Washington State: Ban Babies on Bicycles?

Please see my response to this legislation, posted at:
http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=42267

Warm Regards,

Claire Petersky
Personal page: http://www.geocities.com/cpetersky/
See the books I've set free at:
http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky

If they want to "save the babies" why don't they ban carrying them in
passenger cars and SUVs? How many babies die on bicycles in WA, one
every decade?

"Joshua Putnam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

This week in the Washington Senate, a proposal was introduced, SB
6142, that would prohibit bicycling with baby carriers on public
roadways, except in big cities that ban sidewalk riding. Since most
rural roads don't *have* sidewalks, it's a de-facto ban on baby
carriers throughout rural Washington State.

The bill doesn't define "baby carriers" other than saying they attach
to the bike, so it could easily include trailers as well as rack-
style carriers. There's no age definition of "baby," either.

<http://www.leg.wa.gov/pub/billinfo/2005-06/Pdf/Bills/Senate%
20Bills/6142.pdf>

or http://tinyurl.com/a3lbw if the wrap messes up your browser.

If you're in Washington State, please do let your elected officials
know what you think of this. While I doubt it will go far, it would
be nice to have enough of a response that other legislators think
twice before introducing unjustifiable Big Nanny legislation against
cyclists.

You can find your Washington State legislators at
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/Default.aspx

--
[email hidden] is Joshua Putnam
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/>
Updated Bicycle Touring Books List:
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/bike/tourbooks.html>

If they ban rack style carriers I am all for it. They are ridiculously
dangerous.

The trailers are safe as for as I am concerned.

"Joshua Putnam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

This week in the Washington Senate, a proposal was introduced, SB
6142, that would prohibit bicycling with baby carriers on public
roadways, except in big cities that ban sidewalk riding. Since most
rural roads don't *have* sidewalks, it's a de-facto ban on baby
carriers throughout rural Washington State.

The bill doesn't define "baby carriers" other than saying they attach
to the bike, so it could easily include trailers as well as rack-
style carriers. There's no age definition of "baby," either.

<http://www.leg.wa.gov/pub/billinfo/2005-06/Pdf/Bills/Senate%
20Bills/6142.pdf>

or http://tinyurl.com/a3lbw if the wrap messes up your browser.

If you're in Washington State, please do let your elected officials
know what you think of this. While I doubt it will go far, it would
be nice to have enough of a response that other legislators think
twice before introducing unjustifiable Big Nanny legislation against
cyclists.

You can find your Washington State legislators at
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/Default.aspx

--
[email hidden] is Joshua Putnam
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/>
Updated Bicycle Touring Books List:
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/bike/tourbooks.html>

If they ban rack style carriers I am all for it. They are ridiculously
dangerous.

The trailers are safe as for as I am concerned.

Thomas Wentworth said:

If they ban rack style carriers I am all for it. They are ridiculously
dangerous.

The trailers are safe as for as I am concerned.

See, I'm of the reverse opinion as I consider trailers just something
cars will flatten. Where as, at least a baby on a the bike is above car
wheel height to start with.

The seat we got was actually mounted on the top tube, behind the handle
bars.

Laters,

Marz

Thomas Wentworth said:

If they ban rack style carriers I am all for it. They are ridiculously
dangerous.

The trailers are safe as for as I am concerned.

I had the misfortune of being hit by a car while cycling with my then 4
year old son on the back in a carrier. The car changed lanes suddenly
right in front of us and the bike (and we riders) ended up upside down.
I broke my wrist, but my son was fine. The straps held him in, and I
don't believe his helmet touched anything (I replaced both helmets all
the same - and the bike, for that matter, as the frame was bent by the
crash.)

I have no idea how we would have faired with a trailer, but the seat
was safe.

"Thomas Wentworth" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:utCmf.73$1b.18@trndny03...

Quoted message said:

If they ban rack style carriers I am all for it. They are ridiculously
dangerous.

The trailers are safe as for as I am concerned.

