Can you make it to the market on a bike?

[donquijote1954]

Well, I thought I'd never live long enough to do such a thing in
America. It keeps me fit, and hungry enough to enjoy all that great
(and not so great) food, as well as keeps me away from the crowd that
uses an SUV to go and get a gallon of milk --or worse, cigarettes.
Luckily in my new place I can do such a thing, if not by design by
chance. I can ride leisurely my cruiser with huge baskets to the
supermaket through some quiet, safe streets, about 0.7 mile. I bet
most American are not so lucky, and I don't think the share of bicycle
use for shopping and similar real life errands is any higher than the
percentage that commutes by bike, about 1% or so, right?

Regrettably, my happiness ends at this point as going any further
places me right on major roads, where the major predators rule. And
that's a jungle that makes me nervous. Great places are within biking
distance, up to 15 miles, along parks, beaches and scenic places, but
NO BIKE LANES are provided, and I just play it safe. As a matter of
fact the need to enjoy all this made me found another way to get out
there in the open air without being at the very bottom of the food
chain. So I just got a scooter that allows me to drive with traffic,
if not strictly pollution free, at least rewarding me with a good
80MPG.

So this is my modest effort to fight Global Warming, and I hope I live
long enough in these Darwinian roads to tell my offspring. And now off
I go with my bike (buying nothing in particular, just going to the
market for the hell of it)...

WELCOME TO THE JUNGLE
http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote

BIKE FOR PEACE
http://webspawner.com/users/bikeforpeace

[DougC]

donquijote1954 wrote:
> ... I can ride leisurely my cruiser with huge baskets to the
> supermaket through some quiet, safe streets, about 0.7 mile.
>
> Regrettably, my happiness ends at this point as going any further
> places me right on major roads, where the major predators rule....
> ... Great places are within biking
> distance, up to 15 miles, along parks, beaches and scenic places, but
> NO BIKE LANES are provided, and I just play it safe.....
>

The problem with this plan is that typically "the squeaky wheel gets the
grease". The only way that gov't would know that a bike lane was even
necessary was if there were lots of complaints of motorists being held
up by bicyclists.

Where I live the only roads prohibited for bicycles are interstate
highways; every other road is legal and free. Get a good rear-view
mirror, get out there, and get in the way. Every motorist that gets
pissed off at you for slowing them down is one more "advocate" for bike
lanes.
~

[donquijote1954]

I guess the scooter ain't very safe either...

Zigzagging: Most Dangerous Driving

Don't ask me for a study that backs up such a statement, it's just
obvious. Every time you get on the road you see these wild vehicles
(usually SUVs and larger vehicles) zigzagging all around playing a
game of Russian Roulette --a game they always win since they are
bigger...

So there I was last night riding my scooter with my girlfriend
(sitting ducks, so to speak), taking the middle lane on a three lane
road, when a beat-up van with three terrorist rats* cut me off almost
to the point of making catastrophic contact (*forgive me my jungle
talk referring to the small time predators, unlike the big time
predators in SUVs).

WHY? Well, I know that if I had had a gun I would have emptied it in
his head and so feeding the ROAD RAGE ESCALATION, but I didn't and I
wouldn't have caught up with him anyway. So I was left to cope with my
rage and impotence, if only having the consolation to be alive. But
still that hasn't answered my question. WHY? I guess it may have do to
with the instinct in "Natural Born Killers,"** but there's some deeper
cause, one that points at the system that doesn't crack down on them,
and that simply fails to implement some basic RULES OF THE ROAD.

This dawned on me later: They were provoked into this reckless,
criminal driving (no excuses for that) by a road that was completely
blocked by a few cars, oblivious to that basic rule of "slow vehicles
keep to the right." And there's lies the problem: When there are no
rules of the road, then you get the Law of the Jungle...

** NATURAL BORN KILLERS, the movie

REVIEW
Why not kill them at birth, or even before
By Jacques COULARDEAU

This is Apocalypto in the all-American modern version. Our society
produces, be they born or not born, a whole fringe of killers that
absolutely know what is wrong or right, good or bad, but who do not
care a fig about it, even if at times they do not find any pleasure in
murdering. The film explores the destiny of a couple of two young
people who meet by accident but find in themselves so many common
alienations and frustrations based on about the same social, cultural
and personal environment : sexual abuse and violence from parents,
rejection from society, total lack of care and help in education that
is inexistant or social counselling that is just impotent. They end up
taking what they want by force since it is not provided to them free.
But the film goes a lot further. It analyzes the role of the media
that systematically sell paper and prime time advertising with this
showing of violence and with fake or unfake interviews of murderers
and other criminals. The lower, the better. The nastier, the more
profitable. The bloodier, the tastier. Then the film also shows that
the prison system is a system of incarceration and containment, in no
way of reform, education and improvement. These prisoners are there to
survive because no one dares execute them all. They are the
sacrificial victims of society that needs them to regenerate its lost
virginity, purity and morality. They are the sacrificial victims of a
god that has nothing to envy the Maya gods. This god is the god of
selfish greedy consumerism. Till it explodes. And the official end of
the film shows that such criminals can disappear in society forever,
and they are then living among us unknown and unseen. The alternative
ending shows that you need the intervention of an angel to execute
these criminals. The film preaches and advocates that these criminals
are natural born killers, hence that they will never be anything else,
hence that they have to be purely and simply executed as soon as they
are noticed and as fast as possible to avoid as many victims as
possible, why not at birth ? This vision of crime in our society is
criminal in itself because it produces the criminals concerned by
considering there is no other way, it is their fate and ours.


WELCOME TO THE JUNGLE
http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote

COMING OUT OF THE JUNGLE
http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote1

[donquijote1954]

While some here keep using and abusing their red-herring arguments
that bike lanes are more dangerous (fine, let's do it with or without
bike lanes), there's people out there that have decided to change,
even challenge the beast, so they can have a better, healthier life,
and they are part of the revolution...


Bikes are better than cars

The last time I drove the car was October 27, 2002. It was a very bad
day. I vowed that I would never drive again. I have kept that vow.

I ride my bike everywhere I go. I've lost about 45 lbs since I started
bike commuting, and my blood pressure is lower. I've found myself
expressing optimism, which was something new for me. I don't get as
depressed as I used to, especially in the winter. I think cycling is a
kind of meditation. I could never go back to driving a car.

My Beliefs
I think bikes are inherently better than cars. I honestly believe that
if more people used bikes instead of cars, the world would be a much
better place. I think people would be healthier. They would be more
physically fit, and they would be mentally healthier, both happier and
more relaxed. Those are just the benefits to the cyclist. Everyone
benefits from fewer cars. Fewer cars mean less asthma. Fewer cars mean
fewer traffic deaths (more than 42,000 people per year die in the US
as a result of motor vehicle "accidents"). These are health benefits
for everyone.

Our car culture has hastened sprawl and destroyed wildlife habitat.
People are becoming so far removed from nature, they don't even know
they need nature, not just for their physical health, but for their
mental health.

Cars insulate people from nature. Bikes allow people to experience it.
I don't want to be a passive observer of the weather. I like feeling
the rain and wind on my face -- it makes me know I'm alive! When I
ride as the snow falls, I can't help but smile. I feel like I'm
playing. Riding in a strong headwind is extra work, but it's extra
work for a car too. People driving cars are simply unaware that
they're consuming extra fuel. They're insulated from nature. I'll wear
the right clothing to keep me comfortable for the weather, but I want
to experience it, not just sit inside a metal and glass cage on a
cushy seat where the weather might as well be something on television.
It's a real world out there! I want to be IN it!

A cyclist can also observe plants and animals that a motorist can't.
Cars just whiz by everything too fast for a motorist to see most
things, and the motion and noise of cars send most animals running
from the horrible machine. Bicycles are quiet. They move at a sane
pace. I can actually see what I'm riding past instead of everything
being a blur.

