Vehicular Cycling (VC) - Which are more vehicular shoulders or bike lanes?

Yes, motorists make wide turns often... especially when making turns at higher speeds.

We know what they are supposed to do... which is slow down, move close to the curb and then turn. That is not what happens... especially with larger vehicles such as SUVs.

Making a wide turn to do so at high speed and making a wide turn because they don't know they can be (or are prohibited by law from) driving in a bike lane are two different things. Knowing that some larger vehicles cannot turn from right near the curb is one more reason not to be there at an intersection.

Making a wide turn to do so at high speed and making a wide turn because they don't know they can be (or are prohibited by law from) driving in a bike lane are two different things. Knowing that some larger vehicles cannot turn from right near the curb is one more reason not to be there at an intersection.

Oh they can turn from the curb... but they chose not to slow down to do so. Physically being able to and driving too fast are two different things.

This is just like the turn signal thing... turn signals are very often not used... work perfectly fine, but just not used.

Oh they can turn from the curb... but they chose not to slow down to do so. Physically being able to and driving too fast are two different things.

Ever driven a large SUV? Unless you like climbing up 6-8 inch curbs and then dropping back down after the turn, you are better off turning a bit wider than you would in a normal size car.

Ever driven a large SUV? Unless you like climbing up 6-8 inch curbs and then dropping back down after the turn, you are better off turning a bit wider than you would in a normal size car.

My wife's company owns a Land Cruiser. She uses it to access building work sites under construction. Yeah, I have no problem driving it... nor slowing down to make proper turns from the curb. I also have no problem driving it at or under the speed limit... which many motorists DO seem to have a difficult time doing. The turn signals also work.

The issues you describe are not issues of the vehicle... but of the handling by the motorist.

A large big rig has to turn wide due to the turning radius of the trailer... that issue does not exist on standard consumer SUVs.

My wife's company owns a Land Cruiser. She uses it to access building work sites under construction. Yeah, I have no problem driving it... nor slowing down to make proper turns from the curb. I also have no problem driving it at or under the speed limit... which many motorists DO seem to have a difficult time doing. The turn signals also work.

The issues you describe are not issues of the vehicle... but of the handling by the motorist.

A large big rig has to turn wide due to the turning radius of the trailer... that issue does not exist on standard consumer SUVs.

A large big rig often has to turn from the left lane of a 2 lane each direction road when there is a curb. I see it all the time and they still barely clear the curb. With squared off corners, a large SUV cannot turn from as close to the curb as a regular pasenger car can. It has to do with the length of the vehicle (which with a big rig is substantial), not the turning radius. Imagine a stretch limo trying to make a right hand turn from next to the curb.

A large big rig often has to turn from the left lane of a 2 lane each direction road when there is a curb. I see it all the time and they still barely clear the curb. With squared off corners, a large SUV cannot turn from as close to the curb as a regular pasenger car can. It has to do with the length of the vehicle (which with a big rig is substantial), not the turning radius. Imagine a stretch limo trying to make a right hand turn from next to the curb.

Your point about the stretch limo is valid... BTW that IS part of the turning radius.

But your typical SUV is nowhere near as long as a stretch limo. They may have to make the turn further from the curb than say a Mini Cooper, but the fact is they don't have to make the turn 6 feet from the curb... which is where I see many motorists "carving the corners."

And what about those often unused turn signals... do you attribute that to the vehicle being too long too? Or the general attitude of the motorist.


EDIT. Here let me make it easy for you to envision and understand. Not many vehicles have a difficult time turning from a ROTL. Better yet... ever notice how easily SUVs etc manage to make it through the narrow confines of the local McDonalds drive thru. If that kind of handling and turning can be done in a drive thru, it can be done next to a curb.

States with Mandatory Bike Lane Use:
Alabama, California, Hawaii, Maryland, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania

States with Mandatory Side Path Use:
AL, GA, KS, LA, MI, NE, NY, ND, OK, OR, SC, UT, VA, WV, WY

States with Mandatory Shoulder Use:
Alaska, Colorado, Maryland, New York

Are you sure that Virginia has a Mandatory Side Path Use law? The WABA website suggests that it does not.

http://waba.org/areabiking/bikelaws.php

Your point about the stretch limo is valid... BTW that IS part of the turning radius.

