beater bikes every day of the week, did not even own a car but didn't do club rides or ride the latest and greatest in bikes, as "non-cyclists" this drove me away from the League at the time and it seems inexcusable in 2014 to be so limited and limiting in what we consider a cyclist and as someone worthy of protecting on the road.

As for me, I am a "cyclist" when I am out riding my bike, when I am driving I am a "driver" and sitting here typing on my computer I am someone who transports themselves primarily but not exclusively by bike but even that only makes me a "cyclist" when I am actually out on my bike.

Last edited by buzzman; 08-12-14 at 08:22 PM.
buzzman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-14, 08:32 PM   #37
Null66
Senior Member
 
Null66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Garner, NC 27529
Bikes: Built up DT, 2007 Fuji tourer (donor bike, RIP), 1995 1220 Trek
Posts: 2,103
Quote:
Originally Posted by achoo View Post
Wut?

There are those who only ride because they lost their car license in a DUI. And yes, they tend to be likely to continue drinking...

No true Scotsman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzman View Post
Wow. In my previous post I reference an old elitism I found intolerable in the old League of American WheelMEN.

I guess it still exists when it comes to advocacy today. I prefer advocacy that wants to represent those who cycle for whatever reason, be it economic, legal, hobby, recreation what have you.

To me a cyclist is someone, anyone who is riding a bike.

I remember League members in the 70's who rode exclusively on weekends for club rides and centuries etc, maybe a "Wednesday night ride" too and drove a car to the start of every one of those rides (!), who considered the guys (usually immigrant) who rode beater bikes every day of the week, did not even own a car but didn't do club rides or ride the latest and greatest in bikes, as "non-cyclists" this drove me away from the League at the time and it seems inexcusable in 2014 to be so limited and limiting in what we consider a cyclist and as someone worthy of protecting on the road.

As for me, I am a "cyclist" when I am out riding my bike, when I am driving I am a "driver" and sitting here typing on my computer I am someone who transports themselves primarily but not exclusively by bike but even that only makes me a "cyclist" when I am actually out on my bike.
Wow, someone has issues.

An identity like "cyclist" is a self description. Very few people who ride bikes such that maximizes risk; ninja, salmons, or on sidewalks identify as "cyclist".
Has nothing to do with elitism...

Even on MUPs, most people riding bikes would not say they are "cyclists" and take exception to being called so.

Most people who self identify as "cyclists" only ride as such as an exception to their usual practice likely trying to adapt to an unusual circumstance.
Null66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-14, 08:48 PM   #38
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: 23,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by Null66 View Post
Wow, someone has issues.
Yes, Someone does. Everyone who doesn't fit your approved profile for a cyclist is one of the unworthy untermenchen on bicycles who don't count in your scheme of cycling.

Self Identified Cyclists? Is that the new name used by those who preciously identified themselves as Real Cyclists, True Cyclists, Competent Cyclists, and/or Serious Cyclists?
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-14, 08:50 PM   #39
MMACH 5
Cycle Dallas
 
MMACH 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Land of Gar, TX
Bikes: Lucinda--2010 Jamis Aurora Elite & a few others
Posts: 3,602
This thread has certainly taken an odd turn. But while we're on the subject...

Ideally, LAB represents all cyclists (defined as those who ride, not by how or what they ride). And they are doing a fairly good job of looking at the interests of club/fitness cyclists as well as utilitarian/commuting cyclists.
They are also supported by cycle manufacturers and those manufacturers know that more bicycle infrastructure encourages more cycling and more cycling translates into more sales. In recent decades, this has translated into LAB adopting a philosophy that favors more infrastructure. I'm not saying this is a good or bad thing and I'm basing this on mostly word-of-mouth anecdotes.
Most of the hardcore, anti bike laners have supposedly abandoned LAB in favor of Cycle Savvy.
MMACH 5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-14, 08:55 PM   #40
buzzman
----
Thread Starter
 
buzzman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Newton, MA
Bikes:
Posts: 4,570
Quote:
Originally Posted by Null66 View Post
Wow, someone has issues.
Looks like ILTB beat me to it but I will add a voice to the chorus. Yes, you are right I do have issues. I have issues with those who claim the moniker (self identify) as "cyclists" and presume to speak and advocate for every one who rides a bike.

I am really curious how you "self identify" as a "cyclist" and what parameters you are using to make that claim.

