On Mar 23, 9:38 pm, "Bill Sornson" <
[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > On Mar 23, 2:59 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> >> Matt O'Toole wrote:
>
> >>> So let's concentrate on the *major* reasons people aren't cycling.
>
> >> Kids today don't ride nearly as much as they used to.
> >> These days about 1 in 5 cycling fatalities involves a youngster.
> >> Just ten years ago that ratio was about 1 in 3. The
> >> cycling population is aging rapidly and precipitously.
> >
> > And it's likely that a major cause of this trend is the
> > "dangerization" of cycling that's been used to sell helmets!
>
> Oh, horseshit. Parents don't let kids just "go out and play" as much as
> they used to, period. Main reason is all the cable news coverage of child
> molesters and kidnappers; they think it IS a dangerous world out there.
> (And sadly, it often is.)
>From that statement, here's what I can tell:
You have difficulty telling the difference between my phrase "a major
cause" and your phrase "[The] Main reason..." Even if your unproven
statement is true, it does not negate mine.
Or to spell it out more slowly, even if the _main_ reason were cable
news coverage, it's possible bike helmet fearmongering would be _a_
major cause.
Moving beyond the reading/logic lesson:
It's interesting you say "and sadly, it often is [a dangerous
world]." Of course, "often" is purposely vague. We can't tell if
you're alluding to kids being killed in Iraq, or gang violence in
America's inner cities, or nonexistent kidnappers hiding behind the
swing set in the local park.
But obviously, you're trying to contribute to this country's excessive
paranoia. Despite the handwringing, incidents of stranger abduction
and bike head injury fatality are vanishingly rare. Taking the bike
fatalities as an example: Do you remember how many millions of miles
get ridden between such incidents?
Of course you don't. Why, that would require numbers. Big ones! And
those are so confusing, aren't they?
- Frank Krygowski