I also believe that if more people used bicycles instead of cars,
cyclists would be more respected. We would be treated as human beings
instead of as second-class citizens. People deny us services, yell at
us, swear at us, honk at us, throw things at us, and in extreme cases
assault us, or sometimes even kill us, for no reason other than
because we are riding bicycles. In other words, people treat us like a
despised minority. We haven't had much luck being treated as equals.
And there's still that whole business of cars destroying the
environment and belching carcinogens and other particulates into the
air (asthma, anyone?). So...this means we need to become the majority.
We need to outnumber them. I'm not advocating some sort of violent
revolution. That's the farthest thing from what I want -- I'm a
pacifist. I simply want cyclists -- peaceful cyclists -- to be the
majority. Sure, it's Utopian, but it's what I want. So it's a goal to
strive for.

(lots of good stuff)

http://www.riinsrants.info/bikes/

[William]

I recently purchased a brand new Road Bike that is really nice. I
figured I didn't need anything more rugged since I do most of my
biking in the city. I can bike theoreticly anywhere in the city, but
there are a few neighborhoods I like to avoid, but not many and I have
experience biking through them anyways. In Minneapolis, there are a
lot of designated bike paths, such as the Greenway (
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/bike/images/greenway.jpg ) which makes it
much easier to get around.

[Cathy Kearns]

Yes, I go to the market on the bike all the time. Actually, there are
several different markets I bike to. Not all marketing routes have bike
paths, but most are either not all that busy, or have shoulders, so I'm fine
with that.

[archierob]

Well done!

One only has to read Bill Bryson's book 'Notes from a Big Country' to
realise just how pervasive the automobile is in America. Trying to get
anywhere other than by car is difficult - even crossing over the road
from his hotel to a diner. The one anecdote that made me howl with
laughter was when he returned to the US for a while and invited his
neighbours to dinner -they came by car! They drove down their drive,
turned left and then drove up his drive.

My weekly shop at Lidls is via my 'shopping bike' front rack, rear
rack, panniers, plastic box on rear rack, big solid mountain back
carrying all. Though I say it myself I have it down to a fine art
now - much to the amusement of my 4 x 4 'Chelsea tractor' owning
neighbours.

[Brian Huntley]

On Jul 22, 6:21 pm, donquijote1954 <nolionnoprob...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> Well, I thought I'd never live long enough to do such a thing in
> America.

It can be pleasant, eh? I use a mix of bucket panniers, a backpack-on-
a-rack, or the backpack and a cardboard box from the store on the
rack. We live in one of those Toronto neighborhoods that's like a
village, so a lot is possible.

This weekend, I rode a couple kms to Kensington Market. One in the
market proper (Baldwin and Augusta), travel by anything but bike or
foot would have been impossible. I went to the butcher, the
greengrocer, the cheese shop, and the nuts and spice and tea store.
All shops were active, but I never had to stand in line long enough to
even *look* for an Enquirer. Zoom zoom.

[mark@drumbent.com]

On Jul 22, 7:21 pm, donquijote1954 <nolionnoprob...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> Well, I thought I'd never live long enough to do such a thing in
> America. It keeps me fit, and hungry enough to enjoy all that great
> (and not so great) food, as well as keeps me away from the crowd that
> uses an SUV to go and get a gallon of milk --or worse, cigarettes.
> Luckily in my new place I can do such a thing, if not by design by
> chance. I can ride leisurely my cruiser with huge baskets to the
> supermaket through some quiet, safe streets, about 0.7 mile. I bet
> most American are not so lucky, and I don't think the share of bicycle
> use for shopping and similar real life errands is any higher than the
> percentage that commutes by bike, about 1% or so, right?
>
> Regrettably, my happiness ends at this point as going any further
> places me right on major roads, where the major predators rule. And
> that's a jungle that makes me nervous. Great places are within biking
> distance, up to 15 miles, along parks, beaches and scenic places, but
> NO BIKE LANES are provided, and I just play it safe. As a matter of
> fact the need to enjoy all this made me found another way to get out
> there in the open air without being at the very bottom of the food
> chain. So I just got a scooter that allows me to drive with traffic,
> if not strictly pollution free, at least rewarding me with a good
> 80MPG.
>
> So this is my modest effort to fight Global Warming, and I hope I live
> long enough in these Darwinian roads to tell my offspring. And now off
> I go with my bike (buying nothing in particular, just going to the
> market for the hell of it)...
>
> WELCOME TO THE JUNGLEhttp://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
>
> BIKE FOR PEACEhttp://webspawner.com/users/bikeforpeace

I'm car-free, and I can haul a LOT of groceries with my cargo trike:

http://drumbent.com/trike.html

Also, since it's big and takes up a whole lane I don't get hassled at
all in terms of asserting my right to be on the road (having lights
and turn signals helps). ;)

And not only can I get groceries with it, I just moved house with it
too:

http://drumbent.blogspot.com/2007/07/even-more-moving-photos.html

Mark

[Jens Müller]

donquijote1954 wrote:

> Regrettably, my happiness ends at this point as going any further
> places me right on major roads, where the major predators rule. And
> that's a jungle that makes me nervous. Great places are within biking
> distance, up to 15 miles, along parks, beaches and scenic places, but
> NO BIKE LANES are provided, and I just play it safe.

Why do you think that bike lanes are safer than the carriageway? And why
do you think the carriageway isn't safe?

[Michael Plog]

I also bought a scooter (moped) as a toy, but I take it for errands as often
as possible. I do ride it to work, and do not end up sweaty. My wife and I
still ride our recumbents for entertainment and exercise (especially
cardiac), but the moped is good for other things. I get close to 150mpg, so
I feel pretty good buying one gallon of gas at a time.

A word about traffic. I take side streets on both the bicycle and moped.
Sometimes that is impossible, but generally there will be streets with very
little traffic yet getting where you need to be.

Happy trails!




"donquijote1954" <nolionnoproblem@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185146504.198253.88250@w3g2000hsg.googlegrou ps.com...
> Well, I thought I'd never live long enough to do such a thing in
> America. It keeps me fit, and hungry enough to enjoy all that great
> (and not so great) food, as well as keeps me away from the crowd that
> uses an SUV to go and get a gallon of milk --or worse, cigarettes.
> Luckily in my new place I can do such a thing, if not by design by
> chance. I can ride leisurely my cruiser with huge baskets to the
> supermaket through some quiet, safe streets, about 0.7 mile. I bet
> most American are not so lucky, and I don't think the share of bicycle
> use for shopping and similar real life errands is any higher than the
> percentage that commutes by bike, about 1% or so, right?
>
> Regrettably, my happiness ends at this point as going any further
> places me right on major roads, where the major predators rule. And
> that's a jungle that makes me nervous. Great places are within biking
> distance, up to 15 miles, along parks, beaches and scenic places, but
> NO BIKE LANES are provided, and I just play it safe. As a matter of
> fact the need to enjoy all this made me found another way to get out
> there in the open air without being at the very bottom of the food
> chain. So I just got a scooter that allows me to drive with traffic,
> if not strictly pollution free, at least rewarding me with a good
> 80MPG.
>
> So this is my modest effort to fight Global Warming, and I hope I live
> long enough in these Darwinian roads to tell my offspring. And now off
> I go with my bike (buying nothing in particular, just going to the
> market for the hell of it)...
>
> WELCOME TO THE JUNGLE
> http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
>
> BIKE FOR PEACE
> http://webspawner.com/users/bikeforpeace
>

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 25, 12:30 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:

> Bike paths are the way to go and surely in the future there will be
> thousands and thousands of miles of such paths everywhere. The fact is that
> none of us are safe on the roads and highways where we have to share the
> lane with motor vehicles.