But your typical SUV is nowhere near as long as a stretch limo. They may have to make the turn further from the curb than say a Mini Cooper, but the fact is they don't have to make the turn 6 feet from the curb... which is where I see many motorists "carving the corners."

And what about those often unused turn signals... do you attribute that to the vehicle being too long too? Or the general attitude of the motorist.


EDIT. Here let me make it easy for you to envision and understand. Not many vehicles have a difficult time turning from a ROTL. Better yet... ever notice how easily SUVs etc manage to make it through the narrow confines of the local McDonalds drive thru. If that kind of handling and turning can be done in a drive thru, it can be done next to a curb.

With long vehicles, the rear of the vehicle carves a much different path than the front. This has nothing to do with the turning radius of the vehicle although the smaller the turning radius, the bigger difference there is between the two arcs.

Carving corners is certainly not a cyclist only problem, at least not as much as you seem to be making it out to be, just like speeding and drunk driving aren't cyclist only issues. If you really want people making slow turns, make all roadways barely wide enough to fit the vehicles intended to use it and completely square off the corners. Bike lanes only add width to the roadway allowing for faster turns and so do right turn only lanes. Then we can all move nice and slowly.

I'm not sure why you are bringing up turn signals. Most turn signals that are used are useless and some people are so pathetic at using them that often turn signals are ignored. There are plenty of times when they are useful to help speed things up but I'd put them pretty far down on the safety priority list for cyclists.

With long vehicles, the rear of the vehicle carves a much different path than the front. This has nothing to do with the turning radius of the vehicle although the smaller the turning radius, the bigger difference there is between the two arcs.

Carving corners is certainly not a cyclist only problem, at least not as much as you seem to be making it out to be, just like speeding and drunk driving aren't cyclist only issues. If you really want people making slow turns, make all roadways barely wide enough to fit the vehicles intended to use it and completely square off the corners. Bike lanes only add width to the roadway allowing for faster turns and so do right turn only lanes. Then we can all move nice and slowly.

I'm not sure why you are bringing up turn signals. Most turn signals that are used are useless and some people are so pathetic at using them that often turn signals are ignored. There are plenty of times when they are useful to help speed things up but I'd put them pretty far down on the safety priority list for cyclists.

We'll have to disagree on the turning radius... I feel that the whole vehicle is part of the turning radius, not just the front part... as it is not a complete turn until the rest of the vehicle comes along...

But as far as making roadways wider (BTW bike lanes do not add width, they only mark off width that is already there) and turn signals... etc. I am well aware that not only cyclists are effected... pedestrians and other motorists are also effected. What I am aluding too is a lack of proper vehicle handling by motorists that just don't care, or don't take the time (for whatever imagined reason) to drive their vehicles properly. They don't use turn signals, they clip corners or carve corners, drive too fast for posted speed and conditions, and tailgate. Does everyone do this... no. But there are quite a few motorists that drive carelessly and others take the brunt of their poor driving habits.

I know where this is going... next you will ask if I am a perfect driver... and the answer is no, I am not... nor am I a perfect cyclist. But I try... I pay attention, I can corner from close to the curb and I do use turn signals to convey my intent to other drivers, and I do drive at or under the speed limit. I drive friendly and treat my fellow road users with respect. Motorists that do not do this are being selfish in their use of the roads and others suffer from it... That is the bottom line.

The vehicle is not to blame... it is the user that controls it that makes the difference. Is it up to the rest of society to compensate for poor drivers?

DE's slow moving vehicle and specific cycling laws say that one must use the right hand lane or ride as close as practicable to the curb when going less than the normal speed of traffic at that time. On a 2 lane highway where there is no available passing lane and there are 5 or more vehicles being slowed below the normal traffic speed on that road due to the slow moving vehicle, you are required to pull off into the shoulder (or available turnout) to allow traffic to pass. This law is not applicable when there is an available passing lane (multilane roadway, dashed centerline with no opposite direction traffic).

Somehow, many normal people and some LEO's and apparently most cyclists, read these laws and conclude that cyclists should always use the shoulder when available.

