no1mad 

Caught wind of this through the social media grapevine.

https://dc.streetsblog.org/2013/03/06...t-bike-summit/

tulip

Yes, it's true. They seem to be coming around little by little.

B. Carfree

The comments that were under the article were pretty much my opinion. I left AAA years ago because of their anti-bike advocacy as well as the fact that they contract with some pretty dangerous tow companies locally. I chose long ago to ignore LAB because they seem more interested in pandering to organizations like AAA than improving the conditions on the road for cyclists. I guess this is like the Sierra Club's dalliance with chemical companies: good for a few insiders, not so good for the stated mission of the organization.

GamblerGORD53

Pathetic video, unless you support MHLs. pffft.
CFer riding 12" from the curb ?? fat chance.
3 year old with training wheels on the road ?? fat chance.

Well, at least daddy had an IGH.

mconlonx

1. The speech was not the keynote address, not even opening day.

2. Getting AAA on-board with cycling advocacy is a bad thing? Seriously?!?

3. If you give a s**t, please write AAA about your displeasure regarding their support for MHLs and why they are bad. Respectfully, with appropriate facts and citations.

genec

Mhl? MHL?

Ferrous Bueller

Mandatory Helmet Laws. They're proven to be the best way to discourage people from riding bikes. That's the angle.

B. Carfree

I wish AAA would get behind MHLs where they could do some good: for motorists. Imagine the lives that could be saved if motorists, and their passengers, were required to wear approved motoring helmets.

It really doesn't matter if these helmets would prevent the motorists from being injured in a wreck, they would likely lead to a substantial decrease in driving which most definitely would decrease the CARnage on our roads.

GamblerGORD53

Just wondering .... would a self respecting DUTCH kid use training wheels ????

I-Like-To-Bike

What difference would it make? The video was intended for North Americans.

mconlonx

If you are moved to contact AAA, the more politic approach would be to voice your displeasure with what is being perceived as a pro-Mandatory Helmet Law for cyclists stance, without mentioning the rest. Getting on your high horse -- no matter how warranted -- is a surefire way of getting your message ignored or discounted.

When MHL-cycling bills show up in your state legislature is the time to demand an amendment to cover all motor vehicle operators and passengers...

genec

In spite of the MHL, could it be that an "endorsement" from AAA for cyclists, and safety videos from AAA regarding cyclists and motorists sharing the road, could overall be a positive thing? I mean after all, if AAA is pushing this out to motorists, might this increase the awareness in motorists of cycling and the rights of cyclists to use the road?

We have such a scant voice as it is, and we cyclists send mixed messages all the time... I am inclined to believe that a positive message to motorists about cycling is a good thing for cycling overall.

mconlonx

That's how it was being played off at Bike Summit. And personally, I think it's a great thing, aside from their voicing support for MHLs.

I'd also look out in the future for them to take some kind of stance on bike infrastructure and we'll also need to fight if/when they support legislation relegating bikes to bike lanes/paths. Hopefully they won't, but I could easily see it happening. To clarify, this is not something they have stated as of yet, but I fear it could be a direction they move without appropriate cooperation from bike advocacy orgs.

The political side is the educational end of things -- how we can work with them to craft their bike policy, vs. working against them if they were to develop that policy in a vacuum, without input from cyclist advocacy organizations.

genec

Bike lanes are one thing... if the cyclist is going to share the road, they should have access to the entire road.

Bike paths are quite a bit a different beast... if there is a good quality bike path. (enabling a cyclist to ride at approximately 20MPH or better) adjacent to a high speed roadway (55+MPH) I have no problem with being relegated to that path, in fact I think it is on the edge of insane to share high speed high volume roads with motor vehicles, and I prefer alternatives. (Motorists are just not safe partners on the road... and I have seen better systems) My thinking here is that if this is what AAA et. al. want, then we force a standard, and demand funding for quality bike paths. None of this pseudo sidewalk crap or the narrow poorly laid out bumpy asphalt stuff; we have to stand our ground and demand something as good as the road we are being forced from.

Now of course cycling will not let that happen, as some folks are too hung up on the "same road same rules" and "cyclists rights" mentality while ignoring the basic laws of physics when dealing with fast heavy motor traffic, so in the end, cycling will likely become divided and the motorists will win anyway (through majority rule).

Chris516

Ditto

harshbarj

I simply can never trust AAA. They are an automotive related company. Their key business is drivers and the best way for them to keep doing good business is to keep people in cars. Much as the confusing relationship volkswagen has with bicycles. As I posted on the streets blog. "I could never trust any company involved with the automobile. That would be akin to taking drug rehab classes from your dealer. There is a slight conflict of interest there."

Chris516

Same here

I went into a a new AAA location on the way back from the bike shop yesterday. I asked them if they had any knowledge of AAA's invariable position on cyclist's. They looked at me like 'who?', 'what?' Like they could care less.

mconlonx

AAA offers bicycle roadside assistance services in OR and WA states... There's money in cycling. WD-40 figured it out, others will, too.

We're all road users...

sudo bike

This is probably so overall. Still, the cynic in me thinks this is just AAA's new tactic for anti-bike campaigning. They've found it may be more effective to look like they're playing nice while pushing their agenda from another angle. Why openly draw the ire of cycling groups when they can discourage cycling by pushing MHL's and have less fallout to deal with, and even some support? Hopefully I'm wrong, and hopefully good will come of it anyway, but I'm hesitant to believe AAA has simply had a change of heart.

CB HI

I find it impossible to believe an organization like AAA has not read and fully understands the studies showing MHLs reduce cycling.

mconlonx

I'd rather cycling advocates be working with AAA at their policy level to disabuse them of incorrect, but widely accepted notions, than have to fight wrong-headed policy after it's been established. In this case particularly, I hope that feedback regarding this policy--and the AAA speaker heard the displeasure of 750 involved advocates loud and clear when support of MHLs was mentioned--will sway their view before they start advocating MHLs at the state level.

kardar2

I am a AAA member, I sent them a email to tell them thank you. I am glag that my membership is helping my passion for bikes. If they realize if they have a member that likes riding they might find it beneficial to suppoert it. They might tap into the raising membership numbers.

mconlonx

If you are not a proponent of Mandatory Helmet Laws, I'd ask that you also write voicing your concern with their current stance supporting such laws.

kardar2

Well that is surely a double "gotcha"..... motorcycle have to were helmets and if we want the same rights as cars well you are going to have to put on the helmet . I always wear a helmet anyways. But I am for individual liberties . But it will be just a matter of time and they will pass the law.

genec

Interesting point... if cyclists intend to use the same street as mandatory seatbelt wearing motorists, and mandatory helmet wearing motorcyclists, yes indeed, we should also be prepared to wear helmets.

Disclosure: I wear a helmet anyway.