Well, then, are you also troubled by the vehicle code that governs bicycle use on the roadways that is also based on situation rather than characteristics of the vehicle? For example, the "keep to the right" law in CA, that requires cyclists to keep to the right, only applies in situations where cyclists are moving slower than traffic:
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21202.htm
The CA law mandating bike lane use is similar:
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21208.htm
Thank you for identifying what I believe to be the key to separationist mentality. First of all, bicycles are not ALWAYS slow moving, though they are ALWAYS low power, relative to the other vehicles. But power is irrelevant to the applicability of the rules of the road. Some vehicles weigh over 3000 lbs and have only 60 HP (1963 VW bus), while others weigh less than 2000 lbs and have over 500 HP (Cobra). Yet the laws that govern them are exactly the same. On a hill where the VW bus is moving slower than traffic, it must keep to the right. The VW bus is always a low power vehicle, and a bicycle is always even slower. But what matters is
current speed. When the cyclist and the VW bus can keep up with the rest of traffic, then the slow speed rules of the road do not apply. And they shouldn't.
Sure, I guess a law that gave the pedestrians the right to jump into traffic as long as it is moving at 0-6 mph would not violate the standard vehicular rules of the road, but there is no point in doing it. There is, however, a point to allowing cyclists participate as drivers of vehicles in traffic.
If that were true, you'd have a compelling argument. But it is easy enough to show that pedestrians
do not actually fare best when they act as drivers of vehicles, by demonstrating that they fare better when they act and are treated as, well,
pedestrians.
To the contrary, there is no similar argument to the contention about cyclists faring best when they act as drivers of vehicles. Specifically, there is no demonstration of an alternative. If cyclists don't fare best when they act as vehicle drivers, then what specific behavior allows them to fare even better? To act as pedestrians? No. To act as "cyclists"? What does that mean? We know what it means to act as a pedestrians. We have long established rules for that. As we do for vehicle drivers. But there are no rules for "cyclists"
per se. We can only choose from the vehicular rules, or the pedestrian rules. Either works, but the former seems to fare best for cyclists.
It all comes down to this: If you disagree with the VC principle, if you reject the notion that cyclists fare best when they act as vehicle drivers,
then what do you suggest instead? Describe the behavior under which you believe cyclists fare better than they do acting as (low power) vehicle drivers. if you can't, then what is your basis for disagreeing with the VC principle?
Serge