I think DE's laws encourage safe and courteous cycling without the unnecessary confusion that's added by trying to fit bike lanes into the mix (although DE still does stripe some bike lanes). DE's cycling advocates on the other hand have made such wonderful comments as "use the sidewalk when available" and "ride as far right as possible."
There is a huge problem with the general perception of bike laws (and in enforcement) that I will state as “As long as you can make a case that the cyclists should be riding somewhere else then that’s where they should be riding.” If a cyclist is riding to the far right and gets right hooked or doored then they are at fault for not riding in the middle of the lane just like a motorcycle. If they are riding in the middle of the lane then they are at fault for getting rear ended or for unnecessarily delaying traffic (even if no line of cars are following the cyclists) because they should be riding to the far right.

Yah some cycling advocates or “safety experts” are the real problem, which is why I would love to see this stuff go national in the Uniform Vehicle Code so we can get the best of our experts focused on get the best laws for cyclists rather then each state having to reinvent the wheel.

Just to throw my two cents into the turning radius thing; some SUVs have a roll over problem if they take a turn too fast. So on one hand they have a tight turn radius if the go slow enough but in general they seem to want to turn like a truck and use part of the left adjacent lane to increase the radius and speed of the turn. So basically because of car design and driver behavior I don’t see motorVs using a bike lane or right most portion of a WOL to execute a right turn from any time soon.

We'll have to disagree on the turning radius... I feel that the whole vehicle is part of the turning radius, not just the front part... as it is not a complete turn until the rest of the vehicle comes along...

Ok, so regardless of what we're calling it, a longer vehicle needs to make a bigger arc to make a turn. Some of the carving of corners you see is probably due to that, some due to people's misunderstanding of how to turn when a bike lane is present, and some people who just don't want to slow down. Good luck trying to get people into smaller cars or to take turns slower. Removing bike lane stripes is pretty easy though.


(BTW bike lanes do not add width, they only mark off width that is already there)

I have to laugh at myself for making a statement like "bike lanes add width to the roadway." I constantly remind people that bike lanes don't add width and that the width would still be there if the stripe was gone. And now I make the same mistake and get called on it. Good job, Gene:)


The vehicle is not to blame... it is the user that controls it that makes the difference. Is it up to the rest of society to compensate for poor drivers?

If nobody else is willing to do much about it, then it's up to YOU to compensate for them, or just stop using the roads. Just like health care and car insurance costs are covered by everybody even though they are only high because of a few. It sucks if you dwell on it but the reality is that there are ways to make it have so little affect on your daily life that it's meaningless, in my opinion and experience.

There is a huge problem with the general perception of bike laws (and in enforcement) that I will state as “As long as you can make a case that the cyclists should be riding somewhere else then that’s where they should be riding.” If a cyclist is riding to the far right and gets right hooked or doored then they are at fault for not riding in the middle of the lane just like a motorcycle. If they are riding in the middle of the lane then they are at fault for getting rear ended or for unnecessarily delaying traffic (even if no line of cars are following the cyclists) because they should be riding to the far right.

Yah some cycling advocates or “safety experts” are the real problem, which is why I would love to see this stuff go national in the Uniform Vehicle Code so we can get the best of our experts focused on get the best laws for cyclists rather then each state having to reinvent the wheel.

If cyclists are being found at fault after being in a collision for using too much of a traffic lane then it sounds like your states laws are really an issue. I have to agree with your general perception of bike laws (at least according to those who feel the need to tell me what the laws are, in their own words). It would seem obvious that it's illegal to go straight from a right turn lane but try telling that to people who have witnessed every other cyclist on a road do just that and you don't, during rush hour of all times (funny how none of them comprehends that even if they sat behind me for the entire 3 miles I'm on this road that they'd be delayed less than a couple minutes).

I also agree that uniform traffic laws throughout the country would be a big bonus for cyclists. I'd prefer the laws to be written with as little mention of specific cycling laws as possible, other than to include them as legal road going vehicles and the basic equipment details. Let the slow moving vehicle laws cover everything else.

If nobody else is willing to do much about it, then it's up to YOU to compensate for them, or just stop using the roads. Just like health care and car insurance costs are covered by everybody even though they are only high because of a few. It sucks if you dwell on it but the reality is that there are ways to make it have so little affect on your daily life that it's meaningless, in my opinion and experience.

Its also up to us to tell those that design roads that we do not want high speed arterials all over the place.

