JeffOYB

My hunch is that cycling will get over the hump into total public acceptance and protection by invoking zero "specialness" but by an overwhelming assertion that "bikers are people too."

This is part of the "normalizing of the bike" campaign concept. ...That we get our best gains and potential from behaving just like regular folks. The more outlandish we appear and if we ask for special handling then we isolate ourselves.

Bad drivers hit bikers but they also hit everyone else. The overwhelming campaign should be against bad driving so that all road users are better off.

And the bare and obvious humanity of bikers might be an ideal format for such a public outcry against "motor privilege."

What would happen if hundreds of bikers and also thousands of people converged every day on every capitol. Or maybe once a week. Demanding better driving, a shunning of all macho driving, a new valuing of human life on roadways. Yeah, it would take some work but it might all be over sooner than we think.

There is a sub-current in the USA that thinks it's OK to not pay attention and also to menace the vulnerable.

What could be achieved by a month of national protests with millions of all kinds of folks?

First, maybe we could get vulnerable user laws passed everywhere. But also there might be trickle-out benefits for everyone.

It's possible even that negative/negligent acting out against all those who are vulnerable could be reduced. Even beyond car driving.

Now, to do that violence might need to be understood better: why does it happen? Each country has its own reasons for its own expression of violence. We might need to focus in on the basics of the American style a bit better. ...I assume it is directly related to the behavior of our leadership or anyone in a position of guiding our dominant cultural styles.

Chris0516

I like this idea.

chipcom 

I'll not be claiming to be part of some "vulnerable user" protected class. I survived and have remained relatively undamaged all these years by being just a normal user of the road, following the same rules as the other users.

I got no problem addressing the deficiencies of all users of the road that endanger other users of the road...but I won't be claiming membership in some special protected class to do so.

Dave Cutter

I saw a commercial the other day for an awesome flashlight. The only problem is... 99% of most people's need for a flashlight has been replaced by their phones. The new flashlight.... solves a 1995 problem.

Bicycles (and by extension bicycling) is a very mature technology. I'd say the bike was accepted (or normalized) by the public more than 100 years ago. Bicycling popularity has fallen slightly in the past few years. That happens. Cycling popularity has always had it's ups and downs. Cycling popularity is as much fashion driven as anything else. Blaming (or crediting) motorists for cycling fashion trends... appears to me... to be a bit over-the-top.

The caged chicken that lays our eggs, the family dog, parents, spouse's, children.... all have limited (and different) attention spans. Harsh laws or violent protests will not effect or alter the construction of our brains (chickens and dogs will never be able to drive) and most motorist will never be excellent drivers. In a couple decades our cars will automatically navigate us from here-to-there and traffic safety will greatly improve (even for cyclist).

Meanwhile... I wouldn't put any faith in a fearful over-reaction to the normal risks involved in being a mortal being. There is absolutely no chance that a cyclist won't die... and a 100% chance that (even if they quit cycling) they will die. And NOTHING can be done to change that.

Maybe... you might find comfort... if you do the math and calculate how many days, hours, minutes of life is lost per cyclist... because of cycling. I am sure that the stats show that the type of fitness obtained by cycling does far more to increase longevity than accidents do to decrease life expectancy.

jefnvk

I've long thought the push for cyclist safety should be far more on improving everyone's overall driving skills than any particular importance on cyclist's rights. I don't have any stats to back it up, but I'd be willing to bet far more accidents happen by someone who holds no ill-will towards cyclists and lapsed in their judgement, as they do many times on a daily basis, than people who actively hold a grudge and harass cyclists.

In any case, better driving makes EVERYONE safer: pedestrians, cyclists, motorcycles, and other vehicles.

The only problem with that? No one thinks THEY are a bad driver. No one wants to force more training on THEMSELVES. No one wants to have their license renewal made harder, or have to go with the testing that such a solution would inevitably require.

Leisesturm

As soon as I read this thread's title I knew who its author must be. I don't know... transportation cyclists as a protected class. What about women as a protected class? Or children? You cannot legislate decency! What can be done is to do something about the amount of despair, anger, frustration and inequality that exists. When/if that is done there won't be any need to pass laws for the protection of cyclists. Am I misinformed? Are there not presently laws against running down cyclists? No? Well, if no, then that should change, but I'm almost certain that it is not presently legal to run over a cyclist (or pedestrian) for any reason. Seems to work well enough. I mean cyclists were hit and killed last year... several hundred? Sad, but not IMO indicative of any need for a campaign to humanize cyclists.

mconlonx

So far, so good...

...and then it goes off the rails and straight to...

