Why aren't bikes allowed on freeways.???

[[email protected]]

laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
> On 21 Jun 2006 22:50:36 +0200, "Bill Bonde ('The path is clear, though
> no eyes can see')" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
> >>
> >> It's really the safest place for them since there is always a wide
> >> berm on a freeway and there is no chance of some parked car pulling
> >> into their path like happens all the time in cities.. We need to
> >> encourage bike use and i say BIKES EVERYWHERE.
> >>
> >They are allowed on some freeways.
>
> That's what many on this board have said. But i think it's fair to
> say they are banned on most freeways.

I don't think that's a fair statement at all. Do you have a cite to
substantiate they are banned on most freeways? I've seen no evidence of
that.

 

[Matt O'Toole]

On Tue, 20 Jun 2006 03:59:53 +0000, laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 20:04:01 -0700, mark <markjs1@*nospam*yahoo.com>
> wrote:

>>far to many moron drivers unable to successfully multitask while
>>driving, drinking coffee and chatting to their dog on the cellphone...

> Then activites like that should be outlawed.

Sure, that'll stop 'em...

Matt O.

 

[Matt O'Toole]

On Tue, 20 Jun 2006 03:59:53 +0000, laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 20:04:01 -0700, mark <markjs1@*nospam*yahoo.com>
> wrote:

>>far to many moron drivers unable to successfully multitask while
>>driving, drinking coffee and chatting to their dog on the cellphone...

> Then activites like that should be outlawed.

Sure, that'll stop 'em...

Matt O.

 

[Matt O'Toole]

On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 15:41:47 +0000, Wayne Pein wrote:

> I've got a report in pdf format entitled "Statewide Safety Study of
> Bicycles and Pedestrians on Freeways, Expressways, Toll Bridges, and
> Tunnels" that I'll send to anyone who asks.

I'll take one please!

Matt O.

 

[Matt O'Toole]

On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 15:41:47 +0000, Wayne Pein wrote:

> I've got a report in pdf format entitled "Statewide Safety Study of
> Bicycles and Pedestrians on Freeways, Expressways, Toll Bridges, and
> Tunnels" that I'll send to anyone who asks.

I'll take one please!

Matt O.

 

[Matt O'Toole]

On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:46:54 +0000, Claire Petersky wrote:

> "Wayne Pein" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:%[email protected]...
>
>> I've got a report in pdf format entitled "Statewide Safety Study of
>> Bicycles and Pedestrians on Freeways, Expressways, Toll Bridges, and
>> Tunnels" that I'll send to anyone who asks.
>
> You don't have to bother Mr. Pein -- I was curious, and googled it:
>
> http://transweb.sjsu.edu/publications/BikesAndPeds2.pdf

Thanks Claire! Nix that request Wayne, I've got it.

Matt O.

 

[Matt O'Toole]

On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:46:54 +0000, Claire Petersky wrote:

> "Wayne Pein" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:%[email protected]...
>
>> I've got a report in pdf format entitled "Statewide Safety Study of
>> Bicycles and Pedestrians on Freeways, Expressways, Toll Bridges, and
>> Tunnels" that I'll send to anyone who asks.
>
> You don't have to bother Mr. Pein -- I was curious, and googled it:
>
> http://transweb.sjsu.edu/publications/BikesAndPeds2.pdf

Thanks Claire! Nix that request Wayne, I've got it.

Matt O.

 

[Sorni]

laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:34:35 GMT, "Sorni"
> <[email protected]> wrote:

>> I posted a link to a truthful account of what happened. You deleted
>> it.

> I've got a dozen links to the laura bush case and i don't need to read
> one of yours.

I didn't say (or expect) you'd read it. What I said was you DELETED THE
LINK because you apparently don't want others to read it. Can't say I blame
you.

> You're a criminal coddler.

You're a hateful troll.

 

[Sorni]

laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:34:35 GMT, "Sorni"
> <[email protected]> wrote:

>> I posted a link to a truthful account of what happened. You deleted
>> it.

> I've got a dozen links to the laura bush case and i don't need to read
> one of yours.

