Papa Tom said:I'm not sure what that means, but it seemed worth repeating.
I just meant to applaud your efforts at bicycling advocacy, while
noting that my cruder efforts -- as would be apparent from my vitriol
when talking about such matters -- complement yours in the "bigger
picture" sense of things.
Quoted message said:Anyway, I understand your frustration and anger. However, I don't think we
can overlook cyclists' responsibilities if we're going to trash auto drivers
that way.
I was also obliquely questioning what "responsibilities" we truly
have. Not to cause accidents, sure, but simply being on the road --
even a highway, for whatever reason -- is not irresponsible of us as
bicyclists. I know that's a radical notion, and I'm not saying that
bicycles should be on highways, but to me it's the kind of violation
that's like jaywalking: no big deal.
Basically, aside from doing what we can to ensure our own safety as
cyclists, I think the onus should be on motorists to exercise the vast
majority of any responsibility involved in safety issues...they're the
ones with the power, as measured by horse-engine, and with greater
power goes greater responsibility, naturally....
Quoted message said:I see plenty of cyclists causing situations where they - and
other people on the road - can get seriously hurt because of stupid,
irresponsible behavior.
I'm not sure what irresponsible behavior you might be referring to.
Cycling the wrong way, or on the wrong side of the road? Come on!
That's no big deal; not a crime at all -- the whole point of using a
bicycle for getting around, in fact: freedom!
If you mean sudden turns and swerves, well, motorists do that too --
but motorists should be driving so fast that they can't brake for a
sudden turn or stop. If the rider was a driver in a car, it would
still be the same thing; there's nothing particular to a bicycle or
being a bicyclist involved here.
Frankly, I just don't see how a bicyclist could ever be a fault. I
know it sounds really radical, but my attitude is the road belongs to
pedestrians -- and then bicyclists and skaters -- first and foremost.
Cars are -- should be -- an after-thought. Unfortunately, everything
is organized around cars -- whole neighborhoods are demolished for the
sake of cars being able to speed along on a highway -- such that we
can imagine such a ridiculous notion as "bicyclist responsibility."
The only responsibility a cyclist has is to pedestrians and him or
herself (and other cyclists). Motorists ought to be the ones on the
look-out. The same way most traffic laws assign a much greater
responsibility, if not total responsibility outright, to the motorist
on the "driver's side of an accident," so too should motorists bear
the vast majority of the burden for traffic safety all-around!
Quoted message said:If we look at this issue as one that can only be
black or white, things will just go on the same way forever, and cyclists
and peds will continue to lose.
I don't see that we're continuing to lose at all. Indeed, bike paths
are all the rage in urban planning! Drivers are certainly much more
aware of us, and it seems that more and more people are actually
bicycling in the cities. There are many reasons for all these happy
developments, but I don't think being a "radical bicyclist" has hurt
the cause at all. Again, a fighter fights with both arms: the
radicals like me make the respectable get-along types like you seem a
bargain to deal with.
Quoted message said:Have you noticed that those Critical Mass things never accomplish anything?
I don't know how you measure their actions. It took Al Gore many
years before he got his Oscar and Nobel, after all.