It is time for us to stand up and oppose things like The American Dream Coalition... who believes:

"...your car is designed to be most effective at speeds of 50 to 60 miles per hour. Actions that reduce speeds below this level will lead to more pollution."

The ADC is also against "traffic calming." Again citing pollution as their "sacred cow."

This is not to say that high speed roads cannot exist, but that every road out there does NOT have to be a high speed road. Further we should discourage high speed driving on surface streets through the use of proper enforcement.

Now I don't know how things are in your area, but around here the arterials are moving to 50MPH... not making for comfortable (understatement) mixed traffic situations. As long as freeways are high speed and limited to motor traffic... why can't the surface streets (used by peds and cyclists) remain at 40MPH and lower speeds.

We can advocate for that!

...regardless of all this semantic bickering, riding a bike in a lane to the left of the fog line is more 'vehicular' than riding a bike on the shoulder to the right of the fog line.

how some bike advocates like steve goodridge would be satisfied with road designs that move bicyclists to the right of the fog line is beyond me.

bicycling in a class-preffered lane is more vehicular than riding on the shoulders of high speed roads.

...regardless of all this semantic bickering, riding a bike in a lane to the left of the fog line is more 'vehicular' than riding a bike on the shoulder to the right of the fog line.

how some bike advocates like steve goodridge would be satisfied with road designs that move bicyclists to the right of the fog line is beyond me.

bicycling in a class-preffered lane is more vehicular than riding on the shoulders of high speed roads.

We know that you, Bekologist, strongly advocate bike lanes for your own reasons. But trying to argue for bike lanes by use of a shoulder argument is not at all persuasive. You can make and repeat claims as often as you like, but you have never provided any logic to support them. Hence, they have no credibility.

Contrary to your repeated claims, the presence of a bike-lane stripe indicates to the public that the cyclist should be riding in the bike lane, which means, to this same public, that cyclists' right to use the roadway is limited to the area of the bike lane (unless one of the approved excuses is present). When the cyclist rides on a shoulder that is sufficiently smooth to be attractive to him, there is no indication that he is limited to the shoulder. Several mountain highways that I used to ride frequently had shoulders of varying width, sometimes down to zero. So, I just followed along near the right-hand edge of the effective pavement, sometimes on the shoulder and sometimes on the traffic lane, with no problems at all.

jhon, it's glaringly obvious. bike lanes are more vehicular than a shoulder. riding a bike to the left of the fog line, in a preffered class lane, is more vehicular in nature than riding a shoulder of a road to the right of the fog line.

some of the bicycle 'drivers' in this forum have lauded shoulder riding, versus preferred class lanes. and that attitude is decidely anti-vehicular in scope.

Whatever website that's still listing PA as a mandatory bike lane state really needs to be updated. That law was repealed almost 10 years ago.
Possibly! Do you have a link or quote of PA law that is more current?
http://members.aol.com/StatutesP1/75.Cp.35A.html

§§ 3505. Riding on roadways and pedalcycle paths.
(f) Mandatory use of available pedalcycle path.--Whenever a lane or path for pedalcycles has been provided as a part of a highway and mandatory use of the lane or path has been indicated by official traffic-control devices, pedalcycle riders shall use the lane or path and shall not use any other part of the highway.
The Pennsylvania Statutes / Judiciary@att.net / This webpage was last updated July 2003
Operation Of Pedalcycles / Judiciary@aol.com / last revised January 1998


Are you sure that Virginia has a Mandatory Side Path Use law? The WABA website suggests that it does not.

http://waba.org/areabiking/bikelaws.php

In GA, MI, OK, OR, UT, VA Mandatory Side Path Use rule applies only if there is a local ordinance or sign requiring path use.

Possibly! Do you have a link or quote of PA law that is more current?
http://members.aol.com/StatutesP1/75.Cp.35A.html

§§ 3505. Riding on roadways and pedalcycle paths.
(f) Mandatory use of available pedalcycle path.--Whenever a lane or path for pedalcycles has been provided as a part of a highway and mandatory use of the lane or path has been indicated by official traffic-control devices, pedalcycle riders shall use the lane or path and shall not use any other part of the highway.
The Pennsylvania Statutes / Judiciary@att.net / This webpage was last updated July 2003
Operation Of Pedalcycles / Judiciary@aol.com / last revised January 1998

http://www.dmv.state.pa.us/pdotforms/vehicle_code/chapter35.pdf

Go to page 2, section 3505 (f):Mandatory use of available pedalcycle path.--(Deleted by amendment).
(Dec. 15, 1995, P.L.655, No.72, eff. 60 days; Dec. 21, 1998, P.L.1126, No.151, eff. 60 days)

Main link to PA vehicle code: http://www.dmv.state.pa.us/vehicle_code/index.shtml

Its also up to us to tell those that design roads that we do not want high speed arterials all over the place.