I didn't say (or expect) you'd read it. What I said was you DELETED THE
LINK because you apparently don't want others to read it. Can't say I blame
you.

> You're a criminal coddler.

You're a hateful troll.

 

[Vlad]

Mike T. wrote:
>> Like Richard, we never once exited when we intended to go straight.
>> Non-urban freeway exit ramps get very little exiting traffic, and the
>> cyclist takes only a few seconds to cross the ramp so there's
>> negligible hazard even if the cyclist didn't bother to check his rear
>> view mirror. And if motorists are really going to argue they wouldn't
>> notice a cyclist, they should admit to severe sight problems and turn
>> in their license!
>>
>
> Ummmm . . . motorists often fail to see motorcycles, and motorcycles:
> 1) Are larger than bicycles
> 2) Are LOUDER than bicycles
> 3) Have lights on (front and rear) at all times while the engine is running
> 4) Are faster than bicycles
>
> If people can't see motorcycles, how do you expect them to see bicycles,
> which are (in comparison) slow, small, quiet, and not lit
> up?????????????????????????????????? -Dave
>
>
Bicycles would be ridden in the breakdown lane to the far right I
suspect. It would be foolish to ride on the travel lane unless you can
pedal at 70mph. BUT if there is a car or tractor trailer in the
breakdown lane, the bicycle has to swerve into the travel lanes, BAD
IDEA! Making cars swerve at 70mph makes them flip over.

--
Two ways to improve your life.
1. Turn off the TV.
2. Throw it out the window.

Vlad the Impaler

 

[Pat Lamb]

Wayne Pein wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>> Unless one of us posts actual data, I guess that makes this a tie!
>> ;-)
>>
>> Now, I have actually seen data to prove my point. I believe I can find
>> it and post it. But I'm willing to let you go first.
>>
>> - Frank Krygowski
>>
>
> I've got a report in pdf format entitled "Statewide Safety Study of
> Bicycles and Pedestrians on Freeways, Expressways, Toll Bridges, and
> Tunnels" that I'll send to anyone who asks.


Statewide? What state?

Pat

 

[laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE]

On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 08:11:52 GMT, "Sorni"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:34:35 GMT, "Sorni"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> I posted a link to a truthful account of what happened. You deleted
>>> it.
>
>> I've got a dozen links to the laura bush case and i don't need to read
>> one of yours.
>
>I didn't say (or expect) you'd read it. What I said was you DELETED THE
>LINK because you apparently don't want others to read it. Can't say I blame
>you.
>
>> You're a criminal coddler.
>
>You're a hateful troll.
>

You're a criminal coddler.

 

[Wayne Pein]

"Statewide Safety Study of Bicycles and Pedestrians on Freeways,
Expressways, Toll Bridges, and Tunnels"


http://transweb.sjsu.edu/publications/BikesAndPeds2.pdf


Wayne

 

[Ron Hardin]

In the 70s I rode the interstates in NJ all the time. The only hassle
was always crossing to PA, where they wanted you to walk the bike
across the bridge. No toll was charged, however.

Interstates (70 or 80) were the fast route home when you got tired
of going up and down NW NJ mountains on the regular roads.

NJ interstates today aren't the same animal, being wall-to-wall
speedways.

--
Ron Hardin
[email protected]

On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

 

[[email protected]]

Jeremy Parker wrote:
>
> I seem to recall that the statistics indicate that once one rides
> 1000 miles per year, each extra mile carries no additional risk
> whatsoever

I have a modest collection of statistics related to bicycle safety.
That one would be a useful addition, if you can cite a reputable
source. I'd appreciate it.

- Frank Krygowski

 

[Aunt Judy likes it in the rear]

laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 08:11:52 GMT, "Sorni"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
> >> On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:34:35 GMT, "Sorni"
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>> I posted a link to a truthful account of what happened. You deleted
> >>> it.
> >
> >> I've got a dozen links to the laura bush case and i don't need to read
> >> one of yours.
> >
> >I didn't say (or expect) you'd read it. What I said was you DELETED THE
> >LINK because you apparently don't want others to read it. Can't say I blame
> >you.
> >
> >> You're a criminal coddler.
> >
> >You're a hateful troll.
> >
>
> You're a criminal coddler.

