Being the greatest bicycle racer in the world does not say much about his traffic cycling knowledge and skills.
neither does posting to bikeforums... :D
regardless of his ability to calmly handle a traffic encounter - he can get more visibility in less time than anyone posting here, including the almighty and effective one.
i'm really glad to see he doesn't want to start a series of 'lance camps' like most baseball and football pros do - but that he has used his success for raising cancer cash and now plans on working on the practical side of cycling.
hopefully he'll stay away from the PEDs* and do good for the average cyclist in his town. maybe it will spread. portland is getting contagious. before long we'll have an anti-motoring quarantine on all those leftist, chomsky readin', bike riding, progressive, pro people towns out there.
(*performance enhancing donuts - while i still like Greg LeMond and many other pros, they seem to pack on the weight after they leave the sport - and if all my heroes get fat and cranky, what options do i have for positive role models?)
bmike
02-14-08, 02:04 PM
And, again, improvement can be made, but to really change anything significantly, cyclist attitude, knowledge, skills and behavior have to be addressed.
forget the marginalization, little respect on the road from motorists, a higher proportion of fatalities to $$ spent on infrastructure, poor planning, and a juggernaut* telling you to drive drive drive for the slightest little thing
*marketing, urban planning, development patterns, road building, subsidies to oil and gas and highway construction... etc. etc.
Helmet Head
02-14-08, 02:30 PM
forget the marginalization, little respect on the road from motorists, a higher proportion of fatalities to $$ spent on infrastructure, poor planning, and a juggernaut* telling you to drive drive drive for the slightest little thing
*marketing, urban planning, development patterns, road building, subsidies to oil and gas and highway construction... etc. etc.
Not forget, but compared to the progress that can be made by addressing cyclist attitude, skill, knowledge and behavior, they're not very significant. Because, with the right attitude and appropriate skills and knowledge, a cyclist can behave in a way in which the effect of the "marginalization, little respect, lack if infrastructure, etc." on inhibiting his ability to use a bicycle to travel effectively, safely and enjoyably is practically irrelevant.
genec
02-14-08, 04:37 PM
Not forget, but compared to the progress that can be made by addressing cyclist attitude, skill, knowledge and behavior, they're not very significant. Because, with the right attitude and appropriate skills and knowledge, a cyclist can behave in a way in which the effect of the "marginalization, little respect, lack if infrastructure, etc." on inhibiting his ability to use a bicycle to travel effectively, safely and enjoyably is practically irrelevant.
Forester has had 30 years to make a significant change... There is no evidence of such change anywhere, and in fact, areas that have relied mainly on VC (such as England) have lost ridershare.
How long do you will think it will take for VC to make a "significant change?"
Allister
02-14-08, 05:34 PM
Not forget, but compared to the progress that can be made by addressing cyclist attitude, skill, knowledge and behavior, they're not very significant. Because, with the right attitude and appropriate skills and knowledge, a cyclist can behave in a way in which the effect of the "marginalization, little respect, lack if infrastructure, etc." on inhibiting his ability to use a bicycle to travel effectively, safely and enjoyably is practically irrelevant.
LOL.
Whenever I read one of these posts, I like to imagine you behind a pulpit in full Fire and Brimstone mode.
Allister
02-14-08, 05:44 PM
That's fine; the rest may well do good, but bikeways don't.
<sigh> You really don't have any vision at all, do you?
John Forester
02-14-08, 05:51 PM
Forester has had 30 years to make a significant change... There is no evidence of such change anywhere, and in fact, areas that have relied mainly on VC (such as England) have lost ridershare.
How long do you will think it will take for VC to make a "significant change?"