They won't happen without a revolution. No political will. Our roads
will remain a jungle until the end of times, which is near if we
insist on launching war over precious resources. "Saving" is missing
from the American English Dictionary. There's hope though...

http://atom.smasher.org/streetparty/?l1=Coming+Soon%3A&l2=the&l3=Banana+Revolution%21&l4=

THE BANANA REVOLUTION
http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote40

[Geoff Pearson]

"donquijote1954" <nolionnoproblem@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185146504.198253.88250@w3g2000hsg.googlegrou ps.com...
> Well, I thought I'd never live long enough to do such a thing in
> America. It keeps me fit, and hungry enough to enjoy all that great
> (and not so great) food, as well as keeps me away from the crowd that
> uses an SUV to go and get a gallon of milk --or worse, cigarettes.
> Luckily in my new place I can do such a thing, if not by design by
> chance. I can ride leisurely my cruiser with huge baskets to the
> supermaket through some quiet, safe streets, about 0.7 mile. I bet
> most American are not so lucky, and I don't think the share of bicycle
> use for shopping and similar real life errands is any higher than the
> percentage that commutes by bike, about 1% or so, right?
>
> Regrettably, my happiness ends at this point as going any further
> places me right on major roads, where the major predators rule. And
> that's a jungle that makes me nervous. Great places are within biking
> distance, up to 15 miles, along parks, beaches and scenic places, but
> NO BIKE LANES are provided, and I just play it safe. As a matter of
> fact the need to enjoy all this made me found another way to get out
> there in the open air without being at the very bottom of the food
> chain. So I just got a scooter that allows me to drive with traffic,
> if not strictly pollution free, at least rewarding me with a good
> 80MPG.
>
> So this is my modest effort to fight Global Warming, and I hope I live
> long enough in these Darwinian roads to tell my offspring. And now off
> I go with my bike (buying nothing in particular, just going to the
> market for the hell of it)...
>
> WELCOME TO THE JUNGLE
> http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
>
> BIKE FOR PEACE
> http://webspawner.com/users/bikeforpeace
>

what do you do with a gallon of milk - sounds much more dangerous than
cycling?

[donquijote1954]

On Aug 8, 8:46 am, "J. Clarke" <jclarke.use...@cox.net> wrote:

> > How about requiring these TRUCKS to require a TRUCK DRIVER'S LICENSE
> > (a step above driving a regular car but not a fully semi driver's
> > license) and banning cell phones, etc? I guess that would be too much
> > for the big business involved in SUVs...
>
> Write a legal definition of "truck" so that it can be determined who has
> to have such a license (can't be "everybody knows what a truck is", it
> has to be one that a lawyer can't argue away in court) and figure out
> what training should be required and come up with a convincing argument
> why that particular training would improve safety then suggest it to
> your Congresscritter and you may be surprised at what happens. SUVs are
> basically a way of working around the CAFE tax and if that could be
> closed wihout seeming to be an SUV ban until after it was in place the
> Congresscritters might be all over it.
>
> As for banning cell phones, that's not going to happen. That genii is
> well and truly out of the bottle and any Congress than successfully
> enacted legislation prohibiting their sale and possession would be out
> of office at the next election.
>
> As for bans on using them while driving, such bans are essentially
> unenforceable--yeah, a cop can bust somebody if he catches them in the
> act, but cops can't be everywhere all the time and most people who use
> them while driving don't use them all the time, so the likelihood of
> actually getting caught is too low to serve as a deterrent.
>
> Personally though I've never noticed SUVs "zigzagging around all over
> the place playing a game of Russian Roulette". The big problem I have
> with them is that SUV drivers seem to be unwilling to just PASS THE
> EFFING TRUCK. They'll pull up behind an 18-wheeler, take ten minutes to
> slowly creep by it, and having passed it then take off at 90 mph. And
> meanwhile I'm sitting there in the buffet zone waiting for this circus
> to end so I can get by the blasted thing.

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary
depends upon his not understanding it."
- Upton Sinclair

I think the paper on which I'd write to my Congressman (woman) could
be put to better use. It's all about money, you know...

'And what does Detroit think about all this? They love it. Why?
Because when they sell an SUV, they're selling their lowest-tech
vehicle that has the least R&D expense and costs the least to produce,
since its basically the same product they've been selling -- as a
truck -- for the last 50 years. Come on, people! Challenge Detroit!
Ask for a product they have to break a sweat to design and build! "No
thank you," says Mr. and Mrs. America, "even though we spent the 1980s
and 1990s putting down American cars as being technologically inferior
to European and Japanese products, we've changed our minds now and
want to buy cars that American manufacturers were good at making -- in
1950."

So much for the idiotic decision to buy an SUV that America has been
making in showrooms for the last ten years. What about SUVs on the
road? Let's face it: Most people aren't very good drivers and even the
best drivers have bad moments. This is one reason SUVs are popular.
When I rant about SUVs to my friends (many of whom drive SUVs), they
often respond that they feel "safer" in an SUV. They're right, in one
sense: Surrounded by a ton of unnecessary extra steel, they're likely
to come out of an accident with a normal-sized car better off than the
people in the car. But they don't ask themselves whether being in the
SUV may have contributed to the accident in the first place: With a
higher center of gravity, poor handling and terrible stopping power
due to the extra mass of the vehicle, I think this is a real factor in
a lot of accidents. But, please, let's not think about what we're
doing, OK? Let's just wrap an extra ton of steel around the kids.'

http://www.gregburch.net/cars/suvs.html

My effort go toward THE REVOLUTION. Hey, it may never happen, but I'm
having fun...

By the way, you think the monkeys will ever learn to drive?


What do you think of the monkeys?
Well, put your headphones on --and grab a banana-- before you can
enjoy/cry over what these stupid monkeys are doing...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a15KgyXBX24

Oh, we should add that some of them want to believe themselves to be
lions...

***

Hey, I don't want to leave you depressed with those stupid monkeys.
Some monkeys really know how to have fun...

Do you imagine life as a monkey would be like?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_EyXPs2_Jk

A lot of fun, for sure. I sure like to play with those lady monkeys.

Hey, if you are really proud of who you are, you may consider this T-
shirt:

"Have you felt like monkeying around without any apparent reason and
with a sense of guilt? Well, now you know what to do..."

http://www.zazzle.com/product/235602224199217660

WELCOME TO THE JUNGLE
http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote

THE BANANA REVOLUTION
http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote40


__________________
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere" -M.L. King

[Edward Dolan]

"William" <willbecool10@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185158111.712779.107660@w3g2000hsg.googlegro ups.com...
>I recently purchased a brand new Road Bike that is really nice. I
> figured I didn't need anything more rugged since I do most of my
> biking in the city. I can bike theoreticly anywhere in the city, but
> there are a few neighborhoods I like to avoid, but not many and I have
> experience biking through them anyways. In Minneapolis, there are a
> lot of designated bike paths, such as the Greenway (
> http://www.dot.state.mn.us/bike/images/greenway.jpg ) which makes it
> much easier to get around.

Always use the bike paths whenever you can. They are much more pleasant than
using the mean streets where you have to compete with motorized vehicles.

I believe Minneapolis to have one of the finer bike path systems in the
country. Not to use them would mean that you are an idiot, yet there are
some who would advise that since they believe that a bike path will slow you
down. Hey, better to slow down and live than hurry to your death on those
mean streets.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 22, 10:35 pm, William <willbecoo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I recently purchased a brand new Road Bike that is really nice. I
> figured I didn't need anything more rugged since I do most of my
> biking in the city. I can bike theoreticly anywhere in the city, but
> there are a few neighborhoods I like to avoid, but not many and I have
> experience biking through them anyways. In Minneapolis, there are a
> lot of designated bike paths, such as the Greenway (http://www.dot.state.mn.us/bike/images/greenway.jpg) which makes it
> much easier to get around.