You're a retard AND a ******.

And yes, I've addressed the issue, Aunt Judy.

 

[Alex Rodriguez]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
says...
>
>
>It's really the safest place for them since there is always a wide
>berm on a freeway and there is no chance of some parked car pulling
>into their path like happens all the time in cities.. We need to
>encourage bike use and i say BIKES EVERYWHERE.

In some places they are allowed.
----------
Alex

 

[Bill Bonde ('The path is clear, though no eyes can]

laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
>
> On 21 Jun 2006 22:50:36 +0200, "Bill Bonde ('The path is clear, though
> no eyes can see')" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
> >>
> >> It's really the safest place for them since there is always a wide
> >> berm on a freeway and there is no chance of some parked car pulling
> >> into their path like happens all the time in cities.. We need to
> >> encourage bike use and i say BIKES EVERYWHERE.
> >>
> >They are allowed on some freeways.
>
> That's what many on this board have said. But i think it's fair to
> say they are banned on most freeways.
>
I think that freeways in urban centres, often they are expanded so there
isn't much shoulder, are a bad place for allowing bikes. Right now they
allow them where there are no other means of getting around on a bike.


> Maybe on urban freeways where
> traffic is dense and there are lots of exits, such a ban makes sense.
>
Traffic is pretty heavy on some of the areas where bikes are allowed. At
minimum a wide shoulder is important. I've had more trouble with crazy
bikers on regular surface streets than freeways. I had one idiot woman
on a bike must have been going down a hill at 40 mph into a traffic
circle. She couldn't have stopped. Had I been there a few seconds
earlier, she'd be embedded in the passenger side of my car.


--
Thus, if the problem of technological hopelessness is caused by absence
of care, both by technologists and anti-technologists; and if care and
Quality are external and internal aspects of the same thing, then it
follows that what really causes technological hopelessness is absence of
the perception of Quality in technologists and anti-technologists.
Robert Pirsig, "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance"

Inviato da X-Privat.Org - Registrazione gratuita http://www.x-privat.org/join.php

 

[Jeremy Parker]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Jeremy Parker wrote:
> >
> > I seem to recall that the statistics indicate that once one rides
> > 1000 miles per year, each extra mile carries no additional risk
> > whatsoever
>
> I have a modest collection of statistics related to bicycle safety.
> That one would be a useful addition, if you can cite a reputable
> source. I'd appreciate it.
>
> - Frank Krygowski

I took a quick look through both of Forester's books, to see if I
could find it there. I did find an interesting statement in
Effective Cycling, 1993 ed, p260, similar, but not identical. It
references the 1980 Ken Cross study of non-motor-vehicle accidents in
Santa Barbara Co., Calif., and says that for mileage over 750 miles
per year, the accident rate, per year, not per mile, is constant.
However, that, presumably, is referring only to non MV accidents,
although Forester is rather unclear on that..

I can't give a ref', therefore, but have a feeling it would have been
quoted in the same way the Cross studies do: number of accidents per
year compared to annual mileage. I think it was a fairly old ref,
from the same era as the Cross, Kaplan etc studies.

One possible study is one that was done of the Potomac Pedalers
Touring Club in Washington DC. I don't think that was ever formally
published in anything much more respectable than the club newsletter,
but the figures were quite widely circulated at the time, whenever
that time was. I don't have any details of that study.

Jeremy Parker

 

[Lepidopteran]

On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 18:32:09 -0400, Matt O'Toole
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I've been working with VDOT on this very issue. The engineers' main
>concern is bikes crossing high speed entry/exit lanes (onramps and
>offramps).

As long as you mention that, a very elaborate and impressive system of
bridges is nearing completion in Silver Spring, MD, which appears to
be designed to separate bicycle traffic from the on/off ramps of the
Capital Beltway and Georgia Avenue.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com