You are entirely incorrect in two different ways. The works of the several VC popularizers have benefited all those who have chosen to ride in the VC manner. My work has developed vehicular cycling into a scientifically supported discipline and has protected it from being prohibited by American governments trying to adopt fully childish cycling bikeway systems. This protection has not extended, of course, to the European nations in which childish cycling on bikeways had earlier become so entrenched that vehicular cycling is prohibited by law in many locations.
genec
02-14-08, 06:02 PM
You are entirely incorrect in two different ways. The works of the several VC popularizers have benefited all those who have chosen to ride in the VC manner. My work has developed vehicular cycling into a scientifically supported discipline and has protected it from being prohibited by American governments trying to adopt fully childish cycling bikeway systems. This protection has not extended, of course, to the European nations in which childish cycling on bikeways had earlier become so entrenched that vehicular cycling is prohibited by law in many locations.
Isn't interesting that more people per capita chose to ride bikes in a "childish manner" than in the manner you advocate?
Even here in the US, the majority of bikes are ridden in a "childish manner."
bmike
02-14-08, 06:32 PM
Not forget, but compared to the progress that can be made by addressing cyclist attitude, skill, knowledge and behavior, they're not very significant. Because, with the right attitude and appropriate skills and knowledge, a cyclist can behave in a way in which the effect of the "marginalization, little respect, lack if infrastructure, etc." on inhibiting his ability to use a bicycle to travel effectively, safely and enjoyably is practically irrelevant.
I'll start using the force now when I'm out, because, with the right attitude and appropriate skills and knowledge, a cyclist can behave in a way in which he can effect the very physics of the world around him!
Yesss, cyclists fare best, they do...
or,
"I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, I'm in the right lane position, and doggone it, motorists like me!"
Isn't interesting that more people per capita chose to ride bikes in a "childish manner" than in the manner you advocate?
Even here in the US, the majority of bikes are ridden in a "childish manner."
And, according to John's theories of human behaviour (at least as far as motorists are concerned), if it's the most popular choice, they must have good reasons for doing it, and therefore should be allowed to continue unfettered.
genec
02-14-08, 07:07 PM
And, according to John's theories of human behaviour (at least as far as motorists are concerned), if it's the most popular choice, they must have good reasons for doing it, and therefore should be allowed to continue unfettered.
But... but... it's "childish."
I have to laugh every time he posts that "childish" comment for 2 reasons...
1) it is obvious that many drivers drive in a childish manner... not bothering to learn anything more than the most basic of driving skills
2) we seek "youth" in our activities... we seek to be young, and to feel young... I like riding my bike in a "childish" manner far more than the "serious adult" manner. It's FUN!
Oh, excuse me... back to the gloomy adult manner now... :o
alanbikehouston
02-15-08, 09:34 AM
Y'all argue this stuff in an intellectual manner that is WAAY over my head. All I know is what I've learned from experience:
- riding a bike on narrow residential streets with lots of parked cars, and a small amount of motor traffic moving at 20 mph or 25 mph seems to work well for both me and the motorists. They don't seem too upset that I'm going a tad slower than they are, or holding them up for a few seconds.
- riding a bike on the numerous Texas roads that have four or five very narrow lanes filled with bumper to bumper traffic moving at 40 mph to 50 mph, and with no shoulder and a curb feels like a suicide attempt. I've seen guys ride bikes on those roads, but I've never seen the SAME guy attempt it a second time.
Two of the main routes into downtown Houston are those sorts of roads, and at times, vehicles reach speeds of 60 mph on those roads. Between those roads is a bike trail that is in poor condition, more suited for a mountain bike than for a road bike. But, folks riding bikes into downtown Houston during rush hour feel MUCH safer on that bike trail than on a four-lane motor vehicle raceway.
John Forester
02-15-08, 05:37 PM
Isn't interesting that more people per capita chose to ride bikes in a "childish manner" than in the manner you advocate?
Even here in the US, the majority of bikes are ridden in a "childish manner."
