Once bicycles are outlawed . . .

If those walking bicycles impede traffic, they will be ticketed or an
added rule will outlaw this.

I think this group's members fail to understand how angry cagers are at
being slowed by bicycles. It's a real fight here made worse by ad hoc CM
riders who use the law that they can ride anywhere to 'take the lane' on
busy arteries during rush times.

The relations between cage and bicycles here are terrible as I expect
they were in Blackhawk.

On Jun 16, 6:06*am, slide wrote:
If those walking bicycles impede traffic, they will be ticketed or an
added rule will outlaw this.

I think this group's members fail to understand how angry cagers are at
being slowed by bicycles. It's a real fight here made worse by ad hoc CM
riders who use the law that they can ride anywhere to 'take the lane' on
busy arteries during rush times.

The relations between cage and bicycles here are terrible as I expect
they were in Blackhawk.

So true. It'd be horrible to drive the speed limit or 3 or 4 mph
less, absolutely horrible.

One time I was driving and this guy was going a total of 5 mph less on
the freeway. He was going 65mph!!!! I couldn't believe it.

The obvious solution everyone is missing is to rid the roads of
everyone to keep them very clear and safe. Noone is allowed to walk,
stand, be within 3 feet of, or look menacingly towards, at, on,
around, or near roads.

-Antoni

On Jun 15, 2:43*pm, wrote:

Black Hawk officials expected the uproar. And they are not going to
revisit the rules, Copp said.

"Our council looks at what they think is best for its citizens, for
its businesses, which in this case are casinos, and its visitors,
which are patrons that come to visit the casinos," Copp said. "We have
had positive feedback from citizens, casinos and our guests."
*http://www.denverpost.com/ci_15298056

Could be there are state laws that supersede local. Which of course
means that, at least for a time, you can still get hassled (probably
jailed incl.) for riding.

Meanwhile, there's a saying I learned when I came to Texas:
"Don't go where you're not wanted".

The boycott is a joke both in economic impact (nil) and for serving
the interests of the town council (keeping bikes out of town or at
least off the roads in town).

So, going to Blackhawk? Bring your walkin' shoes, make sure to use the
public facilities at least once after consuming your carried-in lunch,
etc. etc. and be cool.

Yes, the up to Central City is a steep one.

--D-y

slide wrote:
If those walking bicycles impede traffic, they will be ticketed or an
added rule will outlaw this.

I think this group's members fail to understand how angry cagers are at
being slowed by bicycles. It's a real fight here made worse by ad hoc CM
riders who use the law that they can ride anywhere to 'take the lane' on
busy arteries during rush times.

The relations between cage and bicycles here are terrible as I expect
they were in Blackhawk.

I don't know where your "here" is, but in mine (Boston), things are
pretty prickly between cyclists and drivers, too. The range of proposed
ameliorations runs from bans/restrictions to accommodation via
facilities -- fortunately the latter seems to be gaining ground over the
former.

Confrontational tactics (CM) may or may not be helpful, I don't know,
but there's clearly a long history in our democracy of the politics of
confrontation and protest. The marches and demonstrations of the civil
rights era certainly also increased friction and conflict in the short
term, but in the end seemed to be instrumental in effecting change. The
comparison may be imperfect, but there's no question that the tactic in
general is a traditional one.

On Jun 16, 8:25*am, damyth wrote:

I suspect it's more likely that the city council is worried about
bicyclists (going downhill) clipping the doddering geriatric/retired
clientèle of casinos as they attempt to cross the street, say from
behind a bus.

But obviously, they're not worried about the much greater danger of an
automobile clipping those same folks in the same situation!

- Frank Krygowski

On Jun 16, 9:06*am, slide wrote:
It's a real fight here made worse by ad hoc CM
riders who use the law that they can ride anywhere to 'take the lane' on
busy arteries during rush times.

So if you're riding in a substandard width lane - say, one that's 9'
wide - where do you ride? Do you bounce along in the gutter as
motorists' mirrors graze your elbow?

- Frank Krygowski

On Jun 15, 5:41*pm, "MikeWhy" wrote:
AMuzi wrote:
wrote:
Bicyclists want to derail Black Hawk's ban By Jason Blevins
The Denver Post
Posted: 06/15/2010 01:00:00 AM MDT
Updated: 06/15/2010 05:15:58 AM MDT

snip

The roads in Black Hawk are narrow and do not have shoulders. They
teem with tour buses and delivery trucks that feed the bustling
casinos. Demanding that those trucks provide 3 feet of space when
passing cyclists — as required by a 2009 Colorado law — means
trucks and buses must move into oncoming traffic, Copp said.

"We saw the conflicts going on with buses and with trucks, and we
decided to be proactive on this," Copp said, noting that no
accidents prodded the ban. "We don't want to be the city that
knows we need a traffic light but waited until someone gets
killed. This is what our city believes is best for its citizens,
its businesses and its guests."

Black Hawk officials expected the uproar. And they are not going to
revisit the rules, Copp said.
"Our council looks at what they think is best for its citizens, for
its businesses, which in this case are casinos, and its visitors,
which are patrons that come to visit the casinos," Copp said. "We
have had positive feedback from citizens, casinos and our guests."
http://www.denverpost.com/ci_15298056

N8N wrote:
So I guess there aren't any sidewalks, either? *sounds like a hell
hole and best avoided. *I guess they don't want any visitors who use
any other form of transportation other than a motor vehicle. *Well,
I guess I don't need to visit there.
I guess those casinos must not provide enough tax revenue to allow
for what sounds like some long overdue infrastructure improvements?
One has to wonder what happens when a car or truck breaks down on
the roads under discussion.

MikeWhy wrote:
The answer seems simple and obvious: a bike route around the
congestion. Every other municipality seems able to do so. Isn't
there a state or county highway through that horse town?

How would one bicycle to the casino downtown when one is
shunted to an exurban detour?

No craps! No tax revenue!

Why, a well lit and secured bicycle lockup adjacent to the new bike path
would seem to be the solution for all sides. A manicured park and garden
with comfortable seating might entice me to pause in my travels and spend
some money. The congestion can be a thorn in the community's growth, or
village elders can embrace it as a sign of burgeoning prosperity. Either
way, the problem will right itself shortly.

Presumably they feel that the number of cyclists that *would* a) ride
through and b) stop and contribute to the local economy is small
enough that they can alienate them with impunity.

The sad thing is, they're probably right.

Were I of more of a progressive bent, I might make an argument then
for state-wide legislation mandating that all new roads or major
renovations include wide shoulders and/or sidewalks to accomodate
pedestrian and/or bicycle traffic within the limits of areas with a
certain population density...

As it is, I just don't patronize businesses in areas that **** me off,
but that really does nothing much other than making me personally feel
better about my choices.

nate

N8N wrote:
On Jun 15, 5:41 pm, "MikeWhy" wrote:
AMuzi wrote:

N8N wrote:
So I guess there aren't any sidewalks, either? sounds like a hell
hole and best avoided. I guess they don't want any visitors who
use any other form of transportation other than a motor vehicle.
Well, I guess I don't need to visit there.
I guess those casinos must not provide enough tax revenue to allow
for what sounds like some long overdue infrastructure
improvements? One has to wonder what happens when a car or truck
breaks down on the roads under discussion.

MikeWhy wrote:
The answer seems simple and obvious: a bike route around the
congestion. Every other municipality seems able to do so. Isn't
there a state or county highway through that horse town?

How would one bicycle to the casino downtown when one is
shunted to an exurban detour?

No craps! No tax revenue!

Why, a well lit and secured bicycle lockup adjacent to the new bike
path would seem to be the solution for all sides. A manicured park
and garden with comfortable seating might entice me to pause in my
travels and spend some money. The congestion can be a thorn in the
community's growth, or village elders can embrace it as a sign of
burgeoning prosperity. Either way, the problem will right itself
shortly.

Presumably they feel that the number of cyclists that *would* a) ride
through and b) stop and contribute to the local economy is small
enough that they can alienate them with impunity.

The sad thing is, they're probably right.

Were I of more of a progressive bent, I might make an argument then
for state-wide legislation mandating that all new roads or major
renovations include wide shoulders and/or sidewalks to accomodate
pedestrian and/or bicycle traffic within the limits of areas with a
certain population density...

As it is, I just don't patronize businesses in areas that **** me off,
but that really does nothing much other than making me personally feel
better about my choices.

nate

The real trouble is that this is a state highway, funded by the people of
Colorado. Passing a local ordinance denying fair use to a class of vehicles
likely is well beyond their purview. I think we don't have the full story.

wrote:
On Jun 16, 6:06 am, slide wrote:
If those walking bicycles impede traffic, they will be ticketed or an
added rule will outlaw this.

I think this group's members fail to understand how angry cagers are at
being slowed by bicycles. It's a real fight here made worse by ad hoc CM
riders who use the law that they can ride anywhere to 'take the lane' on
busy arteries during rush times.

The relations between cage and bicycles here are terrible as I expect
they were in Blackhawk.

So true. It'd be horrible to drive the speed limit or 3 or 4 mph
less, absolutely horrible.

One time I was driving and this guy was going a total of 5 mph less on
the freeway. He was going 65mph!!!! I couldn't believe it.

The obvious solution everyone is missing is to rid the roads of
everyone to keep them very clear and safe. Noone is allowed to walk,
stand, be within 3 feet of, or look menacingly towards, at, on,
around, or near roads.

-Antoni

In USA there is about 1% more road than 15 years ago but
about 30% more auto miles driven. It's no wonder the 'lure
of the open highway' holds less charm. Cyclists become just
that one last straw for some who were probably edgy anyway.

I have no answer, just noting that I drive almost never, an
activity I once very much enjoyed.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Jun 16, 6:06 am, slide wrote:


I think this group's members fail to understand how angry cagers are at
being slowed by bicycles.


Only those who don't actually Ride Bike in any traffic. I think the
record will show my constant (if not quite "banana" level)
observations of cagers' ample hostility.