Bek's claim that "All states expressly expect competent "rights and responsibilities" operation from cyclists" is so amorphous that, in the detailed discussions in this group, it conveys exactly nothing.

Bek claims that ""incompetent cycling" is sophistry of my own devising." Our society has decided that the minimum acceptable level of competence for drivers of wheeled vehicles is obeying the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles. That is the accepted minimum standard. Measurements of the traffic behavior of cyclists in several of our nation's cities with sizable cycling populations shows that even at commuting hours no population meets that standard; indeed such population averages are about 55% in a system in which the minimum acceptable score is 70%. I have not invented cyclist incompetence; I have only determined its existence by measuring traffic competence of cyclists.

Neither have I invented applications for the concept of cyclist incompetence. That concept was always at the heart of the arguments of the motorists who designed the bikeway system. As for the other side of the controversy, it is standard among bicycle advocates to argue that cyclists cannot be expected to obey the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles. In short, the use of that concept was handed to me by both major parties in the bicycle transportation controversy.

Bek's claims about cyclist incompetence are refuted.