Is that interesting? Of course it is. You state that you, like several others on this list, have chosen to ride in the vehicular manner instead of the childish manner. You seem to have recognized that there are good reasons for doing this, as of course I do, and as the law requires (except where it tries to take away, but largely fails because doing so is recognized as dangerous). Advocating that more of those who choose to cycle should ride in the vehicular manner is clearly advocating that which is best for those persons. Advocating that society should accept that vehicular cycling is the proper way is clearly one of the routes to getting better cyclist behavior.
John Forester
02-15-08, 05:50 PM
Originally Posted by genec Isn't interesting that more people per capita chose to ride bikes in a "childish manner" than in the manner you advocate?
Even here in the US, the majority of bikes are ridden in a "childish manner."
And, according to John's theories of human behaviour (at least as far as motorists are concerned), if it's the most popular choice, they must have good reasons for doing it, and therefore should be allowed to continue unfettered.
First, Allister is trying to transfer my thoughts on how people choose their residences, jobs, and social activities to how they choose to drive cars. These other activities are so different from the methods of driving cars that there is no useful comparison. That is immature debating, and we would be better off if more of it were done at the mature and reasonable level.
To consider the substance of his post, there is no similarity between the training that motorists receive and the training that cyclists receive. Motorists are trained to operate according to the rules of the road because society recognizes the necessity of that training. The reasons don't have to be elucidated here. However, cyclists are trained, in the little that they get, to ride in a childish manner contrary to the rules of the road. That's not good, and society ought to correct that error.
randya
02-15-08, 05:57 PM
it's always wrong if it's not exactly the way John says it should be.
:rolleyes:
Bekologist
02-16-08, 11:05 AM
..... compared to the progress that can be made by addressing cyclist attitude, skill, knowledge and behavior, they're not very significant.
That's so ignorant it's not even funny. Head, just compare 30 percent cycling rates and safer bicycling overall in other countries to US bicycling. Infrastructure is not fixed, social policies are not set in stone. Improvements seen in other countries that are proven to increase bicycling participation and safety can be transferred and adopted for use in the United States.
Cyclists DON'T 'fare best' when they act and are treated just like any other vehicle......
The correct statement is "Cyclists FARE BEST in communities where they act and are given treatment as drivers of human powered vehicles."
ChipSeal
02-16-08, 02:46 PM
- riding a bike on the numerous Texas roads that have four or five very narrow lanes filled with bumper to bumper traffic moving at 40 mph to 50 mph, and with no shoulder and a curb feels like a suicide attempt. I've seen guys ride bikes on those roads, but I've never seen the SAME guy attempt it a second time.
Two of the main routes into downtown Houston are those sorts of roads, and at times, vehicles reach speeds of 60 mph on those roads.
ChipSeal rides on those roads all the time in Dallas. I rode more than 6,000 miles last year.
I am not concerned with my physical safety on such roads. I simply take the lane, as Texas law requires me to do in a lane that is not safe to share. Traffic begins merging left the moment I am spotted by them- mostly when they are more than a quarter mile away. The traffic flows by without a fuss.
In all that cycling in Dallas, I have experienced zero right hooks, thanks to narrow right lanes. Seldom do cars pull out in front of me. (I think I am more visible to them riding where they can see me.) VC works quite well here.
If you try to share a lane on such roads, then yes, it would seem suicidal! :p
Bekologist
02-16-08, 03:15 PM
ah, the "he said, she said" with a little vacuous chestbeating from the south.
design of public space and its' transportational use by the majority of bicyclists(alanbikehuston), or just vc (chipseal's) bicycling antics along cooridors motorists drive 50+?
chipseal, I'm very proud of your abilites bicycling in traffic, don't expect kids, elderly or most bicyclists for that matter to share your enthusiasm for riding heavy, dense, fast traffic flows.
At high speeds of passing traffic, john forestor endorses hugging the curb of high speed narrow laned roads. vc and the fallacy 'cyclists fare best as vehicles' cannot even be practiced by the founder...vc is a bankrupt ideology.
