So asks this opinion piece in Sundays New York Times. The answer appears to be yes. Lots of good points here, paramount why drivers who kill or maim cyclists and who remain at the scene, end up with citations only sometimes and almost never get prosecuted. This is a major league bull-shiit cause by a car-obssessed nation who has been led to believe that the very act of riding a bicycle carries risks that make it dangerous and riding on "automobile" roads means cyclsist are taking on an "inherent" risk that carries with it the responsibility to understand you will most likely get hit. The larger message of course: cyclists go home and stay off of our roads.

The article's author plays into this irrational fear of cycling in his opening paragraphs, where he explains why he has decided to become an indoor rider, eshewing the roads around his city (San Francisco) becasue they are so unsafe as to have caused many accidents, some of them to people he or his friends know first-hand. I'm not judging the safety of riding in SF but I'd like to see some real numbers: like how many cyclist accidents are there as a percentage of cyclist o the road. How many are casued by driver's fault (this story says it's over half but I'd like to know how much exactly for a better comparison. Then let's look at the numbers of drivers/cars on the road and compare that to the number of accidents. I'm sure percendtage wise, the cycling deaths are lower by far.

I believe progress between cyclists and cars won't be made without a concerted effort to education motorists and cyclists about the rules of the road. I've dicovered with most people that if you explain to them that the laws allows cyclists on the roads and sometims in their lanes, there is less antagonism toward them. Around here in Northern California wine coutnry, cyclists are part of the scenary and over time, drivers have adjusted. Just last week,I had a truck with trailer patiently wait for me to get through a road-side construction before finding a moment to drive by. Another waited on a blind hill while five of us climbed to a point where we could stop to let him through. It works, it seems, if people understand it. I'm wondering if "Share the Road" might not be the best nesssage anymore because frankly, it's not the cyclists road -- it's the drvers' -- so how can we be required to share what's really not ours. The new campaign should be about introducing cyclists as another form of vehicle with full rights and repsonsibilites on the road. Becuase bikes are slower, `it doesn't make them intruders. Couple this with some really strong traiing and, god help us, better road signs, warning drivers about things like they are about to cross a marked cycling route so they should pay extra special attention to look both ways before entering the new roadway. Why not license cyclists along with drivers and give both sturdy, practical tests and/or show them a video explaining the rules of the road and explaining how it should be applied. Those are my thoughts FWIW The New York Times has a pay wall so I reprinted the entire story for our educational purposes.

.