Utterly Meaningless » Blog Archive » LETTER OF THE DAY

    Filed at 7:16 am under by dcobranchi

    A future(?) statist writes in:

    Regulate bicycling to keep riders safe

    I think there should be more bike rules because people are getting hurt. If you have more bike rules, it will be a safer place.

    Keith Neuman, Newark

    I hope this is a child’s thinking.

    BTW, the title is the N-J’s.

    7 Responses to “LETTER OF THE DAY”

    Comment by
    July 30th, 2004
    at 9:22 am

    The thing with more rules is that it often doesn’t take into account other forces that could cause problems with said rules. So perhaps it *is* prudent for children to wear safety equipment, that isn’t going to keep the inattentive driver from running over them just because there are more laws governing the riding of bikes.

    Comment by
    July 30th, 2004
    at 8:37 pm

    Lack of rules doesn’t prevent anyone from wearing a helmet if he wants to.

    Rules don’t improve safety. Compliance with good safety rules does. In the absence of good safety rules, common sense can work wonders.

    Comment by
    Brian Sassaman
    July 30th, 2004
    at 11:30 pm

    I had a friend who attended a NOLs (National Outdoor Leadership School) course in the 90s and one of the things they told him about sports activities was “Rules are for fools.”

    While that sounds extreme, it has some truth to it. It basically says that you’ve got to think for yourself. If something seems dangerous, when you have studied the facts, it probably is dangerous.

    I cringe at all of the nanny-state laws that get passed. In Georgia, years ago, a seatbelt law was passed, and all of the legislators agreed and said that it would only be a ticketable violation if the driver had been pulled over for some other offense. It only took a couple of years till that got changed.

    Now they set up road blocks in the middle of the day to check to see if you are wearing your seatbelt.

    You know, if we forbade bicycles altogether there would be far fewer bike accidents.

    Comment by
    July 31st, 2004
    at 1:02 am

    You know, being someone who rides a bike sanely forces me to break CA’s laws for riding every time I ride. The problem with these rules is that they make to assumptions: 1. Everyone is riding a bike capable of keeping up with traffic (read: Road Bike) and 2. Motorists will be conscious of cyclists who may be around them. Therefore, the rules assume that crossing two lanes of traffic to enter a left turn lane is a sane idea! Seriously. It’s in the DMV Manual.

    My point is that things would be better if the rules were fewer and more in line with reality. Now, speaking of reality, since that isn’t going to happen, when it comes to riding, “rules are for fools.”

    Comment by
    July 31st, 2004
    at 11:15 am

    DE has rules for bikes… under 16 you must wear a helmet or the parents can be held accountable.

    We don’t have a helmet law for motocycles.

    If a bike & motor vehicle collide no matter who is at fault the motor vehicle insurance will cover all the damage & injuries for the biker.

    MY BIGGEST BEEF W/ BIKES is why do so many of them ride on the wrong side of the road facing traffic? We have almost no shoulder on a great many DE roads.
    I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had a bike coming head on towards me & there is no squeeze room for me to move over because it’s a two lane road w/ traffic coming the other way!! I slow down praying for a break in traffic so I can cross the yellow line to avoid them.

    Aren’t bikers supposed to ride w/ traffic? that way I can slow down & stay behind them till It’s safe to pass. I’m guessing they’re worried about having someone clip them from behind…. but playing chicken w/ cars is just nerve racking for me.

    Comment by
    July 31st, 2004
    at 11:24 pm

    “Aren’t bikers supposed to ride w/ traffic? that way I can slow down & stay behind them till It’s safe to pass. I’m guessing they’re worried about having someone clip them from behind…. but playing chicken w/ cars is just nerve racking for me.”

    Actually, I’ve been told that it’s safer (in most cases) to ride against traffic so you can see who’s coming and get out of the way. In a perfect world, we could ride with traffic and trust that they’d see and respect us.

    Also, anyone riding on a two-lane road with no shoulder just isn’t the sanest person out there. (read: I’m too scared to do anything like that)

    Comment by
    biker from SC
    August 1st, 2004
    at 10:52 am

    I think an issue that is often overlooked by people are ways to make roadways safer for cars and pedestrians by adding a pedestrian lane on the edge of the roadway. As a biker, walker, and runner, I am often exasperated about the attitudes some motorists have toward anyone not driving a vehicle. Share the road… we pay taxes too.

    In our country, we always talk about how important it is to protect the environment or how we need to fix the health care system because it’s so expensive – try walking or riding a bike to stay healthy. Why don’t we get serious about it and invest in pedestrian lanes on our busy roads?