It is time for us to stand up and oppose things like The American Dream Coalition... who believes:


The ADC is also against "traffic calming." Again citing pollution as their "sacred cow."

This is not to say that high speed roads cannot exist, but that every road out there does NOT have to be a high speed road. Further we should discourage high speed driving on surface streets through the use of proper enforcement.

Now I don't know how things are in your area, but around here the arterials are moving to 50MPH... not making for comfortable (understatement) mixed traffic situations. As long as freeways are high speed and limited to motor traffic... why can't the surface streets (used by peds and cyclists) remain at 40MPH and lower speeds.

We can advocate for that!

The arterials I take to work these days are 40-45mph and 45-50mph (different sections have different speed limits). The one road that I've discussed before has over 70 intersections in a 3 mile stretch yet is marked at 45mph. Average motorist speed is around 30mph although speed in between traffic lights is much higher. The road would be more pleasant for cycling with a lower speed limit. I can't disagree there.
Overall traffic speeds probably wouldn't be affected at all even if people actually drove the speed limit. Actually, there is a section of this road on my way to the LBS where it is a 40mph speed limit, and 3 lanes with no shoulder (as opposed to 2 lanes with a shoulder). Traffic is much calmer in this section and it's much more pleasant for cycling because of that.

It's tough to say what has caused road designers to forget about keeping speed reasonable for cycling. One theory could be that in areas where cycling makes up a low percentage of the transportation mix, road designers just assume cyclists won't be using the roads. Another is that with bike lanes present, road designers just assume any cyclists present are no longer part of the traffic flow and the road can be assigned whatever speed limit motorists want.

The arterials I take to work these days are 40-45mph and 45-50mph (different sections have different speed limits). The one road that I've discussed before has over 70 intersections in a 3 mile stretch yet is marked at 45mph. Average motorist speed is around 30mph although speed in between traffic lights is much higher. The road would be more pleasant for cycling with a lower speed limit. I can't disagree there.
Overall traffic speeds probably wouldn't be affected at all even if people actually drove the speed limit. Actually, there is a section of this road on my way to the LBS where it is a 40mph speed limit, and 3 lanes with no shoulder (as opposed to 2 lanes with a shoulder). Traffic is much calmer in this section and it's much more pleasant for cycling because of that.

It's tough to say what has caused road designers to forget about keeping speed reasonable for cycling. One theory could be that in areas where cycling makes up a low percentage of the transportation mix, road designers just assume cyclists won't be using the roads. Another is that with bike lanes present, road designers just assume any cyclists present are no longer part of the traffic flow and the road can be assigned whatever speed limit motorists want.


Are bike lanes present?

Other than that, I see that you agree that lower speeds, enforced, would be desirable for cyclists.

joejack951,
Thanks:D

Are bike lanes present?

Other than that, I see that you agree that lower speeds, enforced, would be desirable for cyclists.

Are bike lanes present when? I was playing theorist there for a bit and saying that road designers would be more likely to put a higher speed limit on a road that had bike lanes than one that did not because of the assumption that cyclists are not part of the traffic flow on that road. Why limit motorists' speed if there will not be slow moving cyclists in the flow?

I think lower speed limits can make things more pleasant for cyclists, although ultimately, lower levels of traffic are really what makes the difference. I spend as much time dreaming about the latter as I do about 100% enforcement of the speed limit: not much.

I will bring up 5 VC/BL situations. I have 2 cycling speeds, going for a stroll (5% & 10 m/h) and going somewhere (95% and 20 m/h). If I'm going somewhere, I stay away from BL like the plague as they're plagued with loads of Sunday cyclists and by traffic light multiplication and I constantly fear turning cars who'll ignore my right of straightaway.

