Does a trike put me on a collision course with traffic?

Jens Müller

Pat schrieb:
>> Because every one has the right to use public highways.
>
> No they don't. Lot's of thinks can't use the public highways. Amish
> around here can use surface streets but can't use the highway.
> Highways don't allow bikes, horses pedestrians or vehicles that can't/
> don't go over 45 mph.


Please look up the definition of "highway" in your local highway code.
Thank you.

Anyway, it's a) a matter of dedication - everyone may use public goods
(including public highways) for the purpose they were dedicated to and
b) about the basic right to mobility.

At least in my country, the rule of law still prevails.

Jens Müller

Pat schrieb:
> On Apr 4, 12:40 pm, Jens Müller <usenet-11-2...@tessarakt.de> wrote:
> In general, you're off by nearly an order of magnitude.
>
> By State, highest percentage workers who travel to work by foot or by
> other means:
>
> Washington DC 13.7%
> Alaska 12.1%
> Montana 7.2%
> Hawaii 7.2%
> New York 7.1%
> Vermont 6.5%
> ...
> Mississippi 2.9%
> Georgia 2.8%
> Tenessee 2.3%
> Alabama 2.1%
>

I suppose you're living in the wrong country then ...

Tony B

Pat wrote:

> Here's something for you to worry about as you're laying in bed
> tonight. No one -- not a single person, yet alone a government agency
> -- is in charge of making sure that the grocery stores in your town
> are stocked tomorrow. People/businesses figure it out by themselves
> with no government planning. Scary isn't it.

no, because I can grow my own stuff or keep livestock.. however I will
struggle to build myself a powerstation or a hospital.

> The same is true for oil. As the price goes higher, people will
> innovate and find substitutions.

It's higher now - where are the substitutions? That's my point..


> Right now, bottled gas is cheaper per BTU than oil.

another finite resource.

> Diesel is cheaper per btu than gasoline.

not here, but it's almost the same as unleaded..

> As prices go higher, they'll switch to bio
> diesel.

which is how efficientr exactly?? How many biodiesel plants are there
worldwide? How long do they take to build?

> There are already plastics made from corn.
that's a new on eon me, I will google...


> It's too early to predict what will happen. But the world is not a
> static place.

no, it's not. it's not infinite either...

thanks for your pov Pat, but I fear we will forever be at cossed
purposes with this discourse so I'll leave it there if that's OK with you.

bfn,

T

Pat

On Apr 4, 3:51*pm, Tony B <t...@thebramahs.plus.com> wrote:
> Pat wrote:
> > Here's something for you to worry about as you're laying in bed
> > tonight. *No one -- not a single person, yet alone a government agency
> > -- is in charge of making sure that the grocery stores in your town
> > are stocked tomorrow. *People/businesses figure it out by themselves
> > with no government planning. *Scary isn't it.
>
> no, because I can grow my own stuff or keep livestock.. however I will
> struggle to build myself a powerstation or a hospital.
>
> > The same is true for oil. *As the price goes higher, people will
> > innovate and find substitutions.
>
> It's higher now - where are the substitutions? That's my point..
>
> > Right now, bottled gas is cheaper per BTU than oil.
>
> another finite resource.
>
> > Diesel is cheaper per btu than gasoline.
>
> not here, but it's almost the same as unleaded..
>
> > As prices go higher, they'll switch to bio
> > diesel.
>
> which is how efficientr exactly?? How many biodiesel plants are there
> worldwide? How long do they take to build?
>
> > There are already plastics made from corn.
>
> that's a new on eon me, I will google...

http://www.natureworksllc.com/About...eWorks-LLC.aspx

There was a think on the History Channel's Modern Marvels about corn a
few weeks back. They showed the plant and stuff. It was pretty
interesting. They admitted it was first generation stuff. A lot of
it was food packaging stuff. They had some spun and used for
clothing. It was all biodegradable, too. Seems like they had a
problem with something, maybe hot foods, but I don't remember too
much.


