Originally Posted by
Helmet Head
Thank you. You're catching on.
However: Implying that because of those potential dangers it is not possible to be reasonably safe on a bicycle can be considered anti-cycling, because it is.
Jumping to conclusions???
I said in both statements that the environment is inherently dangerous, but that danger is mitigated by rules.
Forester has stated in the past (and on this thread) that vehicular cycling works because of traffic rules.
Mixing up the reality of inherent dangers verses the statistics of doing a particular activity is apples and oranges.
Are you going to convince your students that moving cars are not inherently dangerous? Good luck. Your credibility will plummet dramatically at that point.