ONE
Montreal, the BL on Rachel street. Motor vehicles have synchronized traffic lights every 6 streets or so. The bike lane has traffic lights at every intersection, with green only being available 10 seconds or so per cycle, much less than green time on the car lanes. All those intersections got lights following the increase in collisions since bike lane (separated from traffic by parked cars)!!!!!!! Now collisions have gone down somewhat, but basically at the cost of stopping at every single intersection instead of every 6 like cars... Mind you, the BLs on most Montreal streets are not mandatory, however, as I ride on the street for the privilege of speed and nearly non stop progression, I continuously get honked at my uneducated drivers who think my place is on the BL, I just flip them.

TWO
In Whitehorse Yukon, there's a 2 mile hill that separates downtown from the rest of uptown, which represents 3/4 of the population. Until 2000, cyclists shared the roadway to great pleasure, asphalt was good winter or summer, and speed was great, accidents were rare, there is only one intersection on the 'up' side so the fast 'down' side was safe. Then a group of scaredycats got this idea that 2 Mile Hill was dangerous and built a single 'mandatory' lane on the 'up' side that winds tighter than a prairie river in order to slow down cyclists, in summertime, downhill cyclists just cut through the grass, quite cute, but in winter time the trail is nearly impossible as it's not kept as gritty as the roadway. PCs have recently taken over and passed a helmet for everyone law as well, just horrible.

THREE
Fort Lauderdale, FL, been here a lot the past few years. Mostly at the edge of the lane is a water gutter, there is no shoulder at all. A couple of blvds with modern renovations have reduced treed medians to create free-use BLs but they are quite rare. Most cyclists here must VC and although speed limits on city streets vary from 35 m/h to 55 m/h, drivers often do +15 (myself included, that's traffic flow, plain and simple) so cycling here requires nerves of steel, you actually share narrow lanes with traffic averaging 40 m/h. Down here I do a lot of hands-free driving which catches drivers attention and increases my visibility by a few inches, sometimes I'll make my hands 'dynamic' and turn my head and stare drivers down, to make sure my presence is known. When I do get to Commercial Blvd, I'll use the BL as intersections are very far apart, the BL is not separated by parked cars, the BL is traced all the way to the intersection as straight away and each car lane is wide, so everyone has lots of space for reaction time. On most roads however, I just grit my teeth and go as fast as I can and try to sync with traffic lights so over a 15 m course, I may need to stop only 2-3 times, which keeps my average speed high and saves startup energy (my favorite movie theatre).

FOUR
Bike trail from La Jolla, CA to the outskirt of San Diego. uuuuuuuuuEEEEEEEEEEE, nothing beats that! miles of intersection free, 6' wide unused beautiful pavement, a quarter mile from the main road. I'd come back from the movies late at night, practically all downhill, low grade, but to get to La Jolla, I still preferred the streets, better scenery and better breeze from the ocean.

FIVE
Portugal, Spain, France. Spent 3 months cycling there during July-August a few years ago. Never saw a BL, never felt unsafe, even on Portugal's oceanside cliffs and narrow winding roads. Best cycling I ever did. Bottom line, motor vehicle drivers there are not road hoggers and have respect for cyclists. These countries are certainly not known in Europe as being cycle-friendly because they must compare to Netherlands, but compared to N.America, the difference in attitude by motorized drivers is absolutely astounding.

By basic policy, for my own safety, I watch out for myself and assume every car out there is a loaded gun, I drive aggressive, in the middle of the lane when traffic is slow, in the lane on the right if traffic is faster than me but with my left hand often in motion or hands off. It's amazing how motorists fret when they see a handless cyclist, gives me the leeway I need. I've been hit and will certainly be hit again. My one exception to loving my cycle, if I can't ride lidless I don't ride. final

ONE
Montreal, the BL on Rachel street. Motor vehicles have synchronized traffic lights every 6 streets or so. The bike lane has traffic lights at every intersection, with green only being available 10 seconds or so per cycle, much less than green time on the car lanes. All those intersections got lights following the increase in collisions since bike lane (separated from traffic by parked cars)!!!!!!! Now collisions have gone down somewhat, but basically at the cost of stopping at every single intersection instead of every 6 like cars... Mind you, the BLs on most Montreal streets are not mandatory, however, as I ride on the street for the privilege of speed and nearly non stop progression, I continuously get honked at my uneducated drivers who think my place is on the BL, I just flip them.

That sounds like cycling hell.

Joejack, you get my drift exactly. As the Green parties in N.Amer can not copy Green values from Europe, as cyclists here should not aim at Netherlands or any European cyclist solutions. Due to population distribution differences and cost of fuel, Europe is INHERENTLY friendlier to cyclists and cyclist activism and legal has little to do with it and is of minor political interest.

N.America, due to uneven population distribution and cheaper fuel IS A MOTORIST centered society and there is no way in hell that will change. Roads here will remain INHERENTLY non cyclist friendly and cyclists are too puny an issue to even make a dent in that. There are much larger issues to be concerned with. This is why I wish we could get BL advocates to just move to Europe if they need BL. I feel 100% safer and 100% more efficient taking my place in traffic as any other vehicle, with a speed compensation of course. It's not much of a difference from low Horsepower mopeds really. If play cyclists can't handle traffic, they should simply do as their as other play cyclists do, load the bike on the car and get to your play trails without stressing out the rest of the community.

BL are a way of excluding cyclists from traffic, and exclusion is never good.

N.America, due to uneven population distribution and cheaper fuel IS A MOTORIST centered society and there is no way in hell that will change. Roads here will remain INHERENTLY non cyclist friendly and cyclists are too puny an issue to even make a dent in that. There are much larger issues to be concerned with.
I’m curious, do you have kids, if so what ages?

I’m curious, do you have kids, if so what ages?

Hmmm, somehow I feel a trap being set here... :)

Hmmm, somehow I feel a trap being set here... :)
Man I just hate it when people see through my diabolical plans. :D

So how about letting us know where you live?

Man I just hate it when people see through my diabolical plans. :D

So how about letting us know where you live?

I'm a citizen of the planet, and I believe that quality of life on the planet can be improved, but I also believe that bandaids aren't going to do it. I think it needs to crash before it can be cleaned up. I have too much experience with 'bandaids eventually coming off'. So I may not be chatting on this site for long, as I get the impression that it was constituted mainly for a certain region. However, I am enjoying this ever so vibrant discussion for the time being. This forum deserves much applause.

I have too much experience with 'bandaids eventually coming off'. So I may not be chatting on this site for long, as I get the impression that it was constituted mainly for a certain region.
Yeah. We don't serve your kind (*) here.:eek:

Buh-Bye. Don't get hit by the cyber door on your way out.


* Smarmy Know-It-Alls who claim to be citizens of the planet.:rolleyes:

Yeah. We don't serve your kind (*) here.:eek:

Buh-Bye. Don't get hit by the cyber door on your way out.


* Smarmy Know-It-Alls who claim to be citizens of the planet.:rolleyes:

Ah sweetie, I'm not gone yet! It's way instructional:love:, I wouldn't miss it for the world, any part of the world. Saying I belong to one place would be a blaring lie, sorry... Today I'm in Fort Lauderdale, tomorrow I'll be in Whitehorse, my cycle has more air miles than it should, and I nostalgically remember the days my cycle flew instead of a piece of luggage with no extra $, How airlines have changed. I guess there's one earthly benefit to overcrowded plains, each person's ecological footprint is smaller :)

Ah sweetie, I'm not gone yet!
There is always the ignore feature.

There is always the ignore feature.


I will not put anybody on "ignore", all posts on BF and other forums are fully open to my scrutiny, providing I have time to read them.

I will not put anybody on "ignore", all posts on BF and other forums are fully open to my scrutiny, providing I have time to read them.

You are correct, it would be nice to have time to read them all. There are plenty of interesting people around here to read :) This particular ignore was only my second time in... let's see, since 1994. I figure it's not too bad.

I'm a citizen of the planet, and I believe that quality of life on the planet can be improved, but I also believe that bandaids aren't going to do it. I think it needs to crash before it can be cleaned up. I have too much experience with 'bandaids eventually coming off'. So I may not be chatting on this site for long, as I get the impression that it was constituted mainly for a certain region. However, I am enjoying this ever so vibrant discussion for the time being. This forum deserves much applause.
So, you are going to let the heckling deter you from speaking your mind?

Not good.

So, you are going to let the heckling deter you from speaking your mind?
Not good.

Never :)

Never :)
;)