Well my offspring made it through babyhood sat in a rack-mounted childseat
on my bike. Indeed at the now tender age of 17, he loves cycling, cycle
commutes to college and takes part in time trials, so the ordeal of being
transported in such a 'ridiculously dangerous' mode of transport in his
babyhood appears to have no lasting adverse impacts on him...

Cheers, helen s

Marz said:

Thomas Wentworth said:

If they ban rack style carriers I am all for it. They are ridiculously
dangerous.

The trailers are safe as for as I am concerned.

See, I'm of the reverse opinion as I consider trailers just something
cars will flatten. Where as, at least a baby on a the bike is above car
wheel height to start with.

Not always, a good idea is to add a 1.5m or 2m long pole to the back of
the trailer, an old CB whip antenna would work nicely, then add an
orange reflective safety flag on top. Drivers will see the flag, and
either avoid it, or will look down to see your trailer. Mounting a red
or amber flashing LED light to the back of your trailer, up nice and
high will also assist drivers in seeing it.

The issue really is though, why is the ban intended at all, is it an oil
lobbiest at work: Bicycles with babies could be struck by a car, so
bicycles are unsafe, so lets make sure all children are carried in nice,
safe automobiles.

I actually think that at 1/2 - 1/5th the speed, 3 times better
opportunity for operator awareness, and 10 times the manuverability, a
bicycle is actually much safer then a car.

W

"wafflycat" <w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Well my offspring made it through babyhood sat in a rack-mounted childseat
on my bike. Indeed at the now tender age of 17, he loves cycling, cycle
commutes to college and takes part in time trials, so the ordeal of being
transported in such a 'ridiculously dangerous' mode of transport in his
babyhood appears to have no lasting adverse impacts on him...

Same here for my daughters (but no time trials), BUT they make the center of
gravity pretty high and they do require care when mounting and dismounting
the bike.

These days, I mostly see them on bikes ridden to the train station. These
carriers are ideal for holding a briefcase or a backpack or a laptop case
during these short tides.

On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 12:26:00 -0500, The Wogster <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

See, I'm of the reverse opinion as I consider trailers just something
cars will flatten. Where as, at least a baby on a the bike is above car
wheel height to start with.

Not always, a good idea is to add a 1.5m or 2m long pole to the back of
the trailer, an old CB whip antenna would work nicely, then add an
orange reflective safety flag on top. Drivers will see the flag, and
either avoid it, or will look down to see your trailer.

I usually see the trailer or the cyclist (especially a white helmeted
one) long before seeing their flag. I'm not looking for flags. I'm
looking for bicycles, pedestrians, pets and unlit vehichles.
--
zk

wafflycat said:

"Thomas Wentworth" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:utCmf.73$1b.18@trndny03...

Quoted message said:

If they ban rack style carriers I am all for it. They are ridiculously
dangerous.

The trailers are safe as for as I am concerned.

Well my offspring made it through babyhood sat in a rack-mounted childseat
on my bike. Indeed at the now tender age of 17, he loves cycling, cycle
commutes to college and takes part in time trials, so the ordeal of being
transported in such a 'ridiculously dangerous' mode of transport in his
babyhood appears to have no lasting adverse impacts on him...

Likewise, my daughter spent many, many hours and miles in a
rear-mounted baby seat. She then graduated to a tandem.

She's now married, and still rides. And a few years ago, it was she
who instigated our coast-to-coast bike tour.

- Frank Krygowski

wafflycat said:

"Thomas Wentworth" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

If they ban rack style carriers I am all for it. They are
ridiculously dangerous.

The trailers are safe as for as I am concerned.

Well my offspring made it through babyhood sat in a rack-mounted
childseat on my bike. Indeed at the now tender age of 17, he loves
cycling, cycle commutes to college and takes part in time trials, so the
ordeal of being transported in such a 'ridiculously dangerous' mode of
transport in his babyhood appears to have no lasting adverse impacts on
him...

Nor the entire country of the Netherlands it would seem.

Seemed everyone there had a kid seat on the back of their
bike during my visit a couple years ago.