Lovely. It's coming my way too. The question is WHEN. I hope to be
alive anyway.

[Dane Buson]

Cathy Kearns <cathy_kearns@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Yes, I go to the market on the bike all the time. Actually, there are
> several different markets I bike to. Not all marketing routes have bike
> paths, but most are either not all that busy, or have shoulders, so I'm fine
> with that.

There are multiple places I shop that are difficult or very inconvenient
to park at with a car. It's much easier to shop by bike.

The time difference to get there by car versus bike is pretty minimal.

--
Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org
"High explosives are often applicable
where truth and logic fail."

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 22, 10:51 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> "William" <willbecoo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1185158111.712779.107660@w3g2000hsg.googlegro ups.com...
>
> >I recently purchased a brand new Road Bike that is really nice. I
> > figured I didn't need anything more rugged since I do most of my
> > biking in the city. I can bike theoreticly anywhere in the city, but
> > there are a few neighborhoods I like to avoid, but not many and I have
> > experience biking through them anyways. In Minneapolis, there are a
> > lot of designated bike paths, such as the Greenway (
> >http://www.dot.state.mn.us/bike/images/greenway.jpg) which makes it
> > much easier to get around.
>
> Always use the bike paths whenever you can. They are much more pleasant than
> using the mean streets where you have to compete with motorized vehicles.
>
> I believe Minneapolis to have one of the finer bike path systems in the
> country. Not to use them would mean that you are an idiot, yet there are
> some who would advise that since they believe that a bike path will slow you
> down. Hey, better to slow down and live than hurry to your death on those
> mean streets.
>

Nice advice. Regrettably, there are still too many idiots out there --
and they have a loud voice.

[Jens Müller]

Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> Always use the bike paths whenever you can. They are much more pleasant than
> using the mean streets where you have to compete with motorized vehicles.

Always avoid bike paths when it is legally possible. It is much safer
that way.

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 23, 12:25 am, m...@drumbent.com wrote:

> I'm car-free, and I can haul a LOT of groceries with my cargo trike:
>
> http://drumbent.com/trike.html
>
> Also, since it's big and takes up a whole lane I don't get hassled at
> all in terms of asserting my right to be on the road (having lights
> and turn signals helps). ;)
>
> And not only can I get groceries with it, I just moved house with it
> too:
>
> http://drumbent.blogspot.com/2007/07/even-more-moving-photos.html

Congratulations, Mark. That's the way too go. Actually I think it
takes more courage to do what you do than to fight in Iraq. And at
least you do it for a good cause.

But around here I'd have to engage in many hand-to-hand combats with
enraged drivers.

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 23, 12:28 am, Jens Müller <usenet-01-2...@tessarakt.de> wrote:
> donquijote1954 wrote:
> > Regrettably, my happiness ends at this point as going any further
> > places me right on major roads, where the major predators rule. And
> > that's a jungle that makes me nervous. Great places are within biking
> > distance, up to 15 miles, along parks, beaches and scenic places, but
> > NO BIKE LANES are provided, and I just play it safe.
>
> Why do you think that bike lanes are safer than the carriageway? And why
> do you think the carriageway isn't safe?

Because the SPEED DIFFERENTIAL is too great...

Why is speed differential important?
A speed differential above 20 miles per hour begins to present safety
concerns. When the speed differential approaches 30 to 35 miles per
hour, the likelihood of a collision between fast-moving through
vehicles and turning vehicles increases very quickly. Rear-end
collisions are very common on roads and streets with large driveway
speed differentials and a high density of commercial driveways. When
the speed differential is high, it is also more likely that crashes
will be more severe, cause greater property damage, and result in more
injuries and fatalities.

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:mTtgrijG9oAJ:www.ctre.iastate.edu/research/access/toolkit/7.pdf+SPEED+DIFFERENTIAL&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=10&gl=us

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 23, 3:07 am, Jens Müller <usenet-01-2...@tessarakt.de> wrote:
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> > Always use the bike paths whenever you can. They are much more pleasant than
> > using the mean streets where you have to compete with motorized vehicles.
>
> Always avoid bike paths when it is legally possible. It is much safer
> that way.

Facing the mean streets is much safer. Just raise a white flag and
play dead!

[Edward Dolan]

"Jens Müller" <usenet-01-2006@tessarakt.de> wrote in message
news:5gj2eoF3gb531U1@mid.individual.net...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>> Always use the bike paths whenever you can. They are much more pleasant
>> than using the mean streets where you have to compete with motorized
>> vehicles.
>
> Always avoid bike paths when it is legally possible. It is much safer that
> way.

Admittedly a bike path that gets too crowded can be somewhat dangerous, yet
you are not going to get killed on it unless you do something really stupid.
On the other hand, it is easy to get killed on the street when you mixing
with motor vehicles. They are all going fast and you are going slow, a
recipe for disaster.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

[Edward Dolan]

"archierob" <archierob@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Ay%oi.505$h11.285@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net...
> Well done!
>
> One only has to read Bill Bryson's book 'Notes from a Big Country' to
> realise just how pervasive the automobile is in America. Trying to get
> anywhere other than by car is difficult - even crossing over the road
> from his hotel to a diner. The one anecdote that made me howl with
> laughter was when he returned to the US for a while and invited his
> neighbours to dinner -they came by car! They drove down their drive,
> turned left and then drove up his drive.

The thing that amazes me the most is that in small town America everyone
drives everywhere, even if it is only a few blocks. No wonder we are all
turning into fat slobs.

I will NEVER drive my car in town. I use it strictly for going to other
towns in the vicinity. You can go anywhere in this town of Worthington,
Minnesota (12,000 pop.) in 15 minutes by bicycle at the most. Why the hell
would anyone except an idiot want to drive these very small distances. And
yet, EVERYONE does!
[...]

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

[frkrygow@gmail.com]

On Jul 23, 5:50 am, donquijote1954 <nolionnoprob...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> On Jul 23, 12:28 am, Jens Müller <usenet-01-2...@tessarakt.de> wrote:
>
> > donquijote1954 wrote:
> > > Regrettably, my happiness ends at this point as going any further
> > > places me right on major roads, where the major predators rule. And
> > > that's a jungle that makes me nervous. Great places are within biking
> > > distance, up to 15 miles, along parks, beaches and scenic places, but
> > > NO BIKE LANES are provided, and I just play it safe.
>
> > Why do you think that bike lanes are safer than the carriageway? And why
> > do you think the carriageway isn't safe?
>
> Because the SPEED DIFFERENTIAL is too great...

Bike lanes don't change the speed differential!

Bike lanes also don't add any pavement width. The only thing they add
is a white stripe - and more trash at the right hand (in the US) side
of the roadway, because cars no longer sweep it clean. Oh, and they
add dangerous complication at intersections.

Generally, if there's enough width for a MV lane and a bike lane,
there's enough width to safely share without a white stripe.

As to the original post: IME, it's not uncommon for people to think
"I can't get there by bike," when they've simply not explored
alternative routes well enough.

When I've moved to a new area or spent extensive time visiting a new
area, I've always gotten a detailed street map. Often, I'll tape it
to the wall. That allows me to see alternative routes I might
otherwise miss.

If you're afraid of the busy arterials, you could mark them red. Then
look for alternative parallel routes on smaller streets. Mark those
green, if you like. Also, find out what the local 14-year-olds use
for shortcuts. Those kids explore everything, like ants. They know
about the secret little dirt path that connects the park to the
parking lot, etc.

Admittedly, the modern fashion of transforming corn fields into
isolated cul-de-sac developments makes this difficult in many areas.
But older areas of town can often be peacefully accessed, once you
stop thinking like a car driver.

