Of course it is. The point is that it is equally as flawed as thinking that cars are "safe". Rhetoric is all about exploiting flawed reasoning. If you're looking for good arguments, back away from the computer slowly and never return to the Internet.
What you are saying is that your cycling skills have not evolved or improved at all since you where 6.
Interestingly, I didn't say that. If I wanted to say that, I would have said that. What I "said" was what you quoted.
park 2 people on bikes one adult and one child next to a car now walk around the other side and look at how many bicycles you see. thats not an awareness issue it is physics as the light reflected off the child in daylight will not penetrate thru the car nor warp around it to allow the observer on the other side to see the child.
You sound really serious about this. {shrug} None of this was my point.
A 18-24 yo experienced bicyclist riding to college does not = a 6 yo riding to kindergarten.
I totally disagree; they are exactly the same in every respect. Yes yes, that's what I meant.
The BikeForums Team
-adv-
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content here.
Isn't that the best part of leaping a tall building?
bac
"Don't do (insert activity here), or you will die."
signed .... The Media
st0ut
Yes i am.
tried to ride with my son to his school. a cop pulling out of the coffeshop, WITHOUT stopping, looked over a parked car so he could get away with a "california stop" with my son 3 ft in frount of me and in his blind spot. the cop saw me assumed i was far enough away but did not see my son he proceeded to accelerate and had i not SCREAMED to STOP my son would have been impacted by the squad car. Had his radios been going or cell phone i dont think he would have heard me.
BTW that was the first time we tred to ride to school on his own bike. that was 1 week ago.
My son did nothing wrong, i did nothing wrong, the cop is highly trained driver that made a mistake.
you keep living in your theoretical world i'll live in the real one.
genec
OMG this is flawed on SOOO many levels.
A 18-24 yo experienced bicyclist riding to college does not = a 6 yo riding to kindergarten.
Or even a 10 year old... This is exactly the issue that so many seem to be overlooking...
Of course John Forester used to tout that children of a certain age could be taught to ride bikes on most streets with his form of education. I can't quote it exactly, but it had to do with a child being old enough to understand the rules of a game such as baseball should be able to bike their way to school.
While the child could probably be taught the basics, the education opportunities are not readily available, and even so, obviously do not apply to all children of all ages, and all traffic situations.
Some schools are located in wonderful country like settings... others are located at the intersections of arterial roads... obviously conditions are quite different for either setting.
Brian Sorrell
To clarify my use of rhetoric and satire: We can pick out instances where kids were in danger while biking to school, and we can pick out instances where kids were in danger getting to school by car, or by bus or whatever. Kids have been killed and injured on their ways to school on bicycles, in cars, in busses, etc. Telling stories, citing statistics -- none of this makes anyone's position "right". And being right is not what's at issue; there will not be a single answer to everyone's concerns.
What we all have in common here -- and this is what's important -- is that we use our skills and resources to minimize and mitigate risks. Now, I'm a far more proficient cyclist than I am a driver, and consequently, I feel safer on the bicycle than in the car. Obviously, your mileage will vary. And so will your kid's mileage. And so on. Positions that advance the automobile as a (nearly) risk-free (read: "safe") means of transportation are naive. That's what I was reading into some of the points referenced by the OP.
st0ut, if your comment "you keep living in your theoretical world i'll live in the real one" was directed at me: relax friend. Read charitably and you might even find something useful in what a crazy person like me writes. (My approach: if you think that someone's position is *completely* wrong, you probably don't understand it.)
genec
I totally disagree; they are exactly the same in every respect. Yes yes, that's what I meant.
So you feel that a 6 year old has the same judgment capacity of an 18-24 year old... :rolleyes:
In some respects you are probably right... ;)
But certainly experience, as in the 12-18 more years on this earth, most likely give the older cyclist the advantages that the younger cyclist doesn't have.
YULitle
"Don't do (insert activity here), or you will die."
signed .... The Media
ROFL. That's good. I did a project in high school where I kept track of all the things we should fear per the media by watching local news every night, and it was fairly staggering. Obviously there was room for personal choice, like whether or not to include "black men" but I was much too young to push such buttons.
st0ut
I mean on paper staticily riding to school once should have been a totally non event.
but it wasnt Will we again.. yes but not this year.
One can not fault parents for withdrawing a childs freedom because there is only X% chance of something bad happening.
And that seems to be the thread. Parents have the right if not duty to follow there judgement.
I oftern tell my kids they can do anything as loing as they understand the risk and consciquences. And understand that i cannot help if thresholds are exceeded.
