Posted on 09/07/2019 5:09:00 AM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
In 2019, more and more cities across America are encouraging their residents to commute by bicycle. Cycling, of course, is good for the environment in terms of reducing pollution from car-dominant streets, and it’s a healthier way to travel.
But cities gaining new cyclists are quickly, tragically finding that they do not have the proper infrastructure to keep them safe. Cyclist fatalities have gone up 25 percent across the U.S. since 2010, and up 10 percent in 2018 itself, while all other traffic fatalities have decreased.
And it matters where you live: 75 percent of these cyclist deaths occur in urban areas. New York City became the most dangerous city for cyclists in 2019 with 19 deaths to date—almost double the total in 2018.
(Excerpt) Read more at vice.com ...
Amen!
Loud pipes save lives
A few weeks ago, I saw someone bicycling in a lane of traffic. At that point, the road was separated from another street by a wide bicycle path. He then looped around and headed back the way he came from on the other street before turning and proceeding on a third street (where he did condescend to stay in a bike lane).
So he could have saved himself close to a half mile of biking if he had cut across the bike path (there was concrete pavement all the way, ramped for bikes and wheelchairs), or if he wanted the distance, he could have gone down and back the bike path. But he apparently just wants to inconvenience rush hour drivers.
These are all problems that could be fixed. But govs don't seem to be into that.
Pedestrians are only 50 points whiles cyclists are 200 points.
1. All bicyclists MUST be subject to the same "rules of the road" as motorized vehicles.
2. Bicyclists must wear helmets when riding.
Just these two would cut the injury/fatality rate quite a bit.
The car to our left stopped.
The bike beside him sailed on through and nearly hit the car across from us who was legally going through the intersection.
If you are going to drive on the road ways, observe the rules of the road.
Cyclist Deaths Are Exploding Because Too Many Cyclists Fail To Respect 2,000-Pound Machines They Share The Road With
(fixed headline)
“I follow the rules of the road.
Based on the riders around here, you’d be a rarity.
If the morons on two wheels would simply obey the rules of the road, their death rate would plummet.
Example: there is a bicycle path crossing a street near me. There is a 4 way stop at this crossing. Fewer than 1 in 10 cyclists actually stops there, even if a vehicle has stopped and is now legally proceeding across the crossing.
The police do not usually enforce this, though at least one cyclist has gotten a ticket for running into a car here.
It comes from having a racing background. The team had some strict rules when training in team kit. The team kit had sponsors names and logos which were quite visible. One team I rode for had Bank United as the main sponsor, another had Gulf States Toyota. Any bad behavior reflected poorly on the team sponsors.
Even the juniors and masters had to go through the media training, not just the Category 1 pros.
Cycling deaths are exploding because of the coarsening of society, motorists refusing to see bicyclists as humans who are exceedingly vulnerable, especially to the steel death traps they operate.
Recognizing that someone is in danger is in itself stressful. The act of driving a car now is less dangerous than ever because of all the safety equipment in the modern automobiles. And it would be an invasion of their little cocoon of bliss to admit to themselves that the human beings on bicycles who they share the roadways with have little to fear apart from their SUV they’re driving (and its ilk). So they fail to accord bicyclists an appropriate level of extra care to assure their safety.
Several states now have a “3-foot” law, that motorists must allow no less than three feet of space when overtaking a bicycle or a motorcycle. But these laws are rarely enforced unless a car collides with a cyclist. And even then the penalties are trifling. What they should do instead is attach the same penalty to violating a cyclist’s 3-foot halo as they do to driving while intoxicated. Because you can be arrested for DUI (at a DUI checkpoint) when your driving was perfectly normal but your BAC was beyond some arbitrary limit. In which case the claim that you posed an existential threat to fellow motorists is purely hypothetical. However, every time you get close enough to a motor or bi-cyclist that he/she could potentially fall over into your path, you are posing a material risk to his/her life. So as with a DUI, a penalty of thousands of dollars and temporary loss of driving privileges is warranted.
The biggest problem (for cyclists) is that motorists simply don’t fear them. The potential of a $2500 fine and a six month loss of license (plus $5000 in lawyer’s extortion) could change that.
If you really want people to cycle, you’re going to have to do it like the Netherlands does, and it’s far too late to do that.
I would support that if you also prohibited by law a parent or any other person buying a bicycle or tricycle or big wheel or scooter or any similar device for any child who wasn't licensed and insured, regardless of age.
And require proof of pilot's license and liability insurance before you can buy a rubber band-powered toy airplane, wire or remote controlled model airplane, helium balloon or kite.
And charged every motorist who strikes a bicyclist with assault with a deadly weapon.
I know of three people 50+ who are into extreme fitness and ride bicycles. All three have been in the hospital from bike accidents. Broken hips, life altering concussions....
You're right as far as it goes but it's significantly worse for bicycles because of the relative differences in speed. But you have very little influence on what happens around you. Riding like every single driver is out to kill you won't necessarily prevent them from succeeding.
No, that's not the problem, the problem is that motorists refuse to see that the safest solution to that conflict lies under their left foot, not their right.
My experience is that most bicyclers are jackasses when they are riding their bicycles.
I was on a bike/walking trail in Oregon. Every single biker would whiz (20 mph) by from behind, give no warning and come within 18 inches of me as i was walking. Any (ANY) lateral movement on my part could result in a horrible accident.
When I ride on the road I have to use extreme caution to pass them a (as they typically ride nearly in the middle of the road) . Then as I finally get around them I get stopped at a traffic light. Of course, they ride past all the people and get up to the light and then the light changes and I have to get around them again. I have pulled my car up to the curb so they cannot get around me and they simlpy pass me on the left.
Now bear in mind I do not wish for anyone to get hurt and I do not let my annoyance alter the fact that I do not wish to hurt anyone and drive as safe as I can....but.... they are mostly self centered jack asses.
Spandex isn't about going fast per se (not aerodynamics-related), it's about preserving the skin on your bum when you're seated on a saddle that's tiny compared to what's on a kid's bicycle, your legs are pumping up and down 80 times per minute, and you're going to sustain that for a couple of hours.
Old cycling shorts were wool which, like spandex, is stretchy and will conform to your shape with minimum of excess. When the material gets wet (which it always will, because you're working hard and will sweat profusely), if it didn't fit snugly it would bunch up where you'd least want it ...right between your legs.
What a lot of people don't get is that to a 'serious' cyclist, riding is the same commitment as a part time job. 10-15 hours saddle time per week, which doesn't include time spent maintaining and repairing the bike and bike kit, and doing the laundry on cycling togs. When I was a younger man I routinely rode more than a thousand miles a month (except during winter). That's a lot of wear and tear on your back side.
Which is why all high-mileage cyclists are susceptible to saddle sores anyway but the traditional shape of cycling shorts isn't about the esthetics, it's about comfort and protection against saddle sores. There's also a wee bit of padding in the crotch area called a "chamois" (say: 'shammy'). A chamois is a European goat and back in the wool shorts days the chamois actually was made from the skin of these goats. But it was expensive and required the same care as other forms of leather, which is exactly what it was. Very supple leather. Chamois now are virtually all synthetic, but even modern shorts always have a chamois (even if it isn't made from goat any more) so you don't chafe from the friction of your legs going up and down in opposite directions 5000 times an hour.
Which is why cyclists do not wear undergarments under their shorts. That would only interfere with the function of the shorts and the chamois.
I learned all this the hard way. I thought all that flu-flu stuff was nonsense. Started riding in gym shorts, jock strap, T-shirt and Ray-Bans. But the gym shorts gave me saddle sores, the flapping of the (loose-fitting) T-shirts chaffed, and plain old Ray-Bans don't shield the eyes from 30-mph winds as well as streamlined sports glasses.
Now I wear all the traditional cycling garb (minus the team logos, where possible) because the cyclist's kit has been refined by more than a century of trial-and-error. And the design of every bit of it (except when helmets when through the "Alien" phase) is a matter of form following function, not the other way around.
For the better part, cyclists don't select their clothes to make a fashion statement, they're dressing to enable their body (particularly the perineum, AKA the "taint") to endure the stresses that cycling puts on it.
Excellent reply. I went to the slick shorts after trying all the other forms. Now I know why they designed that way and am happy that I finally worked up.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.