Why American don't ride bike?

Paul Nevai

Why? Thanks G.d they don't. So all the roads and bike paths are left to me.
/Paul [I bike and I even KickBike]

jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org

Benjamin Lewis <bclewis@cs.sfu.ca> writes:

>> I'd ride more if the roads were safer.

> Then they are likely much, much safer than you think they are.

Oh shit! All the old excuses. The real reason is the same as the
ones for my use of my car. Attending dinner at someone's house not
even near my neighborhood, shopping for groceries at a market two
miles from my house where I buy 20 lbs or more of somewhat fragile
groceries including ice cream, going to a meeting of an organization
in SF about 33 miles from my house, taking a 100 mile bicycle ride
over Mt. Hamilton from Milpitas CA that is reached from Palo Alto by
freeways, etc.

Those are some of the excuses for someone who rides at least 200 miles
per week. There are even better excuses for people who don't have my
aerobic capacity and physical fitness that seems to amaze even
bicyclists when they consider by age. I've been doing this for the
last 50 years.

Don't be so self righteous about bicycle riding. I'll bet when you
are a bit older and wiser, you won't be raising a family using only a
bicycle, although there may be people who do so. The neighborhood
store for most of our needs vanished with the automobile. That's one
of the expenses of affluent life. It's the same in Europe and Asia.

Be realistic and face up to the facts. I live in California where
much of this is far easier than in areas with variable weather (rain,
sleet, hail, snow, strong winds, etc) and I use my car often. To make
up for that, I ride to work daily taking a detour that makes the
distance 20 miles instead of +-5miles. When it's shitty weather, I
drive. Bicycling is not my religion and I don't believe in imposing
it on others.

Jobst Brandt
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org

A Muzi

scituatejohn wrote:
> I'd ride more if the roads were safer.

Safer?
When's the last time you were killed going to work?


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

Benjamin Lewis

jobst brandt wrote:

> Benjamin Lewis <bclewis@cs.sfu.ca> writes:
>
>>> I'd ride more if the roads were safer.
>
>> Then they are likely much, much safer than you think they are.
>
> Don't be so self righteous about bicycle riding. I'll bet when you
> are a bit older and wiser, you won't be raising a family using only a
> bicycle, although there may be people who do so. The neighborhood
> store for most of our needs vanished with the automobile. That's one
> of the expenses of affluent life. It's the same in Europe and Asia.
[...]
>
> Be realistic and face up to the facts. I live in California where
> much of this is far easier than in areas with variable weather (rain,
> sleet, hail, snow, strong winds, etc) and I use my car often. To make
> up for that, I ride to work daily taking a detour that makes the
> distance 20 miles instead of +-5miles. When it's shitty weather, I
> drive. Bicycling is not my religion and I don't believe in imposing
> it on others.

I can't quite imagine that you are addressing me, but if you indeed are, I
don't understand where you think I said all the things you appear to be
accusing me of saying. I'm merely taking issue with the notion that
cycling in traffic is too dangerous, not trying to "foist my religion on
others as the one true path".

I'd also appreciate it if you'd not assume how I will choose to run my life
when I'm "older and wiser". I don't believe you know me well enough
personally to make such pronouncements on a public forum.

If, on the other hand, you are not addressing me personally but others on
this thread, I would suggest that you try to make such things clearer.

--
Benjamin Lewis

Seeing is deceiving. It's eating that's believing.
-- James Thurber

Michael J. Klein

On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 23:45:57 -0700, Benjamin Lewis <bclewis@cs.sfu.ca>
wrote:

>jobst brandt wrote:
>
>> Benjamin Lewis <bclewis@cs.sfu.ca> writes:
>>
>>>> I'd ride more if the roads were safer.
>>
>>> Then they are likely much, much safer than you think they are.
>>
>> Don't be so self righteous about bicycle riding. I'll bet when you
>> are a bit older and wiser, you won't be raising a family using only a
>> bicycle, although there may be people who do so. The neighborhood
>> store for most of our needs vanished with the automobile. That's one
>> of the expenses of affluent life. It's the same in Europe and Asia.

<snip>

I have to disagree with that last statement. Big stores are far and
few inbetween here in Taiwan. I own a motor scooter, and if I ride it
once per week, that is a lot. Every evening I walk to the store or a
local restaurant for food, even passing several LBS along the way.
The neighborhood store has vanished in places which are not crowded
and the popluation isn't dense enough to support it any longer, due to
relocation to the subburbs.

Michael J. Klein
Please replace mousepotato with asiancastings

Rick Onanian

On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 13:18:03 -0400, dvt <dvt_spam@psu.edu> wrote:
>Sorni wrote:
>> where is Carl Fogel lately?

I was wondering the same thing. I think I'll send an email.

>That personality disappeared as rapidly as it appeared. Based on his
>unending suspicion of other poster's backgrounds, I wouldn't be
>surprised if he's still around under another name.

What? We're talking about the person who chastised so many in the
helmet debate for questioning other posters' backgrounds when
sock-puppetry accusations appeared.

Can you provide an example of Carl questioning somebody else's
background?
--
Rick Onanian

(Pete Cresswell)

RE/
>Then they are likely much, much safer than you think they are.