If you don't mind carrying over this conversation to this new thread since it veers us off the topic of "come from behind collisions" and bicyclist fatalities- though maybe there are no real "bicyclist" fatalities involved according to some posters or none/not enough worth getting concerned about.
buzzman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-14, 11:16 PM   #41
B. Carfree
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Bikes:
Posts: 6,153
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzman View Post
Besides being one of the more callous statements I've seen in a while on BF, B. Carfree seems to advocate even more of a "do nothing" response to fatal bike accidents. But based on this logic I guess we should not address teen driving accidents or most driving accidents for that matter since they often involve driver impairment or error. Even if bicyclists were puritanical prohibitionists observing all laws we'd still be sharing the road with impaired, flawed drivers and given that they cause a greater proportion of the accidents I still think these fatalities needs to be addressed.
No, you have missed the point. A drunk/ninja/salmon cyclist is creating a hazard on the road that almost entirely puts the risk on him/her. A drunk motorist puts the risk on everyone on the road. If someone is bent on self-destruction, I'm willing to let them do it. If someone is bent on harming others, then even a callous old grouch like me believes we need to take steps to prevent them from succeeding.
B. Carfree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-14, 11:38 PM   #42
buzzman
----
Thread Starter
 
buzzman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Newton, MA
Bikes:
Posts: 4,570
Quote:
Originally Posted by B. Carfree View Post
No, you have missed the point. A drunk/ninja/salmon cyclist is creating a hazard on the road that almost entirely puts the risk on him/her. A drunk motorist puts the risk on everyone on the road. If someone is bent on self-destruction, I'm willing to let them do it. If someone is bent on harming others, then even a callous old grouch like me believes we need to take steps to prevent them from succeeding.
I guess you've kind of answered what I just asked in the other thread I created to address this issue, which, for me, is a separate issue than the "come from behind issue" of the OP. If you don't mind, I'd like to quote this in the other thread and respond there.
buzzman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-14, 01:08 AM   #43
walrus1
Senior Member
 
walrus1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: NYC
Bikes: Schwinn World Sport Jamis Ventura
Posts: 477
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMACH 5 View Post
Do you worry about dying of typhoid? Your odds of getting struck from behind are about the same.
As someone who cycles in a very aggressive city and who gets tailgated at least 1 to 2 times a week I seriously disagree with you about those odds. That being said it's much more likely I'll get taken out by a side swipe or a car completely blowing a red light. But I'd put money on being much more likely to be killed by rear ending then typhoid.
walrus1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-14, 07:29 AM   #44
MMACH 5
Cycle Dallas
 
MMACH 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Land of Gar, TX
Bikes: Lucinda--2010 Jamis Aurora Elite & a few others
Posts: 3,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by walrus1 View Post
As someone who cycles in a very aggressive city and who gets tailgated at least 1 to 2 times a week I seriously disagree with you about those odds. That being said it's much more likely I'll get taken out by a side swipe or a car completely blowing a red light. But I'd put money on being much more likely to be killed by rear ending then typhoid.
We all cycle in aggressive cities. We all think our bicycle trips are worse than everyone else's.

The death rate in America for typhoid is less than 4%. The percentage of cyclists being struck from behind is less than 4%. Your odds of being struck in an intersection are far higher (~64%) and yet you keep pedaling along, crossing those intersections.
MMACH 5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-14, 07:50 AM   #45
gregf83 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Bikes:
Posts: 7,188
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMACH 5 View Post
The death rate in America for typhoid is less than 4%.
4% of what? 4% of the people who actually contract typhoid? There are less than 6000 cases of typhoid in the US per year. If treated the death rate is around 1% so of those 6000 maybe 60 die. That explains why most people have never heard of anyone dying from typhoid fever.
gregf83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-14, 07:52 AM   #46
Null66
Senior Member
 
Null66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Garner, NC 27529
Bikes: Built up DT, 2007 Fuji tourer (donor bike, RIP), 1995 1220 Trek
Posts: 2,103
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
Yes, Someone does. Everyone who doesn't fit your approved profile for a cyclist is one of the unworthy untermenchen on bicycles who don't count in your scheme of cycling.

