[*BCM*] riding

[Lee Peters]

> 1. Simplicy is best when it comes to rules and laws, including traffic
> laws.  So having the same basic roads, signs and signals, and traffic
> regulations for all road users is the most effective, respectful, and
> safest way to go.  Making weird lanes, paths, etc. exclusively for
> two-to-three-wheeled-non-motor-powered travellers seems overly
> complicated and causes more problems than it solves.  Especially in
> crowded urban areas with lots of messy intersections.

I agree that it doesn't have to be complicated, but we don't get even the 
most basic enforcement.  Driver or biker, we have to contend with vehicles 
(cars mostly) running red lights and not yeilding on left turns.  Also, we 
contend with the double parked cars blocking traffic in the spot left over 
for bikes.

> 2. Fair and equal treatment for cyclists and other HPV users will only
> come when the VIPs start treating us as equals on the roadways.

What is an HPV?  Human Powered Vehicle?

> 3. The time and money spent on designing, building, and maintaining all
> these special facilities for cyclists would be better spent on
> education and enforcement.  I would like to see the US educating the
> entire population about traffic rules and safety.  A crucial element
> would be elementary school classes on traffic safety, including actual
> on-road practice with HPV's (bikes, trikes, quads, kick-scooters,
> skateboards, etc,) like they do in the Netherlands and other
> progressive countries.  And I would like to see the judicial system
> enforcing the traffic laws fairly and justly when it comes to cyclists
> and other HPV users.

It is shocking that enforcement of this kind costs money, when the 
punishment is a fine.  Double, or triple the fines until you can afford it 
or don't need to do it.  As for education, start with the cops......no wait, 
they have drivers' licenses, the same ones we do.  THEY AREN'T DOING THIER 
JOBS.  So, I guess my base reaction is to install infrastructure to do the 
job that the police aren't doing.

I do agree that the test to be driver or biker could be much more 
comprehensive.

> 4. Very few, thorough, unbiased studies have been done to show any
> evidence that special bike facilities are any safer (or even as safe)
> as a well designed shared facility.

It is relative.  It would not be called 'special' in Europe.  It is more 
integrated.  I suppose the change would be foriegn for an American driver, 
but they will get used to it.

> 6. Having ridden a bike in other places like Holland and Portland,
> Oregon, where bicycling is admittedly much more pleasant, and having
> really looked at the possible reasons for this, I've come to the
> conclusion that it's not because of the engineering designs, but
> because of the high respect that motorists have for other road users in
> these places.  People simply drive nicer there!  (And there seems to be
> less stress in general in these places.  Massachusetts is a really high
> stress state!)

When people see a cop directing traffic, everything gets real calm and 
orderly.  Have you ever observed this? The thoughts may go like this: 
"ARrrrrgh, this traffic is making me crazy.....oh wait, there is a cop 
trying to make it a little better....cool guy, putting himself in harm's way 
to protect us......  I will drive calmly for the next three blocks.....then 
floor it."

I don't know how to make people nicer, does anybody?  So, methinks a change 
in design can help (this is the end of it I come from - design is 
everything)

> Given all this evidence, I have come to the conclusion that special bike
> facilities are a poor solution to my goal of being safer, happier, and
> better respected when I'm on a bike.

I am thinking that special only means a stripe on the road and 24" more of 
space.

> I understand that other people have other very well thought out reasons
> for supporting exclusive bike facilities and special treatement for
> cyclists, And that is perfectly understandable.  They may have
> different goals than I (a need for feeling special, a desire to punish
> motorists, a priority of speed over safety, or they may even have a
> thrillseeking personality that enjoys the confusion and danger that
> bike lanes cause!).  Or they may simply have not seen all the evidence
> that I have (not surprising, since most people haven't actually had an
> opportunity to work as a professional bicycle advocate, and be paid to
> research this kind of stuff).