>
> > It's too early to predict what will happen. *But the world is not a
> > static place.
>
> no, it's not. it's not infinite either...
>
> thanks for your pov Pat, but I fear we will forever be at cossed
> purposes with this discourse so I'll leave it there if that's OK with you.

k

>
> bfn,
>
> T

Bob

On Apr 4, 7:39*am, ComandanteBanana <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Apr 4, 12:05 am, Bob <hunr...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 31, 12:00 pm, ComandanteBanana <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Having other types of bikes in my collection, I'm about to get off the
> > > beaten path and get either a ROAD TANDEM BIKE or a FANCY UPRIGHT
> > > TRIKE. Well, I like them both but the road tandem would necessarily
> > > put me on the road AMONG THE BEASTS all the time, while the trike I
> > > can use on the back streets and on a new path being built overlooking
> > > the ocean (cool). But I'd be tempted to ride it on the streets
> > > sometimes, squarely TAKING THE LANE because then I'd be more of a
> > > vehicle.
>
> > > What's your thought, I'd be safer in the trike than on the road
> > > tandem, or should I start planning my funerals?
>
> > > WHY THE BANANA REVOLUTION?http://webspawner.com/users/bananarevolution
>
> > The 2006 US Census estimated the total population at just under 300
> > million people. According to FARS data in that same year, 773 cyclists
> > were killed in traffic crashes. Adding pedestrian deaths there were
> > just 5740 non-motorist deaths from traffic crashes that year. That
> > would seem to contradict your view that a significant percentage of
> > motorists are homicidal maniacs intent on doing cyclists harm. Either
> > that or the overwhelming majority of that group are *extremely
> > incompetent* homicidal maniacs.
> > Pedal your bike, not your silly fearmongering.
>
> > Regards,
> > Bob Hunt
>
> It ain't fearmongering; it's the reality of the jungle, which is in
> plain view for all to see...
>

Some jungle. According to the National Safety Council's 2005
statistics your lifetime odds of dying in a car versus bike crash are
1 in 4098. To put that in perspective, the same statistics put your
lifetime odds of dying from falling out of your bed or a chair at 1 in
4225.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

Bob

On Apr 4, 9:27*am, Pat <gro...@artisticphotography.us> wrote:

>
> The bikers in the group say we need bike lanes and camera enforcement
> and this and that. *That's a HUGE investment for a relatively small
> group of people. *That public investment could probably go for better
> uses.
>

There's a bit of crossposting going on but judging by your "bikers in
the group" phrase I'm guessing that you are posting from the
alt.planning.urban group. Just as a point of information, there are
probably at least as many cyclists vehemently opposed to bike lanes as
there are bike lane boosters.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