Saying something like that is just plain irresponsible.
--
PeteCresswell

Benjamin Lewis

x@y.z wrote:

> RE/
>> Then they are likely much, much safer than you think they are.
>
> Saying something like that is just plain irresponsible.

Please elaborate. In all the statistics that I have seen, the danger of
cycling in traffic is in the same order of magnitude as the danger of
driving in traffic.

There are plenty of valid reasons for choosing not to ride a bicycle. I
don't believe that safety is one of them, at least with proper cyclist
education.

--
Benjamin Lewis

A small, but vocal, contingent even argues that tin is superior, but they
are held by most to be the lunatic fringe of Foil Deflector Beanie science.

Benjamin Lewis

x@y.z wrote:

> RE/
>> Please elaborate. In all the statistics that I have seen, the danger of
>> cycling in traffic is in the same order of magnitude as the danger of
>> driving in traffic.
>
> You don't know where the guy lives; you know nothing about the roads he
> is contemplating riding; you know nothing about the behaviour of the
> drivers where he rides; and you know nothing about his age, his physical
> condition, his cycling experience, or his general competance.

Well, I should have elaborated further, but that's why I used the word
"likely". I believe that in most cases, people who avoid riding due to
fears of the dangers are victims of the common and growing perception that
cycling is much more dangerous than it really is.

--
Benjamin Lewis

A small, but vocal, contingent even argues that tin is superior, but they
are held by most to be the lunatic fringe of Foil Deflector Beanie science.

A Muzi

> RE/
>>Then they are likely much, much safer than you think they are.

(Pete Cresswell) wrote:
> Saying something like that is just plain irresponsible.

How do you mean? I don't get it.

Do you mean it is irresponsible to point out that riding a
bicycle won't kill you (not with any statistically
significant risk, anyway) ?
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

G.T.

"A Muzi" <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote in message
news:108jumh2sr63g5a@corp.supernews.com...
> > RE/
> >>Then they are likely much, much safer than you think they are.
>
> (Pete Cresswell) wrote:
> > Saying something like that is just plain irresponsible.
>
> How do you mean? I don't get it.
>
> Do you mean it is irresponsible to point out that riding a
> bicycle won't kill you (not with any statistically
> significant risk, anyway) ?

I think he means that if the audience of the OP's comment are complete
morons and would ride their bikes into traffic on an interstate or something
similar then it's irresponsible to say that they're safer than he thinks
they are. Ignoring those folks, since they'll find a way to get themselves
killed anyway, the original comment of bicycles being "much, much safer then
he thinks they are" stands.

Greg

(Pete Cresswell)

RE/
>I think he means that if the audience of the OP's comment are complete
>morons and would ride their bikes into traffic on an interstate or something
>similar then it's irresponsible to say that they're safer than he thinks
>they are. Ignoring those folks, since they'll find a way to get themselves
>killed anyway, the original comment of bicycles being "much, much safer then
>he thinks they are" stands.

Bingo!....sort of.

During the years I was involved with a Philadelphia organization devoted to
making the area more bicycle-friendly, I got exposed to quite a few people who
were drawn into riding for whatever reason.

A certain percent of the people who show up for an organized ride are really
innocent of the realities of what's going on out there.

For example, for awhile somebody was selling a flag device that stuck out
horizontally from a bike's luggage carrier and pivoted on an internal
bungee-spring if it struck something.

It think it was called "The Sting". The idea was that it carved out a couple
feet of space between the cyclist and traffic by virtue of driver's
reactions/peripheral vision avoiding the visual mass of the flag.

After they'd been selling those things for awhile, I started seeing people
riding bikes in obviously-dangerous situations - but apparently oblivious to the
danger...having believed that this thing would protect them.

I'd say it's a little harsh to call them "morons"...simply because there seem to
be so many of them...although that's definately a word that comes to my own mind
when I see somebody doing something like that... But it is a fact that there
are a lot of people out there that will naively and uncritically follow advice
that they percieve to have come from an authorative source.
--
PeteCresswell

jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org

Pete Cresswell writes:

>> I think he means that if the audience of the OP's comment are
>> complete morons and would ride their bikes into traffic on an
>> interstate or something similar then it's irresponsible to say that
>> they're safer than he thinks they are. Ignoring those folks, since
>> they'll find a way to get themselves killed anyway, the original
>> comment of bicycles being "much, much safer then he thinks they
>> are" stands.

> Bingo!... sort of.

> During the years I was involved with a Philadelphia organization
> devoted to making the area more bicycle-friendly, I got exposed to
> quite a few people who were drawn into riding for whatever reason.

> A certain percent of the people who show up for an organized ride
> are really innocent of the realities of what's going on out there.

> For example, for awhile somebody was selling a flag device that
> stuck out horizontally from a bike's luggage carrier and pivoted on
> an internal bungee-spring if it struck something.

> It think it was called "The Sting". The idea was that it carved out
> a couple feet of space between the cyclist and traffic by virtue of
> driver's reactions/peripheral vision avoiding the visual mass of the
> flag.

> After they'd been selling those things for awhile, I started seeing
> people riding bikes in obviously-dangerous situations - but
> apparently oblivious to the danger... having believed that this
> thing would protect them.

Are you trying to start a helmet thread?

Jobst Brandt
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org