- Frank Krygowski

[Jens Müller]

donquijote1954 wrote:

>> Why do you think that bike lanes are safer than the carriageway? And why
>> do you think the carriageway isn't safe?
>
> Because the SPEED DIFFERENTIAL is too great...
>
> Why is speed differential important?
> A speed differential above 20 miles per hour begins to present safety
> concerns. When the speed differential approaches 30 to 35 miles per
> hour, the likelihood of a collision between fast-moving through
> vehicles and turning vehicles increases very quickly.

At that speed, you don't have turning vehicles, only vehicles changing
lanes.

> Rear-end
> collisions are very common on roads

In the US? Don't know about that. Here in Germany they occur mostly at
the end of traffic jams.

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 23, 12:29 pm, Jens Müller <usenet-01-2...@tessarakt.de> wrote:
> donquijote1954 wrote:
> >> Why do you think that bike lanes are safer than the carriageway? And why
> >> do you think the carriageway isn't safe?
>
> > Because the SPEED DIFFERENTIAL is too great...
>
> > Why is speed differential important?
> > A speed differential above 20 miles per hour begins to present safety
> > concerns. When the speed differential approaches 30 to 35 miles per
> > hour, the likelihood of a collision between fast-moving through
> > vehicles and turning vehicles increases very quickly.
>
> At that speed, you don't have turning vehicles, only vehicles changing
> lanes.

You are going 12mph on the bike, and a car is coming behind you at
50mph. Would that be safe?

[Martin Dann]

donquijote1954 wrote:
> On Jul 23, 12:29 pm, Jens Müller <usenet-01-2...@tessarakt.de> wrote:
>> donquijote1954 wrote:
>>>> Why do you think that bike lanes are safer than the carriageway? And why
>>>> do you think the carriageway isn't safe?
>>> Because the SPEED DIFFERENTIAL is too great...
>>> Why is speed differential important?
>>> A speed differential above 20 miles per hour begins to present safety
>>> concerns. When the speed differential approaches 30 to 35 miles per
>>> hour, the likelihood of a collision between fast-moving through
>>> vehicles and turning vehicles increases very quickly.
>> At that speed, you don't have turning vehicles, only vehicles changing
>> lanes.
>
> You are going 12mph on the bike, and a car is coming behind you at
> 50mph. Would that be safe?

It is as safe as the person driving the car, and the way
they overtake you. If the driver is unsafe overtaking a
12mph bike, then that driver will also be unsafe in a lot
of other places, and should not be driving.

Remember that car drivers should be able to stop in the
distance that they can see.

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 23, 1:04 pm, Martin Dann <martin.d...@virgin.net> wrote:
> donquijote1954 wrote:
> > On Jul 23, 12:29 pm, Jens Müller <usenet-01-2...@tessarakt.de> wrote:
> >> donquijote1954 wrote:
> >>>> Why do you think that bike lanes are safer than the carriageway? And why
> >>>> do you think the carriageway isn't safe?
> >>> Because the SPEED DIFFERENTIAL is too great...
> >>> Why is speed differential important?
> >>> A speed differential above 20 miles per hour begins to present safety
> >>> concerns. When the speed differential approaches 30 to 35 miles per
> >>> hour, the likelihood of a collision between fast-moving through
> >>> vehicles and turning vehicles increases very quickly.
> >> At that speed, you don't have turning vehicles, only vehicles changing
> >> lanes.
>
> > You are going 12mph on the bike, and a car is coming behind you at
> > 50mph. Would that be safe?
>
> It is as safe as the person driving the car, and the way
> they overtake you. If the driver is unsafe overtaking a
> 12mph bike, then that driver will also be unsafe in a lot
> of other places, and should not be driving.
>
> Remember that car drivers should be able to stop in the
> distance that they can see.-

That's the problem here, many people shouldn't be driving.

It should be the opposite: EVERYBODY SHOULD RIDE A BIKE and not a car.

[Jack May]

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
news:vqudnVAxToMCaTnbnZ2dnUVZ_v-hnZ2d@prairiewave.com...
>
> "archierob" <archierob@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Ay%oi.505$h11.285@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net...
>> Well done!
>>
>> One only has to read Bill Bryson's book 'Notes from a Big Country' to
>> realise just how pervasive the automobile is in America. Trying to get
>> anywhere other than by car is difficult - even crossing over the road
>> from his hotel to a diner. The one anecdote that made me howl with
>> laughter was when he returned to the US for a while and invited his
>> neighbours to dinner -they came by car! They drove down their drive,
>> turned left and then drove up his drive.
>
> The thing that amazes me the most is that in small town America everyone
> drives everywhere, even if it is only a few blocks. No wonder we are all
> turning into fat slobs.
>
> I will NEVER drive my car in town. I use it strictly for going to other
> towns in the vicinity. You can go anywhere in this town of Worthington,
> Minnesota (12,000 pop.) in 15 minutes by bicycle at the most. Why the hell
> would anyone except an idiot want to drive these very small distances. And
> yet, EVERYONE does!

The goal of most people is to minimize time. They do not want to make
multiple trips to bring back a small amount of food or supplies. Makes
perfect sense.

If your time is not very valuable, a bike makes sense.

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 23, 2:33 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> "archierob" <archie...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:Ay%oi.505$h11.285@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net...
>
> > Well done!
>
> > One only has to read Bill Bryson's book 'Notes from a Big Country' to
> > realise just how pervasive the automobile is in America. Trying to get
> > anywhere other than by car is difficult - even crossing over the road
> > from his hotel to a diner. The one anecdote that made me howl with
> > laughter was when he returned to the US for a while and invited his
> > neighbours to dinner -they came by car! They drove down their drive,
> > turned left and then drove up his drive.
>
> The thing that amazes me the most is that in small town America everyone
> drives everywhere, even if it is only a few blocks. No wonder we are all
> turning into fat slobs.
>
> I will NEVER drive my car in town. I use it strictly for going to other
> towns in the vicinity. You can go anywhere in this town of Worthington,
> Minnesota (12,000 pop.) in 15 minutes by bicycle at the most. Why the hell
> would anyone except an idiot want to drive these very small distances. And
> yet, EVERYONE does!
> [...]

The word "idiots" explains everything. Thanks!

[Jeff Grippe]

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
news:vqudnVAxToMCaTnbnZ2dnUVZ_v-hnZ2d@prairiewave.com...

> Why the hell would anyone except an idiot want to drive these very small
> distances?

Because I will never share a road again with cars in this country. I believe
that even in Worthington, it isn't safe It may be an exceptionally low
number of people that are involved in bike/car accidents but trust me, You
don't want to be the person on the bike.

[george conklin]

"donquijote1954" <nolionnoproblem@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185219367.523744.317630@k79g2000hse.googlegr oups.com...
On Jul 23, 1:04 pm, Martin Dann <martin.d...@virgin.net> wrote:
> donquijote1954 wrote:
> > On Jul 23, 12:29 pm, Jens Müller <usenet-01-2...@tessarakt.de> wrote:
> >> donquijote1954 wrote:
> >>>> Why do you think that bike lanes are safer than the carriageway? And
> >>>> why
> >>>> do you think the carriageway isn't safe?
> >>> Because the SPEED DIFFERENTIAL is too great...
> >>> Why is speed differential important?
> >>> A speed differential above 20 miles per hour begins to present safety
> >>> concerns. When the speed differential approaches 30 to 35 miles per
> >>> hour, the likelihood of a collision between fast-moving through
> >>> vehicles and turning vehicles increases very quickly.
> >> At that speed, you don't have turning vehicles, only vehicles changing
> >> lanes.
>
> > You are going 12mph on the bike, and a car is coming behind you at
> > 50mph. Would that be safe?
>
> It is as safe as the person driving the car, and the way
> they overtake you. If the driver is unsafe overtaking a
> 12mph bike, then that driver will also be unsafe in a lot
> of other places, and should not be driving.
>
> Remember that car drivers should be able to stop in the
> distance that they can see.-

That's the problem here, many people shouldn't be driving.