[/QUOTE]Now, to do that violence might need to be understood better: why does it happen? Each country has its own reasons for its own expression of violence. We might need to focus in on the basics of the American style a bit better. ...I assume it is directly related to the behavior of our leadership or anyone in a position of guiding our dominant cultural styles.[/QUOTE]

Pie in the sky. "First, we need to educate people..." = doomed to fail.

The first group of quotes is inclusive, get stuff done, wake people up, and enact sensible regulation kind of reasoning and action. Pass more severe negligent and distracted driving laws, with harsher penalties, and fund enforcement. Not just for vulnerable road users, but for all road users and those impacted by them.

The second group of quotes is divisive, either subtly or outright. Victim mentality. Us v. them, and counterproductive to a more cohesive, less violent culture.

Chris0516

I don't see it as proclaiming membership to a given class. As to ability, or inability. But as to equal rights of all road users.

squirtdad

+1 and welcome back chipcom

no motor?

We've got news for you son, you ain't normal.


How come no one has mentioned Critical Mass yet? They've been taking to the streets for this issue for years.

bakes1

There is no doubt in my mind that JeffOYB and Chris 0516 are twin brothers separated at birth by some unusual circumstance. Perhaps one of the doctors or the person responsible for filling out the birth certificate was hit and killed while riding a bicycle?...

squirtdad

OP is dreaming at best

No, cycling is not the public model to rise against all violence and no "uprising" is not going to fix anything.

IMHO:

The biggest single issue on the roads is self centered, narcisstic, I am special behavior...ie. my text is more important then driving safe, it is ok for me to run a red light because: I can make a better judgement call than any one else, I am in a hurry, I am on a bike, etc., and so on

Vigorous enforcement of traffic laws for all road users would help hugely for all users including cyclists. Problem is there are a lot more road users than LEO and in many areas where Law enforcement is limited, other areas like crimes against persons and gang reduction take priority

The only way to really get more cyclists on the road is to make it more convenient to ride than drive for normal everyday activies.

What is convenient? less hassle, Measurable less expense, perceived safety

How to get there: Most would take government regulation changes, like requiring companies to charge drivers for parking at work, massively higher gas prices, not requiring parking for new businesses, more, better, safer, and covered bike parking, requriing schools to encourage students to bike, and so on.

How to get there practically: Use your bike for everyday errands, use your bike for commutes (if you only have a super good road bike....time for N+1...get a bike for errnads and commutting) help your neighbors and co workers ride, support local road diets and bike infrastructure

The more riders, the more visibility and voters, which leads to more goverment attention and action. Repeat cycle

JeffOYB

I disagree. (But I agree that I'm dreaming -- and that's what works.)

Uprisings often have large effect. Social media era increasing this.

Enforcement is reactive and, though helpful, is not a dominant mover. Culture is the main mover.

Obviously impt to emphasize that biking has functional and legal attributes of both vehicle and pedestrian -- one aspect of its superiority. So no need to apologize for bikers running reds unless you're in an area where peds are castigated equally for that. (Urban areas of Calif possibly such a place.) Ask any ped: there are several flavors of red-running. The only problematic one is where folks step out in front of a car to some extent.

Culture leads much more than convenience.

rydabent

This would be good in an ideal world, but probably wont happen. Most people just cant see the light of how good cycling is and is for them.

I am a good example if I do say so myself of what cycling can do for a person. I will be 78 this year, and have never been in a hospital or had an operation. Yes I know I have been blessed with good health, but I still maintain that my bike and trike are my fountain of youth machines. Almost all my friends that are the same age or maybe up to 10 years younger are in far worse shape than I am. Yet-----------------they pretty much snicker at my bike riding. They think I am a nut when I tell them that I pretty much ride approx 30 miles every other day weather permitting.

IMO all of the big cities should bar auto traffic in the down town areas. Wether it would be an influence on violence is up for debate.

lostarchitect 

Jeff may be dreaming, but it's a positive dream, and that's where good things start. Keep dreaming, Jeff, and maybe you can dream something into reality.

Roughstuff

AMEN! I thought i'd never see it. Just what America needs...another "vulnerable" group!

And in any case cyclists are not "vulnerable users." They are simply users of the roadway who have, by choice and fully informed consent, chosen to enter the roadway and lanes of traffic with vehicles much bigger than themselves. Furthermore they are not contained within the vehicle (CAGERS, as the lackey logo goes) but ride on top of it. They have no seat belts, restraining devices, air bags, or any of the other wonderful accoutrements which have inflated (no pun intended) the size, weight, and costs of automobiles in recent decades (which was their hidden agenda all along) while also improving safety.

Bicycles, like motorcycles and every other vehicle, have advantages (mobility, lower cost, etc) and disadvantages (poor protection against weather, poor signaling mechanisms, etc). Get over it.

JoeyBike

My pepper-spray stock value would go up fo sho.

Rollfast

Nope, but it's good to see you again, old friend.