Its up to me to make sure they really understand and comprehend the situations before they get the freedom to act alone.
does that make me a safety nazi. sometimes. but not often
Brian Sorrell
I mean on paper staticily riding to school once should have been a totally non event.
but it wasnt Will we again.. yes but not this year.
One can not fault parents for withdrawing a childs freedom because there is only X% chance of something bad happening.
And that seems to be the thread. Parents have the right if not duty to follow there judgement.
I oftern tell my kids they can do anything as loing as they understand the risk and consciquences. And understand that i cannot help if thresholds are exceeded.
Its up to me to make sure they really understand and comprehend the situations before they get the freedom to act alone.
does that make me a safety nazi. sometimes. but not often
Sounds to me like you're a good parent.
Brian Sorrell
So you feel that a 6 year old has the same judgment capacity of an 18-24 year old... :rolleyes:
In some respects you are probably right... ;)
But certainly experience, as in the 12-18 more years on this earth, most likely give the older cyclist the advantages that the younger cyclist doesn't have.
Please, I was exaggerating my response in a manner similar to how my statements had been exaggerated. It is something akin to satire. Perhaps too nuanced? Oh well.
kjmillig
Is it just me or is the lady that's the head of the helmet organization flipping us all off?
genec
Please, I was exaggerating my response in a manner similar to how my statements had been exaggerated. It is something akin to satire. Perhaps too nuanced? Oh well.
Well honestly the 6 year old does have the same rights (road access) as the 18-24 year old. And our society should recognize that 6 year olds (or better, 10 year olds) should be able to ride a bike to school, and learn how to responsibly do so.
But the real issue is that too many "adults" chose to not be responsible in their actions, and thus drive in a manner that is dangerous to 6, 10, 18, and indeed, 24 year olds. The classic examples are speeding and failing to truly stop and look before moving at a right on red. The latter has rendered even the simple act of crossing the street a dangerous activity in some areas. Used to be a kid could count on a green light or walk signal as a sure sign that it was OK to cross.
Yeah, perhaps too nuanced... but sometimes reality is too nuanced, too.
closetbiker
Is it just me or is the lady that's the head of the helmet organization flipping us all off?
Now don't tell me she's not running a higher risk of brain injury through stroke than she would run a brain injury through trauma on a bike (provided she rode like a reasonable adult)
Allister
Well honestly the 6 year old does have the same rights (road access) as the 18-24 year old. And our society should recognize that 6 year olds (or better, 10 year olds) should be able to ride a bike to school, and learn how to responsibly do so.
But the real issue is that too many "adults" chose to not be responsible in their actions, and thus drive in a manner that is dangerous to 6, 10, 18, and indeed, 24 year olds. The classic examples are speeding and failing to truly stop and look before moving at a right on red. The latter has rendered even the simple act of crossing the street a dangerous activity in some areas. Used to be a kid could count on a green light or walk signal as a sure sign that it was OK to cross.
Young kids under ten simply don't have the awareness nor the proper decision making abilities to ride anywhere unsupervised, even if drivers are operating as safely and legally as they can. Anyone that's ever ridden with a 6 year old knows this. They rely on adults to make those decisions for them, and that's how they learn to ride responsibly. Giving a 6 year old a few verbal reminders and sending them on their way is the height of irresponsibility.
The real problem here is that yes, adult aren't taking proper responsibility, but in that they should be shepherding their kids to school, or at the very least leave them in the care of another trusted adult, be it on foot or bike, until they are absolutely certain they can do it safely on their own. It's the fact that many are unprepared to do that, and see the choice as 'drive my kids to school' or 'let them ride/walk on their own' that is the real reason they don't choose to let them ride. Frankly, given that choice, I'd choose the former as well, but I at least realise there's a third option.
Brian Sorrell
Well honestly the 6 year old does have the same rights (road access) as the 18-24 year old. And our society should recognize that 6 year olds (or better, 10 year olds) should be able to ride a bike to school, and learn how to responsibly do so.
But the real issue is that too many "adults" chose to not be responsible in their actions, and thus drive in a manner that is dangerous to 6, 10, 18, and indeed, 24 year olds. The classic examples are speeding and failing to truly stop and look before moving at a right on red. The latter has rendered even the simple act of crossing the street a dangerous activity in some areas. Used to be a kid could count on a green light or walk signal as a sure sign that it was OK to cross.
Yeah, perhaps too nuanced... but sometimes reality is too nuanced, too.
