"Look Ma!, No Brakes"

In article .com,
Steven wrote:

On Mar 8, 3:45 am, "Gooserider" wrote:
"Paul J. Berg" wrote in
...

`
Oregon Senate Bill 729 would exempt fixed-gear bikes from a law
requiring that bicycles on public roads have brakes.

`

That's a bad idea.

Why? Fixed-gear bikes don't need brakes.

--
~~~

On 7 Mar 2007 17:07:45 -0800, "Steven"
wrote:

A 26 inch cruiser is a one speed bike, so it is a banana seat bike in
basic form. Disconnecting the coaster is easy, but why?

Either of those will hit 20 mph going downhill. It's likely there will
be a street intersecting the road at the bottom of that hill and
little to see around on either side.

BAM!

Look Ma...no life.

So WHAT is the purpose of the bill, REALLY?

I don't agree with the law, for much narrower reasons and opinions,
but they are targeting primarily fixed gear bikes based on track bikes
or very close (they now build them from the ground up for the road),
that are used largely by messengers nowadays in city riding. Some bike
racers will train on fixed gear track bikes, but most that I have seen
(as was mine) have a front brake added.

I object not that the bikes are unsafe in themselves - a fixed gear
brakeless bike of the track type can be stopped PDQ by a skilled rider
- but that the riders are too often not as skilled as they think they
are. And an unskilled cyclist trying to use track braking skills on
the road can be a dangerous individual.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

`
It is fine to allow brakeless fixed gear bikes on the track, in the
control of skilled and trained riders. But, out on the roads? I don't
think public want brakeless bikes in the control of unskilled riders.

If the Oregon Legislature thinks this is such a great idea, why not
allow sixteen year olds to drive NASCAR and Indy race vehicles on the
public roads also.

`

Paul J. Berg wrote:
`
It is fine to allow brakeless fixed gear bikes on the track, in the
control of skilled and trained riders. But, out on the roads? I don't
think public want brakeless bikes in the control of unskilled riders.

Many many messengers have used brakeless bikes, for
decades, without the general public noticing much or
caring. It's only in recent years, with an explosion of
ersatz messengers/urban hipsters on track bikes, that
the public suddenly notices. We may ask is this interest
because of some spike in accidents/incidents, or for
some other reason?


If the Oregon Legislature thinks this is such a great idea, why not
allow sixteen year olds to drive NASCAR and Indy race vehicles on the
public roads also.

You gotta be kiddin me. Sixteen-year-olds in fast vehicles
that they don't have the skills/smarts/experience to drive
is pretty much our national war cry, isn't it?

Robert

Bill Sornson wrote:
Bill Baka wrote:
Bill Sornson wrote:
gatt wrote:
"DougC" wrote in message
...
Paul J. Berg wrote:
`
Oregon Senate Bill 729 would exempt fixed-gear bikes from a law
requiring that bicycles on public roads have brakes.
Is a "fixed-gear" bike basically a one-speed? That's sort of like
requiring brakes on a tricycle or a Big Wheel, right?

"We clocked your kid at two miles an hour! In a frickin' school
zone!"
You've obviously never heard The Legend of Little Billy Baka! (He
did 65 mph on a trike...twice!)

Bill "got a ticket that proves it, too (save for that pesky
producing it part)" S.


I am getting so tired of hearing that. I coasted that hill with a car
and barely hit 25 MPH, so maybe 20 on a trike. Whatever the few die
hard idiots think, I did it at 4, or maybe at best 5 years old. Did
you do anything exciting at 4 or 5? Probably not. The small town cops
knew me well enough to know where to take me home.
And the 160-170++ on a motorcycle is real, but I learned not to sit up
at those speeds, because the wind made me pull back on the bars so
hard I had no steering.
Live life, don't rag on me for having had the nards to actually do it.
Wimps.
Bill Baka

I literally have tears rolling down my cheeks. YOU'RE THE BEST, IRON
BILL!!!

Bill "deep thanks" S.


Life is for living, not hiding in bed.
I'll live for both of us and you can cower under the covers.
Bill Baka

On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 06:32:43 -0800, (Paul J. Berg)
wrote:

`
It is fine to allow brakeless fixed gear bikes on the track, in the
control of skilled and trained riders. But, out on the roads? I don't
think public want brakeless bikes in the control of unskilled riders.

If the Oregon Legislature thinks this is such a great idea, why not
allow sixteen year olds to drive NASCAR and Indy race vehicles on the
public roads also.



I was unaware of legislation limiting the maximum speed _capability_
of motor vehicles - how forward thinking of the Oregon legislature to
have enacted such.

"Bill Sornson" wrote in message
...
Don Homuth wrote:
On 7 Mar 2007 17:07:45 -0800, "Steven"
wrote:

So WHAT is the purpose of the bill, REALLY?

To make legal what is presently not - operating a bicycle with no
manual brake on streets.

Why stop there? How about motorcycles without brakes? Cars?
Semi-trailers?

Bill "FOOT FREEDOM FOR EVERYONE" S.

The particular type of bike in question doesn't coast. Either the pedals
are moving forward or the person is applying force against the forward
motion by actively pushing against the forward motion thereby stopping the
wheel rotation.

Ermine Todd III wrote:
"Bill Sornson" wrote in message
...
Don Homuth wrote:
On 7 Mar 2007 17:07:45 -0800, "Steven"
wrote:

So WHAT is the purpose of the bill, REALLY?

To make legal what is presently not - operating a bicycle with no
manual brake on streets.

Why stop there? How about motorcycles without brakes? Cars?
Semi-trailers?

Bill "FOOT FREEDOM FOR EVERYONE" S.

The particular type of bike in question doesn't coast. Either the
pedals are moving forward or the person is applying force against the
forward motion by actively pushing against the forward motion thereby
stopping the wheel rotation.

I'm sure the pedestrian who gets creamed will appreciate that distinction.

Bill "and thanks for telling me what a fixed gear bike is" S.

fiend999 wrote:
In article .com,
Steven wrote:

On Mar 8, 3:45 am, "Gooserider" wrote:
"Paul J. Berg" wrote in
...

`
Oregon Senate Bill 729 would exempt fixed-gear bikes from a law
requiring that bicycles on public roads have brakes.

`

That's a bad idea.

Why? Fixed-gear bikes don't need brakes.

They do on the streets.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Paul J. Berg wrote:
`
It is fine to allow brakeless fixed gear bikes on the track, in the
control of skilled and trained riders. But, out on the roads? I don't
think public want brakeless bikes in the control of unskilled riders.

Many many messengers have used brakeless bikes, for
decades, without the general public noticing much or
caring. It's only in recent years, with an explosion of
ersatz messengers/urban hipsters on track bikes, that
the public suddenly notices. We may ask is this interest
because of some spike in accidents/incidents, or for
some other reason?


If the Oregon Legislature thinks this is such a great idea, why not
allow sixteen year olds to drive NASCAR and Indy race vehicles on the
public roads also.

You gotta be kiddin me. Sixteen-year-olds in fast vehicles
that they don't have the skills/smarts/experience to drive
is pretty much our national war cry, isn't it?

Robert

So fixies use coaster brakes? why would you have a problem with that.
It is a brake. My CCM worked on the road. I guess I might not be clear on
this fixie brake thing.