It should be the opposite: EVERYBODY SHOULD RIDE A BIKE and not a car.

That is like saying everyone should take a steamship to Europe, and not fly
because you think they should.

[Edward Dolan]

"donquijote1954" <nolionnoproblem@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185219521.003577.172530@m3g2000hsh.googlegro ups.com...
> On Jul 23, 2:33 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
>> "archierob" <archie...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:Ay%oi.505$h11.285@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net...
>>
>> > Well done!
>>
>> > One only has to read Bill Bryson's book 'Notes from a Big Country' to
>> > realise just how pervasive the automobile is in America. Trying to get
>> > anywhere other than by car is difficult - even crossing over the road
>> > from his hotel to a diner. The one anecdote that made me howl with
>> > laughter was when he returned to the US for a while and invited his
>> > neighbours to dinner -they came by car! They drove down their drive,
>> > turned left and then drove up his drive.
>>
>> The thing that amazes me the most is that in small town America everyone
>> drives everywhere, even if it is only a few blocks. No wonder we are all
>> turning into fat slobs.
>>
>> I will NEVER drive my car in town. I use it strictly for going to other
>> towns in the vicinity. You can go anywhere in this town of Worthington,
>> Minnesota (12,000 pop.) in 15 minutes by bicycle at the most. Why the
>> hell
>> would anyone except an idiot want to drive these very small distances.
>> And
>> yet, EVERYONE does!
>> [...]
>
> The word "idiots" explains everything. Thanks!

One of my very favorite words that I use all the time in referring to my
contemporaries, but not necessarily to their faces. After all, a broken nose
is no fun.

By the way, I love your user name and I thought at one time of using it
myself as I am sort of a Don Quixote character who is always tilting at
windmills (to no avail).

Best Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 23, 3:58 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:

> > The word "idiots" explains everything. Thanks!
>
> One of my very favorite words that I use all the time in referring to my
> contemporaries, but not necessarily to their faces. After all, a broken nose
> is no fun.
>
> By the way, I love your user name and I thought at one time of using it
> myself as I am sort of a Don Quixote character who is always tilting at
> windmills (to no avail).

Maybe we can attack the stupid windmills on two fronts and...

Speaking of stupid people out there. My girlfriend just reports to me
via telephone that a man who was cut off by a car threw the bike and
started pounding the hood of the car. Didn't see the end of it.
Probably the cyclist went to jail.

[Jens Müller]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Jens Müller" <usenet-01-2006@tessarakt.de> wrote in message
> news:5gj2eoF3gb531U1@mid.individual.net...
>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>> Always use the bike paths whenever you can. They are much more pleasant
>>> than using the mean streets where you have to compete with motorized
>>> vehicles.
>> Always avoid bike paths when it is legally possible. It is much safer that
>> way.
>
> Admittedly a bike path that gets too crowded can be somewhat dangerous, yet
> you are not going to get killed on it unless you do something really stupid.
> On the other hand, it is easy to get killed on the street when you mixing
> with motor vehicles. They are all going fast and you are going slow, a
> recipe for disaster.
>

How can they go fast when they are on the same lane as me?

They can overtake, but then they are on another lane.

How many people get killed with bikes on the carriageway each year? Here
in Germany, you can count them on one hand. But there are dozens getting
killed by turning cars whose drivers don't look at the bike path.

Do you have statistical data that would support your last sentence?

[biking-geordie]

I'm not sure about scooters - particularly if they're powered by a tw-
stroke engine. Matt Seaton makes the point in his new book that the
emissions from these things are 11 times worse than from a car or
motorbike using a (regular) 4 stroke petrol engine or diesel engine.
Might be worth looking into if this is an issue for you.

On 23 Jul, 22:15, "Michael Plog" <mbp...@insightbb.com> wrote:
> I also bought a scooter (moped) as a toy, but I take it for errands as often
> as possible. I do ride it to work, and do not end up sweaty. My wife and I
> still ride our recumbents for entertainment and exercise (especially
> cardiac), but the moped is good for other things. I get close to 150mpg, so
> I feel pretty good buying one gallon of gas at a time.
>
> A word about traffic. I take side streets on both the bicycle and moped.
> Sometimes that is impossible, but generally there will be streets with very
> little traffic yet getting where you need to be.
>
> Happy trails!
>
> "donquijote1954" <nolionnoprob...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1185146504.198253.88250@w3g2000hsg.googlegrou ps.com...
>
>
>
> > Well, I thought I'd never live long enough to do such a thing in
> > America. It keeps me fit, and hungry enough to enjoy all that great
> > (and not so great) food, as well as keeps me away from the crowd that
> > uses an SUV to go and get a gallon of milk --or worse, cigarettes.
> > Luckily in my new place I can do such a thing, if not by design by
> > chance. I can ride leisurely my cruiser with huge baskets to the
> > supermaket through some quiet, safe streets, about 0.7 mile. I bet
> > most American are not so lucky, and I don't think the share of bicycle
> > use for shopping and similar real life errands is any higher than the
> > percentage that commutes by bike, about 1% or so, right?
>
> > Regrettably, my happiness ends at this point as going any further
> > places me right on major roads, where the major predators rule. And
> > that's a jungle that makes me nervous. Great places are within biking
> > distance, up to 15 miles, along parks, beaches and scenic places, but
> > NO BIKE LANES are provided, and I just play it safe. As a matter of
> > fact the need to enjoy all this made me found another way to get out
> > there in the open air without being at the very bottom of the food
> > chain. So I just got a scooter that allows me to drive with traffic,
> > if not strictly pollution free, at least rewarding me with a good
> > 80MPG.
>
> > So this is my modest effort to fight Global Warming, and I hope I live
> > long enough in these Darwinian roads to tell my offspring. And now off
> > I go with my bike (buying nothing in particular, just going to the
> > market for the hell of it)...
>
> > WELCOME TO THE JUNGLE
> >http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
>
> > BIKE FOR PEACE
> >http://webspawner.com/users/bikeforpeace- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 23, 5:15 pm, "Michael Plog" <mbp...@insightbb.com> wrote:
> I also bought a scooter (moped) as a toy, but I take it for errands as often
> as possible. I do ride it to work, and do not end up sweaty. My wife and I
> still ride our recumbents for entertainment and exercise (especially
> cardiac), but the moped is good for other things. I get close to 150mpg, so
> I feel pretty good buying one gallon of gas at a time.

Wow, that mileage sure sounds high. Are you sure?

>
> A word about traffic. I take side streets on both the bicycle and moped.
> Sometimes that is impossible, but generally there will be streets with very
> little traffic yet getting where you need to be.

You are being smart. The big predators are out there...

SUV vs. Scooter

"Dedicated to all those injured, mutilated or killed by the Hen and
her SUV."


I've always wondered what would happen in an accident between SUV an
Scooter. It's not so simple. The SUV being so high could totally miss
the scooter.

Well, I guess this SUV wasn't high enough...


Preventing Motorcycle, Scooter Accidents a Matter of Awareness
By Ryan Taylor - 17 Jul 2007

In March a BYU student, driving a scooter died of injuries suffered in
an accident with an SUV.

Adam Cox was riding in the outside lane of University Parkway just
behind a car that was driving in the inside lane when an SUV going the
opposite direction, turned left and hit Cox, said Capt. Michael
Harroun, of the BYU Police Department.

Just like Cox's case, most motorcyclists are not at fault when
accidents happened, Harroun said.

"But they will get the worst of it," he said.

Even though Cox was wearing a helmet, he suffered severe head trauma
and died after being taken to Utah Valley Regional Medical Center.

http://newsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/64865


And remember, you SUV drivers, your distraction can spoil someone's
life. Well, I don't mean to offend you, just try not to talk so much
on the phone, and if you do, do like the Hen...

http://www.thehenshouse.com/index.html

DON QUIXOTES OF THE ENVIRONMENT
http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote6

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 26, 2:23 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:

> Are all the English idiots or just those who post to cycling newsgroups?

I think others are more modest about it. They elected the wrong Prime
Minister but at least they showed regret.

[D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch]

In rec.bicycles.misc donquijote1954 <nolionnoproblem@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Preventing Motorcycle, Scooter Accidents a Matter of Awareness
> By Ryan Taylor - 17 Jul 2007

> In March a BYU student, driving a scooter died of injuries suffered in
> an accident with an SUV.

> Adam Cox was riding in the outside lane of University Parkway just
> behind a car that was driving in the inside lane when an SUV going the
> opposite direction, turned left and hit Cox, said Capt. Michael
> Harroun, of the BYU Police Department.

Part of this is simply because SUV drivers generally don't look where
the bleep they're going (I've nearly been killed by them twice in the last
seven days) but another part of the problem in this case is that this
accident happened in Provo, Utah, where drivers think I-15 is Taladega,
and the college requires its students to keep their bikes outdoors, even
in the dead of winter.
Human stupidity, the worst killer of all.

Bill

__o | Harry: How could a troll get in?
_`\(,_ | Ron: Not on its own. Trolls are really stupid.
(_)/ (_) |

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 23, 7:12 pm, Jens Müller <usenet-01-2...@tessarakt.de> wrote:
> Edward Dolan wrote:
> > "Jens Müller" <usenet-01-2...@tessarakt.de> wrote in message
> >news:5gj2eoF3gb531U1@mid.individual.net...
> >> Edward Dolan wrote:
> >>> Always use the bike paths whenever you can. They are much more pleasant
> >>> than using the mean streets where you have to compete with motorized
> >>> vehicles.
> >> Always avoid bike paths when it is legally possible. It is much safer that
> >> way.
>
> > Admittedly a bike path that gets too crowded can be somewhat dangerous, yet
> > you are not going to get killed on it unless you do something really stupid.
> > On the other hand, it is easy to get killed on the street when you mixing
> > with motor vehicles. They are all going fast and you are going slow, a
> > recipe for disaster.
>
> How can they go fast when they are on the same lane as me?
>
> They can overtake, but then they are on another lane.

Well, they can make a mistake when they are on the phone or something
and you get run over. And you'll be lucky if they stop. Hit-and-runs
are way too common.
>
> How many people get killed with bikes on the carriageway each year? Here
> in Germany, you can count them on one hand. But there are dozens getting
> killed by turning cars whose drivers don't look at the bike path.

Not many people dare to face fast traffic. People here not just fail
to see bikers, they fail to see cars and other major obstacles when
they are distracted.

[Jack May]

"Jens Müller" <usenet-01-2006@tessarakt.de> wrote in message
news:5gkr0aF3hac8rU1@mid.individual.net...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "Jens Müller" <usenet-01-2006@tessarakt.de> wrote in message
>> news:5gj2eoF3gb531U1@mid.individual.net...
>>> Edward Dolan wrote:

> How many people get killed with bikes on the carriageway each year? Here
> in Germany, you can count them on one hand. But there are dozens getting
> killed by turning cars whose drivers don't look at the bike path.

In the US bikes and pedestrians have the highest death rates of all forms of
transportation except motorcycles. I think the rate is two and times higher
than cars according to a recent news report. I have not tried to find the
statistics.

[Edward Dolan]

"Jens Müller" <usenet-01-2006@tessarakt.de> wrote in message
news:5gkr0aF3hac8rU1@mid.individual.net...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "Jens Müller" <usenet-01-2006@tessarakt.de> wrote in message
>> news:5gj2eoF3gb531U1@mid.individual.net...
>>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>>> Always use the bike paths whenever you can. They are much more pleasant
>>>> than using the mean streets where you have to compete with motorized
>>>> vehicles.
>>> Always avoid bike paths when it is legally possible. It is much safer
>>> that
>>> way.
>>
>> Admittedly a bike path that gets too crowded can be somewhat dangerous,
>> yet
>> you are not going to get killed on it unless you do something really
>> stupid.
>> On the other hand, it is easy to get killed on the street when you mixing
>> with motor vehicles. They are all going fast and you are going slow, a
>> recipe for disaster.
>>
>
> How can they go fast when they are on the same lane as me?

They will run right over you and then claim that they did not see you. If
you really piss them off, they will do it on purpose.

> They can overtake, but then they are on another lane.

Nope, they will shove you a right off the road. They do not want to be
bothered overtaking a lowly cyclist.

> How many people get killed with bikes on the carriageway each year? Here
> in Germany, you can count them on one hand. But there are dozens getting
> killed by turning cars whose drivers don't look at the bike path.

That is the cyclist's fault. Wherever a bike path crosses a road, it is up
to the cyclist to stop, look and listen.

By the way, bike LANES on streets are worthless. Never trust them.

> Do you have statistical data that would support your last sentence?

I reek of commonsense. Too bad you do not have any!

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

[Stephen Sprunk]

"Jack May" <jack.may@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:wKqdndkpjr8VyTjbnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> "Jens Mller" <usenet-01-2006@tessarakt.de> wrote in message
> news:5gkr0aF3hac8rU1@mid.individual.net...
>> How many people get killed with bikes on the carriageway each year? Here
>> in Germany, you can count them on one hand. But there are dozens getting
>> killed by turning cars whose drivers don't look at the bike path.
>
> In the US bikes and pedestrians have the highest death rates of all forms
> of transportation except motorcycles. I think the rate is two and times
> higher than cars according to a recent news report. I have not tried to
> find the statistics.

And, of course, the leading cause of death for bicyclists and pedestrians is
getting hit by a car -- not that it's included in car fatalities, like it
would be if they were hit by a train.

For motorcycles, it's probably a toss-up between rider stupidity and car
drivers.

S

--
Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS --Isaac Asimov


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Edward Dolan]

"Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7.com> wrote in message
news:13abivvf0a8s401@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:vqudnVAxToMCaTnbnZ2dnUVZ_v-hnZ2d@prairiewave.com...
>
>> Why the hell would anyone except an idiot want to drive these very small
>> distances?
>
> Because I will never share a road again with cars in this country. I
> believe that even in Worthington, it isn't safe It may be an exceptionally
> low number of people that are involved in bike/car accidents but trust me,
> You don't want to be the person on the bike.

Jeff, you are living in a very intense motor vehicle environment. The entire
country is not like White Plains, New York.

Quiet country roads can be quite safe except for the occasional drunken
driver. Small town streets can also be quite safe provided you stay out of
lanes which motor vehicles are using. I always ride pretty far to the right
near the curb so that motor vehicles can easily go around me. The main thing
is never to impede the flow of motor vehicle traffic. All that does is piss
off drivers and make them want to kill you.

But you are not far from wrong. Essentially, it is NEVER 100% safe to be on
the road with motor vehicles. That is why I am such a proponent of bike
paths. Why there are not more of them is one of the eternal mysteries of
life.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

[Peter Clinch]

Jeff Grippe wrote:
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:vqudnVAxToMCaTnbnZ2dnUVZ_v-hnZ2d@prairiewave.com...
>
>> Why the hell would anyone except an idiot want to drive these very small
>> distances?
>
> Because I will never share a road again with cars in this country. I believe
> that even in Worthington, it isn't safe It may be an exceptionally low
> number of people that are involved in bike/car accidents but trust me, You
> don't want to be the person on the bike.