ComandanteBanana

On Apr 4, 10:27*am, Pat <gro...@artisticphotography.us> wrote:
> On Apr 1, 5:57*pm, ComandanteBanana <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 1, 5:37*pm, Jens Müller <usenet-11-2...@tessarakt.de> wrote:
>
> > > ComandanteBanana schrieb:
>
> > > >> Bicycle parking facilities? Well, that might be the case. Facilities for
> > > >> moving bicycle traffic? Here, there are much too many of them ...
>
> > > > Nice. Most of the nation lacks those facilities.
>
> > > No, not nice. They are actually causing completely real deaths of people.
>
> > What is causing their deaths, the bike facilities?
>
> > WE NEED BIKE LANES or 20MPH LANES --enforced by cameras.
>
> > This is a fair comment that I stick to...
>
> > tjspiel
> > Was at a book store last night thumbing through the latest Bicycling
> > magazine. I ended up buying it mostly because of their feature report
> > called: "What you can do to fix America's traffic laws - and why you
> > should".
>
> > There was a lot of text devoted to several people that that been
> > killed or sustained permanent, life altering injuries. They were
> > struck by drunk drivers or in one case, a driver trying to grab
> > something out of a bag in her back seat. All of the cyclists had been
> > riding on a wide shoulder or in a bike lane and had been hit from
> > behind.
>
> > The article seemed to focus more on stonger penalties for people who
> > kill or injure cyclists and not so much on new laws. There were a lot
> > of interesting statistics. For example cities with more cyclists had a
> > lower percentage of fatal collisions. Another thing they mentioned
> > that is absolutely true is that in the U.S. there is little or no
> > driver training related to being on the road with cyclists. There's
> > also little formal training for cyclists on how to ride safely in the
> > street. Both are sorely needed.
>
> > One good idea though was implemented in Kansas. Apparently when you
> > renew your license in that state there is a written test. A guy there
> > was able to successfully get the state to insure that there would be
> > at least one question related to cyclists on the test. The current
> > version has a multiple choice question on how many feet you must leave
> > between your car and the cyclist when passing. In Kansas, it's 4 feet.
>
> > Anyway, the whole article definitely made me a little more nervous
> > about riding with fast moving traffic. I still contend that segregated
> > bike lanes are the way to go. You can't legislate away lapses in
> > judgement and attention.
>
> The bikers in the group say we need bike lanes and camera enforcement
> and this and that. *That's a HUGE investment for a relatively small
> group of people. *That public investment could probably go for better
> uses.
>

And so what's a better investment, the war in Iraq or landing on Mars?

The 1% is only the result of people being intimidated. I don't think
99% of the people are lazy and stupid.

That percentage should be around 50%.

ComandanteBanana

On Apr 4, 3:33*pm, Jens Müller <usenet-11-2...@tessarakt.de> wrote:
> Pat schrieb:
>
> > Here's the problem. *You think you (and others) have some God-given
> > right to oil. *Maybe even a right to cheap oil. *
>
> Is Iraq's oil really worth 3000 billion dollars?

It ain't worth it as a nation, it's stupid for the whole world, but
it's very much profitable for the military and civilian contractors.

ComandanteBanana

On Apr 4, 3:39 pm, Jens Müller <usenet-11-2...@tessarakt.de> wrote:
> Pat schrieb:
>
> >> Because every one has the right to use public highways.
>
> > No they don't. Lot's of thinks can't use the public highways. Amish
> > around here can use surface streets but can't use the highway.
> > Highways don't allow bikes, horses pedestrians or vehicles that can't/
> > don't go over 45 mph.
>
> Please look up the definition of "highway" in your local highway code.
> Thank you.
>
> Anyway, it's a) a matter of dedication - everyone may use public goods
> (including public highways) for the purpose they were dedicated to and
> b) about the basic right to mobility.
>
> At least in my country, the rule of law still prevails.

And we are still ruled by the law of the jungle. I'm quoting here
something I posted elsewhere...

"Maria de los Angeles - 04 April 2008 03:58 PM
It's not that we're rats ... we've just lost all focus, which makes us
lose touch with our spiritual consciousness."


It ain't so much that we are rats, it's that someone or something is
making us race against each other. So our rat race doesn't happen by
chance, but by design...

"If they can be convinced that the Law of the Jungle is the right and
proper law to govern human activity, they will fight among themselves
instead of against the economic jungle's powerful predators." (http://
http://www.islandhosting.com/~conte...worldorder.html)

In reality though, ONLY THROUGH COOPERATION WE CAN SURVIVE...