Helmet Head
02-19-08, 04:32 PM
ah, the "he said, she said" with a little vacuous chestbeating from the south.
design of public space and its' transportational use by the majority of bicyclists(alanbikehuston), or just vc (chipseal's) bicycling antics along cooridors motorists drive 50+?
chipseal, I'm very proud of your abilites bicycling in traffic, don't expect kids, elderly or most bicyclists for that matter to share your enthusiasm for riding heavy, dense, fast traffic flows.
At high speeds of passing traffic, john forestor endorses hugging the curb of high speed narrow laned roads. vc and the fallacy 'cyclists fare best as vehicles' cannot even be practiced by the founder...vc is a bankrupt ideology.
Even if there was a modicum of truth in what Bek says, it would not refute the VC principle that cyclists who ride like ChipSeal fare best.
The fact that many others do not have skills, experience or knowledge to do so, and some (elderly and children) are not physically capable, has always been acknowledged and is a separate matter.
But anyone who can comfortably ride on totally physically segregated bike paths for several miles at an average speed of 10-12 mph or higher has the physical capability to ride in traffic over similar terrain. What he or she may not have are the skills, knowledge or experience to ride in traffic reasonably safely, but that can be attained easily enough. A lack of interest in them attaining the necessary skills, knowledge, experience or desire is not any more of a legitimate excuse to create accommodating facilities for them than would be the refusal of someone to take driver training an excuse to create motoring facilities that are safe for untrained drivers (bumper cars for everyone, anyone?).
Bekologist
02-19-08, 04:41 PM
:roflmao: your argument is quite disengenous. I purport alanbike huston IS a vehicular bicyclist.
just understanding VC doesn't make all roads rideable by all 'vc'; some 'vc' will be uncomfortable enough they avoid some roads altogther. remember, head, we've discussed this. additionally, a 'vc' is MORE capable of riding a bike laned road so bike lanes present LESS problems systemically for a 'vc' like yourself, head.
Helmet Head
02-19-08, 04:57 PM
:roflmao: your argument is quite disengenous. I purport alanbike huston IS a vehicular bicyclist.
just understanding VC doesn't make all roads rideable by all 'vc'; some 'vc' will be uncomfortable enough they avoid some roads altogther. remember, head, we've discussed this. additionally, a 'vc' is MORE capable of riding a bike laned road so bike lanes present LESS problems systemically for a 'vc' like yourself, head.
It is not at all clear that Alan has attempted to ride on these arterials with narrow lanes in anything but a curb hugging manner. He might be a vehicular cyclist on low speed roads, but he apparently has not attained the skills, knowledge and/or experience required to ride in the vehicular manner on the high speed roads with narrow outside lanes, as ChipSeal clearly has.
As long time vehicular cyclist, tourist and CABO activist Ruth Barnes once stated when she was asked what kinds of traffic conditions stressed her, she replied: "Get stressed by traffic? I don't get stressed by traffic, I give stress!"
http://www.postfinder.com/post/24385803.html
Bekologist
02-19-08, 05:07 PM
Head, curbhugging IS vehicular!!!! :roflmao:
Helmet Head
02-19-08, 05:41 PM
Head, curbhugging IS vehicular!!!! :roflmao:
Of course it is, Bek, in certain situations, particularly where any driver of a slow moving vehicle would be curbhugging (assuming curb hugging means hugging the curb or edge of the road), like on a 2 lane rural road to allow faster traffic to pass.
But in the situations described by Alan and ChipSeal, curb hugging does not sound like the vehicular thing to do.
rando
02-19-08, 06:14 PM
Y'all argue this stuff in an intellectual manner that is WAAY over my head. All I know is what I've learned from experience:
- riding a bike on narrow residential streets with lots of parked cars, and a small amount of motor traffic moving at 20 mph or 25 mph seems to work well for both me and the motorists. They don't seem too upset that I'm going a tad slower than they are, or holding them up for a few seconds.