Self Identified Cyclists? Is that the new name used by those who preciously identified themselves as Real Cyclists, True Cyclists, Competent Cyclists, and/or Serious Cyclists?
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzman View Post
Looks like ILTB beat me to it but I will add a voice to the chorus. Yes, you are right I do have issues. I have issues with those who claim the moniker (self identify) as "cyclists" and presume to speak and advocate for every one who rides a bike.

I am really curious how you "self identify" as a "cyclist" and what parameters you are using to make that claim.

If you don't mind carrying over this conversation to this new thread since it veers us off the topic of "come from behind collisions" and bicyclist fatalities- though maybe there are no real "bicyclist" fatalities involved according to some posters or none/not enough worth getting concerned about.
Both of you need external validation of who you yourselves think you are, pretty serious issues.

What matters in an identity is not someone else's understanding but each person understanding of themselves.

Many, perhaps most people who ride bikes don't think of themselves as "cyclists", even though they ride bikes. Call them that and you'll likely get an ear full of what they think "cyclists" are like. Down here, it involves a rather negative view of lycra, leg shaving, racing, performance enhancers, a particular attitude, and a big dose of "you're not from around here, are you?".... But they still ride bikes... And they do make up a disproportionate number of fatalities.

A neighborhood kid loves riding, but you'd get an earful if you called him a "cyclist". I can't take him on any rides, but the MUP as he insists on riding against traffic.


Me? I'm many things, but I'm not a "cyclist" either... I do ride bikes a fair number of miles a year.

However, I do not ride on sidewalks. Unless there's no other way, a couple bridges over highways are not in my opinion suitable to taking a lane. There's no way a driver could see you in the lane in time to slow down given the usual and customary speed (well over speed limit). The sight lines are just too short for those speeds, yet those are the speeds.

But then, I'm not advocating anything for anybody. Just recognition of the reality that certain behaviors have an extreme risk. Given the numbers of people who ride bikes and do those things, they skew the overall data enough to make the data not applicable to those that don't.

And that the numbers are such that even if you did the high risk behaviors in the same proportion as people who ride bikes. Your overall risk of death is reduced given the offset of the most common way to die, cardiac issues. Think driving across country to flying. Some people do die in airplanes, but it is very few per trip/mile. So if fly instead of drive, there is a extremely small risk of dying in the plane, but it is ever so much less the dying in a car had you drove.



Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzman View Post
I guess you've kind of answered what I just asked in the other thread I created to address this issue, which, for me, is a separate issue than the "come from behind issue" of the OP. If you don't mind, I'd like to quote this in the other thread and respond there.

Mirrors are a good thing. Allows me to be more aware of what's coming at me, and at times the need to get off the road. Freddly? perhaps... But don't really care...

Last edited by Null66; 08-13-14 at 08:01 AM.
Null66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-14, 08:12 AM   #47
MMACH 5
Cycle Dallas
 
MMACH 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Land of Gar, TX
Bikes: Lucinda--2010 Jamis Aurora Elite & a few others
Posts: 3,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregf83 View Post
4% of what? 4% of the people who actually contract typhoid? There are less than 6000 cases of typhoid in the US per year. If treated the death rate is around 1% so of those 6000 maybe 60 die. That explains why most people have never heard of anyone dying from typhoid fever.
Yes. It is a rarity. More rare than being struck from behind.
I was trying to show that struck from behind accidents are rare. They are tragic, but rare. Not the best comparison I could make. I'll try to do better in the future.
MMACH 5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-14, 08:38 AM   #48
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: 23,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by Null66 View Post
What matters in an identity is not someone else's understanding but each person understanding of themselves.

Many, perhaps most people who ride bikes don't think of themselves as "cyclists", even though they ride bikes. Call them that and you'll likely get an ear full of what they think "cyclists" are like.
[SKIP continued silly-willy pedantic patter]
cyclist

cyclist (sklst) noun
One who rides or races a bicycle, motorcycle, or similar vehicle.

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-14, 08:41 AM   #49
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,581
I can't help but wonder if people driving cars consider themselves "motorists."
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-14, 10:16 AM   #50
spare_wheel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NA
Bikes: NA
Posts: 4,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
Anytime I do not provide a comment on whatever topic YOU are thinking about, feel free to fabricate an imaginary straw man response for me if it pleases you. So much for rational arguments.
I'm very grateful that you have the courage to address the inconsistencies of a critique without addressing the subject of the critique.
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 03:11 AM.