ComandanteBanana

On Apr 4, 10:28*pm, Bob <hunr...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Apr 4, 7:39*am, ComandanteBanana <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 4, 12:05 am, Bob <hunr...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 31, 12:00 pm, ComandanteBanana <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > Having other types of bikes in my collection, I'm about to get off the
> > > > beaten path and get either a ROAD TANDEM BIKE or a FANCY UPRIGHT
> > > > TRIKE. Well, I like them both but the road tandem would necessarily
> > > > put me on the road AMONG THE BEASTS all the time, while the trike I
> > > > can use on the back streets and on a new path being built overlooking
> > > > the ocean (cool). But I'd be tempted to ride it on the streets
> > > > sometimes, squarely TAKING THE LANE because then I'd be more of a
> > > > vehicle.
>
> > > > What's your thought, I'd be safer in the trike than on the road
> > > > tandem, or should I start planning my funerals?
>
> > > > WHY THE BANANA REVOLUTION?http://webspawner.com/users/bananarevolution
>
> > > The 2006 US Census estimated the total population at just under 300
> > > million people. According to FARS data in that same year, 773 cyclists
> > > were killed in traffic crashes. Adding pedestrian deaths there were
> > > just 5740 non-motorist deaths from traffic crashes that year. That
> > > would seem to contradict your view that a significant percentage of
> > > motorists are homicidal maniacs intent on doing cyclists harm. Either
> > > that or the overwhelming majority of that group are *extremely
> > > incompetent* homicidal maniacs.
> > > Pedal your bike, not your silly fearmongering.
>
> > > Regards,
> > > Bob Hunt
>
> > It ain't fearmongering; it's the reality of the jungle, which is in
> > plain view for all to see...
>
> Some jungle. According to the National Safety Council's 2005
> statistics your lifetime odds of dying in a car versus bike crash are
> 1 in 4098. To put that in perspective, the same statistics put your
> lifetime odds of dying from falling out of your bed or a chair at 1 in
> 4225.
>
> Regards,
> Bob Hunt- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Yeah, but that's only if you ride your bike once a year. I took a nice
20mile ride and survived it... What does it prove?

You are advising me to buy the tandem road bike I like and ride it
everyday among the top predators?

Hint: Check the book "It's No Accident," and you will know what
happens when people are not paying attention to driving.

ComandanteBanana

On Apr 5, 1:58*am, Bob <hunr...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Apr 4, 9:27*am, Pat <gro...@artisticphotography.us> wrote:
>
>
>
> > The bikers in the group say we need bike lanes and camera enforcement
> > and this and that. *That's a HUGE investment for a relatively small
> > group of people. *That public investment could probably go for better
> > uses.
>
> There's a bit of crossposting going on but judging by your "bikers in
> the group" phrase I'm guessing that you are posting from the
> alt.planning.urban group. Just as a point of information, there are
> probably at least as many cyclists vehemently opposed to bike lanes as
> there are bike lane boosters.
>
> Regards,
> Bob Hunt

I've said there are TWO OPTIONS: BIKE LANES or ENFORCED 20MPH LANES.

But it won't happen before we destroy the world. What we are lacking
is POLITICAL WILL!

Pat

On Apr 5, 11:13*am, ComandanteBanana <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> On Apr 5, 1:58*am, Bob <hunr...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 4, 9:27*am, Pat <gro...@artisticphotography.us> wrote:
>
> > > The bikers in the group say we need bike lanes and camera enforcement
> > > and this and that. *That's a HUGE investment for a relatively small
> > > group of people. *That public investment could probably go for better
> > > uses.
>
> > There's a bit of crossposting going on but judging by your "bikers in
> > the group" phrase I'm guessing that you are posting from the
> > alt.planning.urban group. Just as a point of information, there are
> > probably at least as many cyclists vehemently opposed to bike lanes as
> > there are bike lane boosters.
>
> > Regards,
> > Bob Hunt
>
> I've said there are TWO OPTIONS: BIKE LANES or ENFORCED 20MPH LANES.
>
> But it won't happen before we destroy the world. What we are lacking
> is POLITICAL WILL!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I have a meeting on Monday. It's 240 miles east of here and it'll end
at about 7:00 PM. Should I take my bike or drive at 20 mph. I don't
think I want to drive for 24 hours straight.

You're pretty funny.