- riding a bike on the numerous Texas roads that have four or five very narrow lanes filled with bumper to bumper traffic moving at 40 mph to 50 mph, and with no shoulder and a curb feels like a suicide attempt. I've seen guys ride bikes on those roads, but I've never seen the SAME guy attempt it a second time.
Two of the main routes into downtown Houston are those sorts of roads, and at times, vehicles reach speeds of 60 mph on those roads. Between those roads is a bike trail that is in poor condition, more suited for a mountain bike than for a road bike. But, folks riding bikes into downtown Houston during rush hour feel MUCH safer on that bike trail than on a four-lane motor vehicle raceway.
Listen, can you hear it? yes... it's the voice of reason!
I avoid these roads (2nd and 3rd 'graph) like the plague. Screw VC. I want to have a pleasant ride and to live to ride another day. If someone want to test their VC chops, more power to them, but don't put the rest of us down for not doing it.
Not that anyone's doing that. but if they are, screw you.
Bekologist
02-19-08, 06:37 PM
why, helmet head? as your mentor describes his curbhugging narrow lanes on rural highways,
the onus of safe passing is on the motorist.
AND, since the responsibility of overtaking a bicycle is on the motorists and not the responsibility of the bicyclist,
ANY position, even curbhugging in any narrow lane, is not in conflict with vehicular principles. you're confusing defensive bicycling with vehicular bicycling.
Why do I not put jon on ignore? The humor I get from his ranting and raving about bicycling.
Bekologist
02-19-08, 06:41 PM
I got confused, this thread is about bicyclists 'faring best'.
Taking a global look at bicycling, bicyclists 'fare best' in communities that recognize bicyclists as unique human powered vehicles, and accomodate them as such.
John's fallacy 'bicyclists fare best when they act and are treated as vehicles' is incorrect.
rando
02-20-08, 07:54 AM
Cyclists fare best when they have good accomodations on roadways in which they need them.
Helmet Head
02-20-08, 11:05 AM
Cyclists fare best when they have the skills, knowledge, attitude and experience to not need cyclist-specific accommodations on roadways in order to travel on them safely and effectively.
Bekologist
02-20-08, 11:42 AM
:roflmao: you are talking about able bodied individual cyclists and not as cyclists as a group or class, head.
however, even an experienced, skilled cyclist fares best in communities that recognize bicycling as unique human powered vehicles and are accomodated as such, head.
Helmet Head
02-20-08, 12:12 PM
:roflmao: you are talking about able bodied individual cyclists and not as cyclists as a group or class, head.
Groups or classes don't "fare well", Bek. Groups or classes don't "fare" at all. Only individuals fare, and those individual cyclists who ride in accordance with the vehicular rules of the road (which implies being defensive) fare best.
however, even an experienced, skilled cyclist fares best in communities that recognize bicycling as unique human powered vehicles and are accomodated as such, head.
No, Bek, cyclists fare best when they are recognized to have the same rights and responsibilities as drivers of vehicles, and fare worse when they are seen as having different rights and responsibilities, more akin to pedestrians.
Bekologist
02-20-08, 12:17 PM
um, actually not, head.
there are more bicyclists across all age and economic spectrums using their bikes for more daily trips in countries where bikes are recognized as unique human powered vehicles and accomodated as such.
Bicyclists in communities with progressive social and accomodation policies towards bicycling are both treated better by motorists and incur lower accident rates.
your denial of reality is amusing. Unless you are measuring 'better' by some odd metric, when you look at bicyclists as a class of citizenry, bicyclists most assuredly fare best where bikes are recognized as unique human powered vehicles and accomodated as such.
and I'm sure there's still plenty of club fred group riding in Denmark and Belgium, head.
TRaffic Jammer
02-20-08, 12:20 PM
Maybe it's his American reality, you know, the one where the rest of the world doesn't exist.
rando
02-20-08, 12:23 PM
I don't think I could ever recieve enough "training" to ride some of the roads around here. But, this is a city that accomodates cyclists to a great degree, with Bike lanes, Bike Routes and other amenities. ( not enough, but more than a lot of places have) I see these being used daily.