Must be related to the question of how any kids from
pre-mandated helmet days could ever have survived their
childhoods on such killer contraptions as bicycles without
the things.

SMH

Marz said:

Thomas Wentworth said:

If they ban rack style carriers I am all for it. They are ridiculously
dangerous.

The trailers are safe as for as I am concerned.

See, I'm of the reverse opinion as I consider trailers just something
cars will flatten. Where as, at least a baby on a the bike is above car
wheel height to start with.

According to tests carried out by a German insurance company into
various child carrying options, trailers came out best. Rather than
being flattened, they got shoved out of the way: they stressed the
importance of a strong roll cage and good seat belts.

Quoted message said:

The seat we got was actually mounted on the top tube, behind the handle
bars.

This type of seat came of worst in tests. The rear seats usually have
built-up sides that protect the kids.

Thomas Wentworth said:

If they ban rack style carriers I am all for it. They are ridiculously
dangerous.

The trailers are safe as for as I am concerned.

Maybe Burley is behind the law, if it allows trailers but bans seats on
the back or in the middle.

Yes, the seats are dangerous, but not to the extent that they need to be
banned.

On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 16:16:05 -0800, SMS <[email hidden]>
said in <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Yes, the seats are dangerous, but not to the extent that they need to be
banned.

Dangerous, eh? No doubt you can quote the injury figures. Here's a
space for you to add them:

Do go ahead...

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

Quoted message said:

Marz said:

Thomas Wentworth said:

If they ban rack style carriers I am all for it. They are ridiculously
dangerous.

The trailers are safe as for as I am concerned.

See, I'm of the reverse opinion as I consider trailers just something
cars will flatten. Where as, at least a baby on a the bike is above car
wheel height to start with.

According to tests carried out by a German insurance company into
various child carrying options, trailers came out best. Rather than
being flattened, they got shoved out of the way: they stressed the
importance of a strong roll cage and good seat belts.

Quoted message said:

The seat we got was actually mounted on the top tube, behind the handle
bars.

This type of seat came of worst in tests. The rear seats usually have
built-up sides that protect the kids.

The other problem with the seats mounted on the back of the bike, or the
middle for that matter, is that they affect the handling of the bike.

I'm glad to see that some entity conducted a test on the this, but I
always find it amusing that some people will claim that the absence of a
test on a type of product somehow means that the product must be safe
and that common sense can be safely ignored.

SMS said:

The other problem with the seats mounted on the back of the bike, or the
middle for that matter, is that they affect the handling of the bike.

I'm glad to see that some entity conducted a test on the this, but I
always find it amusing that some people will claim that the absence of a
test on a type of product somehow means that the product must be safe
and that common sense can be safely ignored.

Properly installed, they don't affect handling as much as a trailer or
a Trail-a-Bike. You have to get the weight over the rear axel or in
front of it, if possible.

One thing I always tell people with one is to get a mirror that you can
see your child with. For me, that meant a convex mirror mounted as far
to the left as I could get it.

In rec.bicycles.misc Just zis Guy said:

Dangerous, eh? No doubt you can quote the injury figures. Here's a
space for you to add them:

Yeah, I know this is anecdotal, but just a few months ago, someone on
this very group recounted a crash involving a child in a trailer. The
bike went down and the trailer rolled. The kid thought it was great fun
and said "do that again!" I'd be surprised to hear of the same outcome in
a crash with a child in a bike-mounted seat.

Bill

-----------------------------------------------------
| When the power of love overcomes the love of power |
| the world will know peace. |
| -- Jimi Hendrix |
-----------------------------------------------------

On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 22:17:11 -0800, SMS <[email hidden]>
said in <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

I'm glad to see that some entity conducted a test on the this, but I
always find it amusing that some people will claim that the absence of a
test on a type of product somehow means that the product must be safe
and that common sense can be safely ignored.

And I always find it amusing that some people will make dogmatic
statements about safety without the benefit of any hard evidence
whatsoever, despite the substantial number of situations where common
sense turns out to be a highly unreliable guide :-)

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound