What American Cities are Missing: Bikes by the Thousands



P

Pat

Guest
On May 29, 3:24 pm, donquijote1954 <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On May 24, 2:15 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I rather keep fit in my SUB (smart utility bike). Well, rethinking my
> > > strategy in light of the Darwinian roads where I'm forced to drive.
> > > Even smaller cars put me at the wrong end of the food chain. I guess
> > > only buses protect me from the big predators out there.

>
> > I am in a small town in the middle of nowhere. In the last two weeks,
> > we have had two bus incidents. One was a lacrosse bus (that my son
> > was on) that his a mogal in the road so hard that it ripped the kid-
> > gate off the front of the bus. A couple of kids hit the ceiling.
> > Then last week, a bus (with the lights flashing) was slowing down to
> > drop off kids and it was rear-ended by a tractor trailer. 3 kids and
> > the driver hurt. Nothing too serious. 4 kids okay. Busses are safe,
> > but maybe not as safe as I had thought.-

>
> Though nothing is absolutely safe, they are the only ones that don't
> bow to SUVs or at least the only ones where you don't feel like a
> sitting duck...
>
> You know how I feel in any other vehicle out there???
>
> http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/cga0264l.jpg
>
> Yes, I feel like that, and not even walking you are safe from the
> ARROGANT, CARELESS SUV DRIVERS. Case in point, as I was walking down
> the sidewalk last Friday (transferring buses, with a heavy box to
> boot), an SUV with a young lady at the wheel starts turning into this
> driveway to the shopping center, cutting me off in the process
> (something kind of usual in this Darwinian city where I live, #1 in
> the nation), and I respond by knocking on her window. She then shows
> the phone: She's gonna call the police! And I shout at her, "Go ahead
> and call the police!" OK, she changed her mind, but she still stopped
> some feet further to shout something at me.
>
> So, under this TERROR we must live. I guess it's normal in the jungle.
> Like the sitting duck said, "Never sit down during the hunting
> season..."


A guy I knw who rode a motorcycle always wore "gauntlet" gloves that
covered the wrist. He grometed a spike on the outside of each glove.
If someone got too close, he swung at them. It's hard to break a
windshield but I guess side windows are pretty easy ;-) And
scratching paint is easier. He said he took out a few windows in his
day.

Where I live, EVERYONE drives a SUV or a pickup. But we're pretty
rural and very snowy. Hummers and Cadilac Espensades (or whatever
they are called) are an obsession on the Rez.

Most bicycles stay on the sidewalks around here.

On my motorcycle, SUVs aren't as big of a concern as tractor
trailers. Their wind blasts can move you quite a bit. I ride a
heavy, touring bike for better visibility, use pre-emptive honking,
and keep the CD on the trucker channel to talk to them. Rocks coming
out of dump trucks is the worst. Take a #2 crushed stone to the body
at 70mph and you feel it. Even sand stings a bit.

BTW, school gets out 1/2 hour early tomorrow for the funeral of a 15-
year-old who was killed in a single-car accident on Friday. A dog
jumped from the back seat to the front seat and distracted the
driver. She swerved, over-corrected and hit a bank. The girl who was
killed was ejected from the car during the rollover. Too many people
in the car and an inexperienced driver.
 
A

Amy Blankenship

Guest
"Pat" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
...
>> > I don't want a "lifestyle" because I have a family. I don't want
>> > culture because I get my entertainment watching my kids in sports and
>> > concerts and stuff. I don't want "new urbanism" or "smart growth"
>> > because I don't want any urbanism and only a bit of growth.

>>
>> > I don't want to be politically correct because I don't like "mind
>> > police". There are Indians on the Rez, not aboriginals and seldon
>> > Native Americans. They play on the Warriors football team and the
>> > Allegany Arrows lacrosse. So do the Indians and no one minds the
>> > names. And the lacrosse team just played the "Braves" from another
>> > Reservation.

>>
>> > I think my philosophy is consistant but I don't care if it isn't.

>>
>> > I'm glad you all love your bikes and ride them through the rain and
>> > snow and sleet and shine. I'm glad you love your "lifestyle" as much
>> > as I love not having one. But please, stay in the cities and we'll
>> > all like it better. I'll be right back. I want to go check on my
>> > tomato plants.

>>
>> What you don't get, though, is that New Urbanism is probably our greatest
>> hope in rural areas. Because it is very much about containing growth and
>> trying to encourage that if there *is* growth in area A that that growth
>> will house more people than would otherwise happen under conventional
>> suburban sprawl. If area A has twice as many residents that wanted to
>> move
>> into the locality than otherwise would, then Area B does not have to
>> absorb
>> such a large population influx, and can remain more rural than it
>> otherwise
>> would have. If Area B *does* have to grow, if it encourages that most of
>> that growth is concentrated in a relatively small area and applies zoning
>> and other controls to discourage growth in areas that the community has
>> decided should be protected, then Area B may be able to somewhat maintain
>> its character.

>
> My problem is that almost all zoning is fundimentally flawed. Instead
> of being a blueprint for the future, it is a compilation of past
> mistakes in the community. Instead of being fair and open, it is rife
> with politics and intrigue. There is no zoning that money cannot
> change.


This is true. My problem sith tomatoes is that they get fusarium wilt and
tobacco mosaic.

>> What New Urbanism is about is for a community to be able to decide what
>> future it wants for itself and take some steps to try to encourage that
>> future to come about, while at the same time realizing that in some areas
>> you can't stick your fingers in the dike to prevent a flood of new
>> residents. Sometimes those steps do not have the desired results.
>> Sometimes things get derailed by other political and economic realities.
>> Sometimes the results turn out to be the opposite of what you intended.
>> But
>> then sometimes bugs eat your tomatoes. One thing's for sure. You seldom
>> get tomatoes if you don't plant any in the first place.

>
> True, but the same cannot be said for zucchini.


I didn't plant any zucchini this year, yet surprisingly I don't have any
either :). However, there is a tomato I didn't plant behind the chicken
coop. Just goes to show...
 
J

John Kane

Guest
On May 28, 10:06 pm, Nobody <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 May 2007 13:16:20 -0700, [email protected] (Tom Keats)
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >In article <[email protected]>,
> > Nobody <[email protected]> writes:

>
> >>>> It simply is not practicable (note the use of adjective), either by
> >>>> wish or function.

>
> >>>It is for me, and for many others.

>
> >> Yeah, but what youse who like this "challenge" in transportation don't
> >> seem to appreciate, you're not even in the slightest minority.

>
> >We have enough presence to show up in modal share statistics
> >for numerous North American cities.

>
> >> I lke to go biking for exercise, enjoyment...but for basic
> >> transportation to and from my place of employment 10 km away? Go jump
> >> in the closest pond.

>
> >10 km might be a bit much for a beginning rider.
> >But it doesn't take long to be able to easily
> >and routinely ride that distance, and even further.

>
> >> It just does not make sense for most of us. As I say, it is not
> >> "practicable". (And that's different than beng practical.)

>
> >Who exactly /is/ "most of us"?

>
> >And why are you so vehement about discouraging people
> >from cycle-commuting by denying its practice-ability?

>
> ***********, what you're suggesting is a situation of "enthusiasts"
> dictating what they believe the rest of humanity should be doing.
>
> I'm not discouraging anybody from doing anything.
>
> So, regardless of distance, let's say, I can (i.e. "am able to") ride
> a bicycle to work. Um, urban size dictates that is gonna be a
> time-consuming, and in weather-challenging conditions, rather
> unpleasant.


Depends on where you live and work. In Canada the median commuting
distance is 7.2 km or perhaps 15-20 minutes by bike[1]. Given that
that is the median time it is likely that for a lot of people the
distance is significantly less. In fact for female commuters it is 6.4
km.

Here is a simple bar chart showing a rough breakdown of who commutes
how far
http://ca.geocities.com/jrkrideau/cycling/commute.png. Over 60% of
the Canadian working population have a less than 10 km (or 20-30
minute by bike) commute.

The way I see it there's lots of room for people to cycle (or even
GASP, walk) to work while some people clearly would find it difficult
or completely impractical.

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada

1. Commuting to Work, 2001 Census Catalogue no.: 97F0015XIE2001001
Unfortunately it does not give a breakdown by community size or
urban/rural split.

--clip ---
 
T

Tim McNamara

Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
donquijote1954 <[email protected]> wrote:

> http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/cga0264l.jpg
>
> Yes, I feel like that, and not even walking you are safe from the
> ARROGANT, CARELESS SUV DRIVERS. Case in point, as I was walking down
> the sidewalk last Friday (transferring buses, with a heavy box to
> boot), an SUV with a young lady at the wheel starts turning into this
> driveway to the shopping center, cutting me off in the process
> (something kind of usual in this Darwinian city where I live, #1 in
> the nation), and I respond by knocking on her window. She then shows
> the phone: She's gonna call the police! And I shout at her, "Go ahead
> and call the police!" OK, she changed her mind, but she still stopped
> some feet further to shout something at me.
>
> So, under this TERROR we must live. I guess it's normal in the
> jungle. Like the sitting duck said, "Never sit down during the
> hunting season..."


Stop being such a self-victimizing drama queen. Jeez. The people
around you are oblivious of you, whether they are walking, driving,
eating dinner, riding their bikes, whatever. They are not going to
accommodate your presence. It's not a jungle, people are not out to get
you, it's just life going on. Stop personalizing it and acting like you
expect to be the center of the universe.
 
N

Nobody

Guest
On 29 May 2007 13:57:53 -0700, John Kane <[email protected]> wrote:

>On May 28, 10:06 pm, Nobody <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Fri, 25 May 2007 13:16:20 -0700, [email protected] (Tom Keats)
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >In article <[email protected]>,
>> > Nobody <[email protected]> writes:

>>
>> >>>> It simply is not practicable (note the use of adjective), either by
>> >>>> wish or function.

>>
>> >>>It is for me, and for many others.

>>
>> >> Yeah, but what youse who like this "challenge" in transportation don't
>> >> seem to appreciate, you're not even in the slightest minority.

>>
>> >We have enough presence to show up in modal share statistics
>> >for numerous North American cities.

>>
>> >> I lke to go biking for exercise, enjoyment...but for basic
>> >> transportation to and from my place of employment 10 km away? Go jump
>> >> in the closest pond.

>>
>> >10 km might be a bit much for a beginning rider.
>> >But it doesn't take long to be able to easily
>> >and routinely ride that distance, and even further.

>>
>> >> It just does not make sense for most of us. As I say, it is not
>> >> "practicable". (And that's different than beng practical.)

>>
>> >Who exactly /is/ "most of us"?

>>
>> >And why are you so vehement about discouraging people
>> >from cycle-commuting by denying its practice-ability?

>>
>> ***********, what you're suggesting is a situation of "enthusiasts"
>> dictating what they believe the rest of humanity should be doing.
>>
>> I'm not discouraging anybody from doing anything.
>>
>> So, regardless of distance, let's say, I can (i.e. "am able to") ride
>> a bicycle to work. Um, urban size dictates that is gonna be a
>> time-consuming, and in weather-challenging conditions, rather
>> unpleasant.

>
>Depends on where you live and work. In Canada the median commuting
>distance is 7.2 km or perhaps 15-20 minutes by bike[1]. Given that
>that is the median time it is likely that for a lot of people the
>distance is significantly less. In fact for female commuters it is 6.4
>km.
>
>Here is a simple bar chart showing a rough breakdown of who commutes
>how far
>http://ca.geocities.com/jrkrideau/cycling/commute.png. Over 60% of
>the Canadian working population have a less than 10 km (or 20-30
>minute by bike) commute.
>
>The way I see it there's lots of room for people to cycle (or even
>GASP, walk) to work while some people clearly would find it difficult
>or completely impractical.
>
>John Kane, Kingston ON Canada


And how far are YOU going to cycle in Kingston in
December/January/February/March?


>1. Commuting to Work, 2001 Census Catalogue no.: 97F0015XIE2001001
> Unfortunately it does not give a breakdown by community size or
>urban/rural split.
>
>--clip ---
>
 
D

donquijote1954

Guest
--Why are all SUV drivers
lumped as one?--

No, I'm not. We are talking about SUPERSIZED UNNECESSARY VEHICLES
here. Obviously they are a bigger problem for the environment, and
even greater problem for other vehicles. Who can survive a collision
with this...

"This is the biggest baddest suv I've ever seen. It takes away a
slight amount of the guilt I have from recently purchasing a Yukon
Denali but not much. Can you imagine taking the kids to a soccer game
with this thing?"

http://www.marketingshift.com/2004/9/biggest-suv-navistar-international.cfm

--Do a Google search on Toyota Prius batteries and see how devastating
they are to the environment.The Hummer has a better "carbon
footprint",to use a cry-baby term.--

OK, perhaps hybrids are not such a good idea, perhaps they are used by
Toyota as to do some good PR for the nasty SUVs it too puts out.
Actually the lady trying to run me over was driving this type of
vehicle...

"The FJ Cruiser is the latest in a long line of celebrated off-road
vehicles from Toyota. And in the tradition of the legendary Land
Cruiser family, the FJ Cruiser is not only engineered to conquer
anything Mother Nature has to offer, but to keep coming back for more.
Find out what Rod and Ryan Millen did to prepare their FJ Cruiser TRD
for the rough-and-tumble, metal-crunching experience of racing the
length of the Mexican peninsula in the famous Baja 1000."

http://www.toyota.com/fjcruiser/index.html?s_van=GM_TN_FJ_INDEX

I guess that vehicle would not conquer Nature, but our Darwinian
roads. I rest my case.

A good common sense solution is to move into SMALL EFFICIENT CARS that
don't need to conquer anything.
 
D

donquijote1954

Guest
On May 29, 6:16 pm, Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:

> > So, under this TERROR we must live. I guess it's normal in the
> > jungle. Like the sitting duck said, "Never sit down during the
> > hunting season..."

>
> Stop being such a self-victimizing drama queen. Jeez. The people
> around you are oblivious of you, whether they are walking, driving,
> eating dinner, riding their bikes, whatever. They are not going to
> accommodate your presence. It's not a jungle, people are not out to get
> you, it's just life going on. Stop personalizing it and acting like you
> expect to be the center of the universe.-


Life in the jungle perhaps. Well, things may be different down here...

Driving in Miami: The Rules Are Different Down Here

While every city loves to brag about their insane traffic and bad
drivers, no city has quite the unique combination of residents that we
do here in South Florida to make for unbearable motor transportation.
As I have mentioned previously in this relocation guide, there may be
one or two people in Miami who learned to drive in another country.
This thrown in with transplants form such capitals of polite driving
as New York, Boston and Philadelphia, and a complete lack of strategic
planning on the part of the county make for one hell of a driving
experience.

WHEN YOUR PREMIUMS ARE MORE THAN YOUR PAYMENT

If you are relocating here, you have no doubt looked into insuring
your car in South Florida. Upon doing this, I'm sure your reaction was
somewhere between "Did my computer mess up and misplace that decimal
point?" and "Well, so much for retirement." Yes, folks, sadly Miami-
Dade County has some of the highest insurance premiums in the nation.
Aside from insurance companies' general love of raping the ever-loving
soul from people who live down here, there are actually some fairly
valid reasons for these exorbitant premiums. First, as stated above,
drivers here pretty much do whatever they want and so accidents happen
a lot. I see an average of four a day just driving around, and I don't
even go out during Rush Hour.

more...

http://www.miamibeach411.com/news/index.php?/news/comments/driving-in-miami/

So pretty much you do what you want here: use your SUV to intimidate
others, chat on your cell phone or simply pull a gun. And you pay for
all this, whether with insurance premiums or... with your life.
 
C

Clark F Morris

Guest
On Tue, 29 May 2007 17:16:59 -0500, Tim McNamara
<[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>,
> donquijote1954 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/cga0264l.jpg
>>
>> Yes, I feel like that, and not even walking you are safe from the
>> ARROGANT, CARELESS SUV DRIVERS. Case in point, as I was walking down
>> the sidewalk last Friday (transferring buses, with a heavy box to
>> boot), an SUV with a young lady at the wheel starts turning into this
>> driveway to the shopping center, cutting me off in the process
>> (something kind of usual in this Darwinian city where I live, #1 in
>> the nation), and I respond by knocking on her window. She then shows
>> the phone: She's gonna call the police! And I shout at her, "Go ahead
>> and call the police!" OK, she changed her mind, but she still stopped
>> some feet further to shout something at me.
>>
>> So, under this TERROR we must live. I guess it's normal in the
>> jungle. Like the sitting duck said, "Never sit down during the
>> hunting season..."

>
>Stop being such a self-victimizing drama queen. Jeez. The people
>around you are oblivious of you, whether they are walking, driving,
>eating dinner, riding their bikes, whatever. They are not going to
>accommodate your presence. It's not a jungle, people are not out to get
>you, it's just life going on. Stop personalizing it and acting like you
>expect to be the center of the universe.


That's right Tim. When walking we have to look out for inattentive
drivers like you who don't yield the right of way to pedestrians and
probably don't even look for them.
 
R

Red Cloud

Guest
On May 30, 10:31 am, donquijote1954 <[email protected]>
wrote:
> --Why are all SUV drivers
> lumped as one?--
>
> No, I'm not. We are talking about SUPERSIZED UNNECESSARY VEHICLES
> here. Obviously they are a bigger problem for the environment, and
> even greater problem for other vehicles. Who can survive a collision
> with this...
>
> "This is the biggest baddest suv I've ever seen. It takes away a
> slight amount of the guilt I have from recently purchasing a Yukon
> Denali but not much. Can you imagine taking the kids to a soccer game
> with this thing?"
>
> http://www.marketingshift.com/2004/9/biggest-suv-navistar-internation...



Is that a truck or Supersized Hummer?
 
B

Bolwerk

Guest
George Conklin wrote:
> "Bolwerk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> Amy Blankenship wrote:
>>> "George Conklin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]thlink.net...
>>>> Pushing the labor laws back to those of the third world is not a

> viable
>>>> goal. Such work is abusive, and if you pull the pedicab yourself, then
>>>> you
>>>> are abusing yourself.

>> I guess any work that involves physical exertion is "abusive." Like,
>> say, construction, carpentry...um, farming?
>>
>>> George believes that everyone in the US should be free...
>>> to do things George approves of.

>> I'm starting to wonder if George knows what George approves of.

>
> Pushing third world abuses into the USA is no victory for anyone but this
> fool.


You have a funny notion of what "third world abuse" is. I would think
it amounts more to something like working your fingers raw in a sweat
shop for 17 hours a day, seven days a week.

I don't know for sure, but if I was to venture a guess, I'd say pedicab
operation is probably better pay than burger flipping, and healthier.
 
B

Bolwerk

Guest
Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> donquijote1954 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/cga0264l.jpg
>>
>> Yes, I feel like that, and not even walking you are safe from the
>> ARROGANT, CARELESS SUV DRIVERS. Case in point, as I was walking down
>> the sidewalk last Friday (transferring buses, with a heavy box to
>> boot), an SUV with a young lady at the wheel starts turning into this
>> driveway to the shopping center, cutting me off in the process
>> (something kind of usual in this Darwinian city where I live, #1 in
>> the nation), and I respond by knocking on her window. She then shows
>> the phone: She's gonna call the police! And I shout at her, "Go ahead
>> and call the police!" OK, she changed her mind, but she still stopped
>> some feet further to shout something at me.
>>
>> So, under this TERROR we must live. I guess it's normal in the
>> jungle. Like the sitting duck said, "Never sit down during the
>> hunting season..."

>
> Stop being such a self-victimizing drama queen. Jeez. The people
> around you are oblivious of you, whether they are walking, driving,
> eating dinner, riding their bikes, whatever. They are not going to
> accommodate your presence. It's not a jungle, people are not out to get
> you, it's just life going on. Stop personalizing it and acting like you
> expect to be the center of the universe.


That sounds like grounds for a lot of revoked drivers' licenses to me.
 
B

Bolwerk

Guest
Amy Blankenship wrote:
> "donquijote1954" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> If it is 16 times for an SUV vs. car, it must be like 160 times more
>> deadly in a semi vs. car. Imagine what it would be if semi drivers
>> were as poorly trained and as careless as SUV drivers. Probably worse
>> than Iraq.

>
> Are there a lot of SUV drivers in Iraq?


Hummers :-D
 
B

Bolwerk

Guest
George Conklin wrote:
> "Bolwerk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> George Conklin wrote:
>>> "Scott M. Kozel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]
>>>> "George Conklin" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> "Bolwerk" <[email protected]> wrote
>>>>>> George Conklin wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I suggest you understand the demography of poverty these days, which
>>> you
>>>>>>> obviously do not.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here is an article by the President of the Southern Sociological
>>> Society:
>>>>>>> http://www.ncsociology.org/sociationtoday/v42/wim.htm
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Read it and stop blessing your own stupidity.
>>>>>> I don't see any reason to open that URL.
>>>>> Naturally. You bask in ignorance and stupidity.
>>>> He can't help it... it's chronic.

>> Failing to follow your red herring isn't "ignorance and stupidity."
>> Maybe I have better ways to spend my time.
>>

>
> You always find ignorance a good way to spend you time.


Is that the best you can do? Next, are you going to accuse me of having
a small pee-pee? All because you don't have a leg to stand on?
 

Guest
I'm wondering at what point George thinks bicycling with cargo becomes
abuse.

When I go bicycle touring with 50 lbs of gear in panniers, is that
"third world abuse"?

When I go shopping with a trailer and ride home with 200 lbs of
household supplies, is that "third world abuse"?

When I load my kids up for a ride on our tandem/trailer combo, and lug
around 100+ lbs of passengers for the fun of it, is that is that "third
world abuse"?

Or is it only "third world abuse" if I were to carry passengers for
$10/hour plus tips, with benefits, subject to OSHA regulations, while
covered by unemployment and workers' compensation insurance?

--
[email protected] is Joshua Putnam
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/>
Updated Infrared Photography Gallery:
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/photo/ir.html>
 
D

Dane Buson

Guest
In rec.bicycles.misc Clark F Morris <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 May 2007 17:16:59 -0500, Tim McNamara
>>
>>Stop being such a self-victimizing drama queen. Jeez. The people
>>around you are oblivious of you, whether they are walking, driving,
>>eating dinner, riding their bikes, whatever. They are not going to
>>accommodate your presence. It's not a jungle, people are not out to get
>>you, it's just life going on. Stop personalizing it and acting like you
>>expect to be the center of the universe.

>
> That's right Tim. When walking we have to look out for inattentive
> drivers like you who don't yield the right of way to pedestrians and
> probably don't even look for them.


Err, unless I'm mistaken, Tim is an avid *cyclist*. He's not saying
anyone should assault cyclists or pedestrians. Rather he's saying that
rarely is anyone 'out to get you'. Sure there are oblivious drivers,
sure there are *incompetent* drivers. In 99.9% of the cases, drivers
are just people trying to get from point A to point B. They just want
to get there with minimal trouble and interaction with anyone.

Of course it's the 0.1% that are obstreperous children prone to traffic
tantrums that we often remember best.

--
Dane Buson - [email protected]
Mind that child- they may be wiped out of existence
 
D

Dane Buson

Guest
In rec.bicycles.misc Bolwerk <[email protected]> wrote:
> Tim McNamara wrote:
>>
>> Stop being such a self-victimizing drama queen. Jeez. The people
>> around you are oblivious of you, whether they are walking, driving,
>> eating dinner, riding their bikes, whatever. They are not going to
>> accommodate your presence. It's not a jungle, people are not out to get
>> you, it's just life going on. Stop personalizing it and acting like you
>> expect to be the center of the universe.

>
> That sounds like grounds for a lot of revoked drivers' licenses to me.


You say that like it's a *bad* thing. ;-)

Personally, I'd like it if it required a little more than fogging a
mirror and $25 to obtain and keep a license.

I think if most drivers ponder it for a moment, they might agree with
me. Wouldn't it be nice if the least capable of the drivers simply
weren't on the road?

--
Dane Buson - [email protected]
The little town that time forgot,
Where all the women are strong,
All the men are good-looking,
And all the children above-average.
-- Prairie Home Companion
 
D

donquijote1954

Guest
--What the hec are you doing in rush hour traffic??? No wonder your
getting run over!!!--

I was just quoting someone else, who says he doesn't drive in rush
hour. But if they can't bike in rush hour, what advantage can we sell
to the sitting motorists when speedy, safe bikes are not an option?
Well, for that to happen we need BIKE PATHS or BIKE LANES, away from
traffic. Or we may need to secure ONE WHOLE TRAFFIC LANE for bikers.

Otherwise, like you say, you are inviting getting run over. You know,
when the bullets fly, don't be a sitting duck...

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/TEL/1182.jpg
 
B

Bolwerk

Guest
Dane Buson wrote:
> In rec.bicycles.misc Bolwerk <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Tim McNamara wrote:
>>> Stop being such a self-victimizing drama queen. Jeez. The people
>>> around you are oblivious of you, whether they are walking, driving,
>>> eating dinner, riding their bikes, whatever. They are not going to
>>> accommodate your presence. It's not a jungle, people are not out to get
>>> you, it's just life going on. Stop personalizing it and acting like you
>>> expect to be the center of the universe.

>> That sounds like grounds for a lot of revoked drivers' licenses to me.

>
> You say that like it's a *bad* thing. ;-)


The *bad* thing is that moron drivers don't have their licenses revoked
more easily.

So, no, I don't think every-man-for-himself is an excuse for permitting
stupidity with a potentially deadly vehicle.

> Personally, I'd like it if it required a little more than fogging a
> mirror and $25 to obtain and keep a license.
>
> I think if most drivers ponder it for a moment, they might agree with
> me. Wouldn't it be nice if the least capable of the drivers simply
> weren't on the road?


It'd be great, but it's not really practical, sadly. The worst part is
that the incompetents tend to live in places most dependent on the
automobile.
 
B

Bolwerk

Guest
[email protected] wrote:
> Or is it only "third world abuse" if I were to carry passengers for
> $10/hour plus tips, with benefits, subject to OSHA regulations, while
> covered by unemployment and workers' compensation insurance?


We can debate it all day, but it probably comes down to a case of George
not liking it, and therefore rationalizing ways to ban it. It seems to
be his MO here.