Helmet Head
02-20-08, 12:24 PM
I don't think I could ever recieve enough "training" to ride some of the roads around here. But, this is a city that accomodates cyclists to a great degree, with Bike lanes, Bike Routes and other amenities. ( not enough, but more than a lot of places have) I see these being used daily.
You and Al should borrow a tandem that fits you two, and he can show you how it's done, I'm sure.
rando
02-20-08, 12:26 PM
:p Don't wanna! you can't make me! I have other options, and I use them. Every rider does not have to ride every road, helmie. If I HAD an accomodation on some of these high-speed arterials, I might ride on them more often. Al does it, and more power to him, but I just don't like it.
Bekologist
02-20-08, 12:30 PM
rememberr, head, don't predicate your fallacy of 'vc=allroad ability' because that is not the case. knowing the rules of the road doesn't automatically infer the ability to traffic dance a 50MPH arterial, dude.
I've talked to LAB trained 'vehicular cyclists' that will still choose to avoid high speed suburban arterials. and i've seen a LAB instructor riding on a bike path when there was a perfectly good street 50 feet away!
genec
02-20-08, 12:38 PM
No, Bek, cyclists fare best when they are recognized to have the same rights and responsibilities as drivers of vehicles, and fare worse when they are seen as having different rights and responsibilities, more akin to pedestrians.
How do you propose to advance this recognition?
Who exactly is suppose to recognize cyclists and acknowledge their rights?
Helmet Head
02-20-08, 01:12 PM
How do you propose to advance this recognition?
Done (for the most part).
Who exactly is suppose to recognize cyclists and acknowledge their rights?
Not who, what. Ours is a system of laws, not of men.
The law is supposed to recognize cyclists and acknowledge their rights, and does (with a few minor exceptions that would be ideal to fix but not required in order to use the roads safely and effectively).
Bekologist
02-20-08, 01:20 PM
:eek:
TRaffic Jammer
02-20-08, 01:24 PM
*shakes head* It's amazing sometimes the ability of people to delude themselves into thinking they are actually saying something. I would have thought that if motorists recognized and acknowledged cyclists' rights, THAT would be the ticket..
genec
02-20-08, 01:33 PM
Done (for the most part).
Not who, what. Ours is a system of laws, not of men.
The law is supposed to recognize cyclists and acknowledge their rights, and does (with a few minor exceptions that would be ideal to fix but not required in order to use the roads safely and effectively).
Right... think that law will pull over and give me room. :rolleyes:
I'd rather have motorists with whom I share the road recognize my rights...
Helmet Head
02-20-08, 02:50 PM
Right... think that law will pull over and give me room. :rolleyes:
I'd rather have motorists with whom I share the road recognize my rights...
They recognize mine.
Helmet Head
02-20-08, 02:52 PM
*shakes head* It's amazing sometimes the ability of people to delude themselves into thinking they are actually saying something. I would have thought that if motorists recognized and acknowledged cyclists' rights, THAT would be the ticket..
Motorists do recognize and acknowledge cyclists' rights - the rights of cyclists who act as vehicle drivers, that is.
But if you're going to ride around acting like even you don't believe you have a right to be there, or as if you do not have an obligation to accommodate safe passing of you by faster traffic when it's safe and reasonable to do so, it's a bit of a stretch to expect others to treat you as if you have those rights and obligations.
TRaffic Jammer
02-20-08, 02:54 PM
You baffle me.... baffler. How can you post and feel satisfied?
Helmet Head
02-20-08, 02:59 PM
You baffle me.... baffler. How can you post and feel satisfied?
Read it again. It's not that hard.
genec
02-20-08, 03:25 PM
I believe.... I believe... Amen brother, I believe.:rolleyes:
Do you think those motorists might also sense when someone is smug?