Pat

On Apr 5, 11:10*am, ComandanteBanana <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> On Apr 4, 10:28*pm, Bob <hunr...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 4, 7:39*am, ComandanteBanana <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 4, 12:05 am, Bob <hunr...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 31, 12:00 pm, ComandanteBanana <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > Having other types of bikes in my collection, I'm about to get offthe
> > > > > beaten path and get either a ROAD TANDEM BIKE or a FANCY UPRIGHT
> > > > > TRIKE. Well, I like them both but the road tandem would necessarily
> > > > > put me on the road AMONG THE BEASTS all the time, while the trike I
> > > > > can use on the back streets and on a new path being built overlooking
> > > > > the ocean (cool). But I'd be tempted to ride it on the streets
> > > > > sometimes, squarely TAKING THE LANE because then I'd be more of a
> > > > > vehicle.
>
> > > > > What's your thought, I'd be safer in the trike than on the road
> > > > > tandem, or should I start planning my funerals?
>
> > > > > WHY THE BANANA REVOLUTION?http://webspawner.com/users/bananarevolution
>
> > > > The 2006 US Census estimated the total population at just under 300
> > > > million people. According to FARS data in that same year, 773 cyclists
> > > > were killed in traffic crashes. Adding pedestrian deaths there were
> > > > just 5740 non-motorist deaths from traffic crashes that year. That
> > > > would seem to contradict your view that a significant percentage of
> > > > motorists are homicidal maniacs intent on doing cyclists harm. Either
> > > > that or the overwhelming majority of that group are *extremely
> > > > incompetent* homicidal maniacs.
> > > > Pedal your bike, not your silly fearmongering.
>
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Bob Hunt
>
> > > It ain't fearmongering; it's the reality of the jungle, which is in
> > > plain view for all to see...
>
> > Some jungle. According to the National Safety Council's 2005
> > statistics your lifetime odds of dying in a car versus bike crash are
> > 1 in 4098. To put that in perspective, the same statistics put your
> > lifetime odds of dying from falling out of your bed or a chair at 1 in
> > 4225.
>
> > Regards,
> > Bob Hunt- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Yeah, but that's only if you ride your bike once a year. I took a nice
> 20mile ride and survived it... What does it prove?
>
> You are advising me to buy the tandem road bike I like and ride it
> everyday among the top predators?
>
> Hint: Check the book "It's No Accident," and you will know what
> happens when people are not paying attention to driving.- Hide quoted text-
>
> - Show quoted text -

Frankly, I think you should stay off of a bike. I think you're way
too intimidated by cars to ride safely. You post like you're a scare
rabbit. Take a taxi, seems like it's a better mode of transporation
for you.

Tom Sherman

Pat, an apparent non-cyclist, wrote:
> [...]
> The bikers in the group say we need bike lanes and camera enforcement
> and this and that. That's a HUGE investment for a relatively small
> group of people. That public investment could probably go for better
> uses.
>
A "biker" is someone that rides a large cruiser type motorcycle and
wears the associated clothing and accessories.

A cyclist is someone who rides a bicycle. Real cyclists do NOT want
ghetto facilities such as "bicycle lanes".

> Since you guys like telling other people what they should do and how
> they should do it, what would happen if the rest of us -- the 99.9%
> who don't ride bikes -- just said "it would be cheaper and better for
> society if we just banned bikes from public streets because the added
> cost of them is just too high and even the riders report that it is
> way too dangerous".

Do not be stupid, and group every cyclist in with a few fear mongers.

Furthermore, cyclists pose no real danger to other users of public
infrastructure, especially compared to motor vehicles.

Cycling is NOT dangerous compared to other normal activities, and
requires no extra investment in infrastructure.

While there are infrastructure improvements that would aid cyclists
(secure parking, showers at work places), these are cheap compared to
what is invested in motor vehicle only infrastructure.

> First the ban cell phones for drivers because
> they are "dangerous"; why not ban bikes because they are too dangerous?

That question is too silly to deserve a response.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful