Do you feel like biking makes you a loser?

"Republican Congressman Blasts Bicycles"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ip8nozp7vs8

The Republicans are represented by the elephant, which believes that
"bigger is better"; the Democrats are represented by the donkey, which
is slow to change; and the Banana Revolution is represented by a
clever monkey that believes "small is better" and wants to change
ASAP.

PS: We also use a chihuahua, so take your pick.

On Jul 8, 10:42*am, KingOfTheApes wrote:

But I do propose another alternative: Open all right hand lanes to
bikes and reduce the speed limit on them to 20MPH. That would be the
"American way."

I hope SOMEONE (hopefully a politician) reads this and draws some
lessons from the Dutch...

Originally Posted by Pig_Chaser
"Maybe we could bring over the Dutch laws... if a motorist hits a
cyclist he is assumed at fault unless it can be proven the cyclist was
negligent."

meb wrote:
Can you confirm that this law was actually passed?

I've seen press articles that such a law was considered:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/despatches/34915.stm

However, reading a Dutch version of a FAQ on site:
http://www.fietsersbond.nl/urlsearch...itemnumber=790 suggests it was
considered but not passed.

As far as cycling comparisons go, I've cycled in all 12 Dutch
provinces and in all 50 US states. They are fairly different systems.

The size of the Netherlands is about same size as MA/CT/RI together
with 16-million people. A good percentage of these people live in a
megalopolis in the west. There isn't much space to put new roads there
and some Dutch still definitely like their cars with miles-long
traffic jams happening at times. Minimum driving age is 18 and getting
a license is tougher. There is a fairly complete separate bike network
with paths and traffic signals. Bicycles are basic transportation with
a reasonable percentage of the population cycling. For example, my
grandmother kept riding until age of 92 (not very fast mind you). A
reasonable percentage of the population cycles and it is probably
easier to do without owning a car. Last time I was there (2007), I
liked some of the separate path network - though found some bumpier
than I remembered from previous visits.

I've cycled on some paths/lanes in the US. Some are quite good, though
my typical complaint is that they aren't always "continuous" or
designed as a system. Occasionally, a piecemeal solution is as bad as
no solution at all. In some places you have a different size/scale as
compared to the Netherlands (e.g. Colorado is eight times as large as
the Netherlands with a quarter of the population). So, I think it is
useful to understand and learn from other areas such as the
Netherlands - but one will still need to create a solution that meets
needs of Colorado.

cyclezealot wrote:
"Check it out Quixote. There is a bicycle caucus in the Congress.
Headed by the congressman Earl ( something) from Portland, Or. Not all
pols are dumb heads. That caucus does all it can to further bike
infrastructure."

Yeah, I think we discussed it before. They can only do so much with
little resources. Nothing like the Pentagon, or even NASA. That's
where the real money goes.

I'm even sure the War on Drugs gets more money than bikes. Come to
think of it, if we brought the Dutch system, we could use that money
for bike facilities.

No, it's not a new theme park in Orlando, but a whole region of Europe
where cycling can still be a pleasant experience. And it's NOT that
I'm promoting tourism over there either, but that it shows what
America could be if there was the political will to make it happen. In
the meantime, dream on folks!

"Bikelandia is my name for a huge bike-friendly chunk of Europe that
embraces most of Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Holland and Denmark
plus France, Corsica, Belgium and Luxembourg. While monstrous trucks
and obscene-sized RVs have made bike touring less and less inviting on
America's roads, touring by bicycle is flourishing in Bikelandia and
is soaring in popularity with each passing year.

In Bikelandia, everything America's bike activists are striving for
already exists. Without exaggeration, cycling is ten times safer and
more pleasant than it is on most American roads. People are friendly
and helpful and in most hotels, someone speaks English. All of which
makes Bikelandia the the one best place for touring by bike.

From spring through fall, millions of men and women of all ages use
bikes every day for shopping or riding to work or school. Bike parking
racks exist within a few yards of almost every store. There are no
drive-in banks or restaurants or loose dogs, no pick-up trucks or U.S.
style motels, and most motorists seem patient and willing to share the
roads with cyclists. In many ways, cycling is much like it was in the
great days of biking 40 years or more ago."

http://www.tourvelo.org/bikeland.html

Originally Posted by Ed Holland
"I think this must be the worst case of cyclist inferiority syndrome
we have ever seen?"

The 99.6% of commuters who do NOT use a bike to work seem to agree
with me.

Even kids understand this...

Why do so many people who ride bicycles ride in the streets when there
is a sidewalk nearby?
Now I ride my bike all the time and definitely stay on the
sidewalks... so why do so many people ride in the streets and slow
traffic and risk getting hit? Its sooo annoying and stupid (in my
opinion)

Answerer 4
By law, a bicycle is a vehicle and belongs in the street.

Of course, common sense says that a bicycle is too frail for being in
motor vehicle traffic.

Conclusion: There is no proper place for bicycles.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...0182657AArONFj

Hey, it would be interesting to take kids to Bikelandia!


Originally Posted by Ed Holland I think this must be the worst case
of cyclist inferiority syndrome we have ever seen?

The 99.6% of commuters who do NOT use a bike to work seem to agree
with me.

Even kids understand this...

Why do so many people who ride bicycles ride in the streets when there
is a sidewalk nearby?
Now I ride my bike all the time and definitely stay on the
sidewalks... so why do so many people ride in the streets and slow
traffic and risk getting hit? Its sooo annoying and stupid (in my
opinion)

Answerer 4
By law, a bicycle is a vehicle and belongs in the street.

Of course, common sense says that a bicycle is too frail for being in
motor vehicle traffic.

Conclusion: There is no proper place for bicycles.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...0182657AArONFj

Hey, it would be interesting to take kids to Bikelandia!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Republicans are represented by an Elephant, the Democrats by a
Donkey, and we, the Banana Revolution, are represented by a Chihuahua.
"Small Is Better!"

Well, what I mean is, we should approach the people and ask them, "Why
don't you ride a bike?" Then if they say, "Well, because it's
dangerous out there, stupid!" Then the politicians go to work and fix
it! But if they say, "Just because I'm lazy and stupid," then
everything is left like it is.

It makes so much sense, you know, that in the nation where everything
is polled, we poll this issue, shouldn't we? Now let's take a
poll...

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=439585

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Republicans are represented by an Elephant, the Democrats by a
Donkey, and we, the Banana Revolution, are represented by a Chihuahua.
"Small Is Better!"

Originally Posted by Longfemur
"If you're a child, ride on the sidewalk. If you're an adult who has
the mind of a child, walk."

The system tries to kill the child within, so you give up the bike and
become an avid consumer of oil and everything related with the
automobile industry.

But some adults refuse to grow and pay the price --their bike being
considered "a toy" by the rest of society.

Am I getting too philosophical?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Riding a bike costs peanuts --which is why monkeys love biking"

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote88

On Jul 16, 12:00*pm, KingOfTheApes
wrote:
Originally Posted by Longfemur
"If you're a child, ride on the sidewalk. If you're an adult who has
the mind of a child, walk."

The system tries to kill the child within, so you give up the bike and
become an avid consumer of oil and everything related with the
automobile industry.

But some adults refuse to grow and pay the price --their bike being
considered "a toy" by the rest of society.

Am I getting too philosophical?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------*-----
"Riding a bike costs peanuts --which is why monkeys love biking"

http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote88

According to the California Vehicle Code, bicycles are considered
vehicles in their own right, and are subject to the same rights and
responsibilities as motorists. I think the age requirement is what
makes many people think bikes are toys. When gas prices to $10/gallon,
I'm sure people would reconsider the bike's status.
My biking range is extensive: Hollister, Santa Cruz, Half Moon Bay,
San Francisco, Oakland, Sunol, and Sausalito. Just muscle power!
I have been compared to Lance Armstrong, a huge biker who won the Tour
De France 7 times. Of course Europe has a bigger bike culture than the
USA due to exorbitant gas prices and compact urban areas. The USA's
addiction to cars would make it difficult to get people on bikes. High
gas prices alone would not do it. Bike To Work Day is one attempt
which is somewhat successful, although I started 5 years before the
first BTWD. Bike To Work Day is the third Thursday in May, and began
in 1994, one month before my first ride to Gilroy. I had ridden to San
Francisco once or twice then, now 21 times

On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 03:48:17 -0700 (PDT), said
in
:

According to the California Vehicle Code, bicycles are considered
vehicles in their own right

Followup-to amended to remove uk.rec.cycling, since the California
Vehicle Code does not apply in the uk.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

On Jul 10, 10:17*am, KingOfTheApes
wrote:
Well, what I mean is, we should approach the people and ask them, "Why
don't you ride a bike?" Then if they say, "Well, because it's
dangerous out there, stupid!" Then the politicians go to work and fix
it! But if they say, "Just because I'm lazy and stupid," then
everything is left like it is.

It makes so much sense, you know, that in the nation where everything
is polled, we poll this issue, shouldn't we? Now let's take a
poll...

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=439585

---------------------------------------------------------------------------*-----
The Republicans are represented by an Elephant, the Democrats by a
Donkey, and we, the Banana Revolution, are represented by a Chihuahua.
"Small Is Better!"

Many people think biking is dangerous because they are sharing the
road with people who shouldn't be driving. The roadway planners were
trying to shoehorn bike lanes onto streets that were not originally
biking routes. That's why bikers get doored. Most of our streets were
designed when gasoline was cheap and people rarely biked. It was
assumed that we would drive cars. The addition of bike lanes was
prompted by rising gas prices, the fitness movement, etc. Los Angeles
had a bike path in 1910 where Hwy 110 is now. Only two miles of the
bike path was completed before the auto and oil industry wanted it
torn down. At that time, the toll on the bike path was $.05, train
fare was $.25. The railroad wanted the bike path torn down because it
was losing passengers, and therefore money. The automotive industry is
very powerful, as is the oil industry. These industries effectively
told us that bikes are toys and do not belong on streets.