no, its very clear that the governmental agencies and professional associations tasked with traffic safety have established rigorous protocols surrounding roadway safety; the national academy of the sciences recomendations to the FHWA on traffic safety might be blithely dismissed by john, but refusing to accept national roadway safety countermeasures that are an inseparable part of the federal highway administration's strategic highway safety plan leaves john creating his own version of traffic safety, NOT any official part of the more than 50 year old federal highway safety initiative.




ah, more of johns mystical 'incompetent cycling on bikeways' fabrication, despite every state in the union legally requiring competent, legal roadway use by cyclists. Bicyclists in all 50 states have rights and responsibilities associated with public use of the roadways.

there is no official or otherwise endorsement of 'incompetent' road use by anyone. John's fraudulent 'public incompetency syndrome' is acrimonious skew.


actually, john, you reject a significant portion of FHWA highway safety guidance, in particular nearly all what they mandate and recommend regarding roadway bicycle traffic, so to say you oppose the FHWA weight of guidance of road design is accurate, you oppose the weight of their guidance on roadway design, their recommendations regarding planning for roadway bicycle traffic.


unbelievable someone can actually convince themselves of this portrayal of american road design and traffic safety measures. Those yarns are getting a little long in the tooth.