Nice. Well stated genec. Much respect.
RobertHurst
... Used to be a kid could count on a green light or walk signal as a sure sign that it was OK to cross. ...
I don't think that's true Gene.
I do agree that things have gotten worse.
Catweazle
Young kids under ten simply don't have the awareness nor the proper decision making abilities to ride anywhere unsupervised, even if drivers are operating as safely and legally as they can. Anyone that's ever ridden with a 6 year old knows this. They rely on adults to make those decisions for them, and that's how they learn to ride responsibly. Giving a 6 year old a few verbal reminders and sending them on their way is the height of irresponsibility.
The real problem here is that yes, adult aren't taking proper responsibility, but in that they should be shepherding their kids to school, or at the very least leave them in the care of another trusted adult, be it on foot or bike, until they are absolutely certain they can do it safely on their own. It's the fact that many are unprepared to do that, and see the choice as 'drive my kids to school' or 'let them ride/walk on their own' that is the real reason they don't choose to let them ride. Frankly, given that choice, I'd choose the former as well, but I at least realise there's a third option.
Absolutely, undeniably well stated and perfectly correct. The only room for manouver anyone rightfully has from that position is to contend that some children mature at different times to others, and that the 10 years of age point will not necessarily be universal. But it's close enough to be useful. In every instance, though, it'd be irresponsible to set a 6 year old loose amongst traffic unsupervised, and if parents choose to delay the freedom to do so until later than 10 years of age then that is parental responsibility in operation.
I'm quite staggered to see, in this thread, people suggesting or intimating that little kids should be let loose on the road amongst traffic and unsupervised!
genec
I don't think that's true Gene.
I do agree that things have gotten worse.
While it was no guarantee that a red light runner wouldn't come along, green lights used to mean that only the traffic going on the parallel road (to the walk path) would be going...
These days there are* both right turning and even left turning traffic going across the walk paths. I have seen motorists downtown try to right turn through throngs of pedestrians crossing with a walk signal; and near schools, left turning motorists honk at students crossing with a walk signal... neither situation is "proper." The right turn situation would not have occurred before RTOR, and I am still not sure why left arrows are "on" when a walk signal shows... the latter may just be bad engineering on the part of local engineers.
______________________________________
* grammatical side note: traffic is plural, so is it: "there is traffic", or is it, "there are traffic;" similar to "data." Think about it.
atbman
* grammatical side note: traffic is plural, so is it: "there is traffic", or is it, "there are traffic;" similar to "data." Think about it.
The singular of data is datum, so, theoretically people should use "the data are" and "the datum is". Ain't no singular/plural states of traffic, so "the traffic is..."
StrangeWill
I'm quite staggered to see, in this thread, people suggesting or intimating that little kids should be let loose on the road amongst traffic and unsupervised!
Then again sounds like natural selection taking it's course.
genec
The singular of data is datum, so, theoretically people should use "the data are" and "the datum is". Ain't no singular/plural states of traffic, so "the traffic is..."
or is the singular form just very irregular... as in "the cyclist is" and "the traffic are?"
LittleBigMan
My Mom and Dad encouraged me to ride my bike to school.
I remember one evening, I enjoyed my Mom's homemade spaghetti (my favorite meal in those days, cooked all day in the pressure cooker) right after coming home from a ride to downtown Washington, D.C. from a Rockville, Md. suburb with friends. I told them about it, I never heard a bad word about it.
I was 12.
littlewaywelt
Even on 25mph residential streets? Definitely not the 4 year old, maybe not at 6, but somewhere around 7 or 8 I'd think they should be fine on residential streets by themselves.
Impacts below 25mph have very high survival probabilities, above that it plummets. I live in an average safe residential community, but even I've noticed that NO ONE drives less than 25mph in the neighborhoods anymore. In a car at that speed it feels like you're crawling. The difference btwn 25 and 35 doesn't feel like much to a driver. In terms of impact force it's a huge difference.
While a 7 or 8 yo may have the judgment to do ride knowing the rules, we've all seen that drivers don't. My 6yo knows the basic rules of the road and commuting, watches out for dooring situations, other hazards and calls the intersections "left, right, left, clear" so I know he's looking, but what neither he nor a 10 year old understand is that drivers in a large number of circumstances can't be predicted. Heck with years of driving and or bike commuting experience we as adults know we can't predict them. To pass that job onto a kid who can't begin to guess how drivers will or won't react isn't reasonable, imho.