Helmet Head
02-20-08, 04:17 PM
I believe.... I believe... Amen brother, I believe.:rolleyes:
Do you think those motorists might also sense when someone is smug?
Maybe. Who knows? Who cares? What difference does it make?
The point is they respect my right to the road, even on a commute that is on roads (big suburban arterials) that Robert Hurst considers to be "probably the most dangerous places for cyclists to ride" [link (http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=6198853&postcount=270)].
If the 6 lane 45 mph (posted/ 50-55 mph actual) arterials are the most dangerous places to ride, then everywhere else must be cake, because it's not very difficult for a cyclist riding vehicularly to be quite safe on these roads. Today I did it in the rain (well rain for San Diego, probably drizzle by Seattle standards). Dozens of motorists had to slow down and/or change lanes to pass me. I got three friendly waves and 0 honks (which is typical), though also maybe half a dozen (more than the usual 0 or 1) also seemed confused by my presence out in the rightmost through lane to the left of a lane dedicated to freeway on ramp traffic that needed a little "assistance" to snap out of their stupor. But no big deal.
"I don't get stressed in traffic, I give stress in traffic" - Ruth Barnes
invisiblehand
02-20-08, 04:26 PM
Motorists do recognize and acknowledge cyclists' rights - the rights of cyclists who act as vehicle drivers, that is.
Hmmmm, I think that there is a difference between refusing to kill you -- i.e., slowing down and waiting until it is safe to pass -- and recognizing and acknowledging cyclists' rights.
I can't tell what the most drivers are thinking with a high degree of certainty. In a practical sense, it probably matters little. In my opinion, chances are that no one is going to take away nor give us any more rights -- at least not in a grand fashion -- because most people have very weak feelings on the matter.
Bekologist
02-20-08, 04:38 PM
didjya see any other bicyclists out there riding head? I BET YOU DIDN'T
and did you ride in a bike lane for a while in a vehicular fashion? I BET YOU DID....
For head, a solitary bicyclist with the skill set, attitude and ability to ride arterials doesn't prevent him from riding vehicularily in a bike lane. Head rides in bike lanes as a vehicular cyclist in a community that recognizes bikes as human powered devices and accomodates them along high speed arterials with bike lanes that are mostly vehicular in design.
When you start to see 'bicyclists' as more than just high mileage, skilled, savvyy, riders with techniques and mental training to act like a vehicle in traffic, maybe you'll understand, head.
do you want my mom to not bike to the store if she'd doesn't want to bike amongst SUV's moving 60mph? What if she needs to use her bike for transportation? Tell her to 'suck it up' and get out there in high speed lanes of traffic? You've approach is ludricous for the majority of actual and potential bicyclists in this country.
however, in countries overseas, there are more bicyclists across all age and socio-economic brackets and safer bicyclists that ride in the vehicular manner for bicycles in their countries.
Even Head is reaping the benefits of riding in an accomodated community. (He just doesn't like to mention that-perhaps it's a bit of denial?)
Where do bicyclists 'fare best'? In communities that recognize bicycles as uniquely human powered vehicles and accomodated as such.
Course, in Cali, bikes are NOT vehicles (you can thank john forestor for that. He was also one of the sole bicyclists voices supporting the ban of bikes from freeways in Cali if slow speed alternatives are available)
Helmet Head
02-20-08, 06:01 PM
Hmmmm, I think that there is a difference between refusing to kill you -- i.e., slowing down and waiting until it is safe to pass -- and recognizing and acknowledging cyclists' rights.
I can't tell what the most drivers are thinking with a high degree of certainty. In a practical sense, it probably matters little. In my opinion, chances are that no one is going to take away nor give us any more rights -- at least not in a grand fashion -- because most people have very weak feelings on the matter.
Fair enough. All I care about is whether their behavior is consistent with recognizing my rights, which it is.