Originally Posted by
hagen2456
"the anti-motoring environmentalists jumped on the motorists' anti-cycling-motivated bandwagon. The anti-motorists preferred the support of the ignorant and superstitious millions to the knowledge of those who had actually been cycling through all these years."
You might have been able to be of some use for the safety of cyclists had you joined force with them. But no, for you it was all about equal rights and rules-of-the-roads.
Hagen, you have no knowledge of the facts. I might have been of some use for the safety of cyclists? The best evidence showed that that group of American cyclists who were most likely to be obeying the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles had a crash rate only 20-25% of that of the typical cyclists whose incompetent mode of operation the motoring establishment were trying to force all cyclists to adopt. Given that evidence, preserving cyclists' right to operate in the safer mode was the prime safety purpose and was the justification for opposing the American motoring establishment's discrimination against cyclists.