Additionally, the number of drivers that are driving around in a very distracted manner on blackberries, cell phones, texting, etc is only increasing. Think about all the teens now and soon to be on the roads in those communities who text constantly as a primary form of communication. Those young drivers are on the roads now with mine. No thank you.
I'd love for my kid to have the freedom a bicycle gives, and some day he will, but I can't in good conscience expose him to that risk with it's high severity, even though the chance of occurrence is low.
StrangeWill
I mean on paper staticily riding to school once should have been a totally non event.
but it wasnt Will we again.. yes but not this year.
One can not fault parents for withdrawing a childs freedom because there is only X% chance of something bad happening.
And that seems to be the thread. Parents have the right if not duty to follow there judgement.
I oftern tell my kids they can do anything as loing as they understand the risk and consciquences. And understand that i cannot help if thresholds are exceeded.
Its up to me to make sure they really understand and comprehend the situations before they get the freedom to act alone.
does that make me a safety nazi. sometimes. but not often
Glad to hear that you tried and kept your kid safe while doing it. Obviously kids of a younger age don't exactly grasp the idea of needing to watch what everyone else is doing at all times, and are easily distracted. I mean quite a few adults here aren't even capable of that. :lol:
Of course it's all determined by the individual kid, glad to also see that you'll be trying it when they're a little older and more educated and such.
Thumbs up to this parent. :thumb:
crhilton
Impacts below 25mph have very high survival probabilities, above that it plummets. I live in an average safe residential community, but even I've noticed that NO ONE drives less than 25mph in the neighborhoods anymore. In a car at that speed it feels like you're crawling. The difference btwn 25 and 35 doesn't feel like much to a driver. In terms of impact force it's a huge difference.
While a 7 or 8 yo may have the judgment to do ride knowing the rules, we've all seen that drivers don't. My 6yo knows the basic rules of the road and commuting, watches out for dooring situations, other hazards and calls the intersections "left, right, left, clear" so I know he's looking, but what neither he nor a 10 year old understand is that drivers in a large number of circumstances can't be predicted. Heck with years of driving and or bike commuting experience we as adults know we can't predict them. To pass that job onto a kid who can't begin to guess how drivers will or won't react isn't reasonable, imho.
Additionally, the number of drivers that are driving around in a very distracted manner on blackberries, cell phones, texting, etc is only increasing. Think about all the teens now and soon to be on the roads in those communities who text constantly as a primary form of communication. Those young drivers are on the roads now with mine. No thank you.
I'd love for my kid to have the freedom a bicycle gives, and some day he will, but I can't in good conscience expose him to that risk with it's high severity, even though the chance of occurrence is low.
By this logic no one should ride a bicycle. What age do you become capable of riding defensively? I'd have said the same age at which you understand the rules of the road. But you seem to think a typical 10 year old can't ride defensively, or can't be trusted to.
gpsblake
I blame the bicycling community in part because of parents not wanting kids to ride. I'll tell you why. While we talk about how great bicycling is and such..... **EVERY DAY** there are threads in here that either talk about harassment from cars or accidents with cars. Parents read enough of those stories and will decide that bicycling isn't safe for their kids anymore.
littlewaywelt
By this logic no one should ride a bicycle. What age do you become capable of riding defensively? I'd have said the same age at which you understand the rules of the road. But you seem to think a typical 10 year old can't ride defensively, or can't be trusted to.
Those stats above and below 25mph are for kids, and it's a core reason why fewer parents are letting their kids ride bikes out on the street. Ppl drive in a more distracted manner and faster which results in lower impact survival rates.
A 10 year old can't predict a distracted driver, which have increased a hundred fold from 20 years ago. As I explained, even seasoned cyclists can't do it all the time. How is a ten year old going to know that someone riding up behind him, pulling out of a driveway, turning onto a street isn't paying attention?
If a parent wants to trust that his 10yo can predict that behavior that's his/her right. I'm not putting the life of my kid in some 16yo's text messaging hands.
bac
I don't know if you've seen the SIZE of 81% of our kids. I see a pretty obvious correlation.
At least he's unlikely to suffer that other great parental fear - drowning.
Allister
I blame the bicycling community in part because of parents not wanting kids to ride. I'll tell you why. While we talk about how great bicycling is and such..... **EVERY DAY** there are threads in here that either talk about harassment from cars or accidents with cars. Parents read enough of those stories and will decide that bicycling isn't safe for their kids anymore.
A big part of doing something safely is being aware of the risks, and how to mitigate against them.