Look at the numbers of people who get totalled while driving or riding
in cars. That isn't safe either (especially when they get hit by
trucks...).

While your own personal misfortune will have an understandably big
impact on your risk assessments, it is the case that it's a bad way to
play the odds for any subsequent events.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

[Jeff Grippe]

I'm sure you are right and even though I love to cycle, I'm not going to
play in traffic. At some point I'm just going to have to move closer to the
rail trails. You are correct that my risk assessment is probably incorrect.

Jeff
"Peter Clinch" <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:5gm1i1F3g7u1uU1@mid.individual.net...
> Jeff Grippe wrote:
>> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
>> news:vqudnVAxToMCaTnbnZ2dnUVZ_v-hnZ2d@prairiewave.com...
>>
>>> Why the hell would anyone except an idiot want to drive these very small
>>> distances?
>>
>> Because I will never share a road again with cars in this country. I
>> believe that even in Worthington, it isn't safe It may be an
>> exceptionally low number of people that are involved in bike/car
>> accidents but trust me, You don't want to be the person on the bike.
>
> Look at the numbers of people who get totalled while driving or riding in
> cars. That isn't safe either (especially when they get hit by trucks...).
>
> While your own personal misfortune will have an understandably big impact
> on your risk assessments, it is the case that it's a bad way to play the
> odds for any subsequent events.
>
> Pete.
> --
> Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
> Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
> Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
> net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

[D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch]

In rec.bicycles.misc Jack May <jack.may@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> > I will NEVER drive my car in town. I use it strictly for going to other
> > towns in the vicinity. You can go anywhere in this town of Worthington,
> > Minnesota (12,000 pop.) in 15 minutes by bicycle at the most. Why the hell
> > would anyone except an idiot want to drive these very small distances. And
> > yet, EVERYONE does!

> The goal of most people is to minimize time. They do not want to make
> multiple trips to bring back a small amount of food or supplies. Makes
> perfect sense.

> If your time is not very valuable, a bike makes sense.

There's a cycling web page out there (someone here will have heard of
it, or you could Google it) that recounts the experience of a guy who put
a Hobbes meter in his car. A Hobbes meter looks like an odometer, but
measures time. After about four years owning the car he read the two
meters, did the math, and discovered that he and his car had been
averaging 17 mph. People think of their cars move them along at 40 mph or
whatever because that's what the speed limits signs say, but they forget
that they spend a lot of time at red lights, stuck in traffic jams, etc.
My 6 mile commute to work only takes me five or ten minutes longer than
driving does.
And this person's calculations didn't take into account the fact that
he was also spending part of every work day earning the money to pay for
his car. Figure that in and that average mph number might easily go below
10 mph, slower than a lot of bikes.
I got thinking of all this last Saturday, when I spent $500 on car
repairs and then tried to get to a wedding and got stuck for 45 minutes on
I-15 because of a horrible accident that brought no less than four ground
ambulances and a helicopter to the scene where the SUV had crashed and
burned.

Bill


__o | I used to think that I was cool, running around on fossil fuel
_`\(,_ | Until I saw what I was doing was driving down the road to ruin.
(_)/ (_) | - James Taylor

[Peter Clinch]

Jack May wrote:

> The goal of most people is to minimize time. They do not want to make
> multiple trips to bring back a small amount of food or supplies. Makes
> perfect sense.

Which is why I use a bigger bike. I've carried a two seater sofa on my
freight bike with no great trouble, and it easily fits a trolley load of
groceries. Doesn't take significantly longer, and any degree which it
is longer is easily repaid by me being fitter and healthier and not
spending so much on the car, so I lose less time elsewhere.

> If your time is not very valuable, a bike makes sense.

There's more to time than the immediate short term trip. But even if
that is all there is to it then a bike will often be quicker. Bikes
routinely work quicker than cars in congested urban settings: if that
weren't the case, cycle couriers wouldn't exist.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

[Edward Dolan]

"Jack May" <jack.may@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:oZWdnSvsRpryljvbnZ2dnUVZ_gKdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:vqudnVAxToMCaTnbnZ2dnUVZ_v-hnZ2d@prairiewave.com...
>>
>> "archierob" <archierob@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Ay%oi.505$h11.285@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net...
>>> Well done!
>>>
>>> One only has to read Bill Bryson's book 'Notes from a Big Country' to
>>> realise just how pervasive the automobile is in America. Trying to get
>>> anywhere other than by car is difficult - even crossing over the road
>>> from his hotel to a diner. The one anecdote that made me howl with
>>> laughter was when he returned to the US for a while and invited his
>>> neighbours to dinner -they came by car! They drove down their drive,
>>> turned left and then drove up his drive.
>>
>> The thing that amazes me the most is that in small town America everyone
>> drives everywhere, even if it is only a few blocks. No wonder we are all
>> turning into fat slobs.
>>
>> I will NEVER drive my car in town. I use it strictly for going to other
>> towns in the vicinity. You can go anywhere in this town of Worthington,
>> Minnesota (12,000 pop.) in 15 minutes by bicycle at the most. Why the
>> hell would anyone except an idiot want to drive these very small
>> distances. And yet, EVERYONE does!
>
> The goal of most people is to minimize time. They do not want to make
> multiple trips to bring back a small amount of food or supplies. Makes
> perfect sense.

I use an upright trike with a big basket in the rear to carry things,
including as many groceries as I want.

> If your time is not very valuable, a bike makes sense.

I am not into rushing about like a mad fool like most Americans. However, I
still consider my time valuable, even if I am only using it to contemplate
my navel.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 24, 10:23 am, "Jack May" <jack....@comcast.net> wrote:

> > I will NEVER drive my car in town. I use it strictly for going to other
> > towns in the vicinity. You can go anywhere in this town of Worthington,
> > Minnesota (12,000 pop.) in 15 minutes by bicycle at the most. Why the hell
> > would anyone except an idiot want to drive these very small distances. And
> > yet, EVERYONE does!
>
> The goal of most people is to minimize time. They do not want to make
> multiple trips to bring back a small amount of food or supplies. Makes
> perfect sense.
>
> If your time is not very valuable, a bike makes sense

What you do with your time is a matter of preference. Some join the
rat race, and some simply refuse. For the latter a bike makes sense.

[Brian Huntley]

On Jul 24, 9:23 am, "Jack May" <jack....@comcast.net> wrote:

> The goal of most people is to minimize time. They do not want to make
> multiple trips to bring back a small amount of food or supplies. Makes
> perfect sense.
>
> If your time is not very valuable, a bike makes sense.

I live downtown, and can't realistically drive to work - it would cost
me about $150 a week to park at my office. So if I take transit, I'd
have to come home, get a vehicle, hen go shopping.

With the bike, I shop on my way home. No extra trips required, really.
I usually avoid the mega stores, as you waste too much time standing
in line. When I do use the supermarket, I either bring my bike buckets
or take a free cardboard box (which I recycle later.) With the buckets
and the top of the rack, my bike has about the same grocery capacity
as a Suzuki Swift (my last car.)

It just takes some thought.

[Bill Z.]

"Jack May" <jack.may@comcast.net> writes:

> The goal of most people is to minimize time. They do not want to make
> multiple trips to bring back a small amount of food or supplies. Makes
> perfect sense.

Multiple trips (e.g., on separate days) to "bring back a small amount of
food" means the food you eat is fresher. It's a "quality of life" thing.
Plus, you get some exercise, and most people don't get enough.

You don't really "minimize time" by increasing your chance of spending
weeks in intensive care recovering from a heart attack caused by a poor
diet and lack of exercise.

> If your time is not very valuable, a bike makes sense.

"One size fits all" thinking. :-) A bike makes perfect sense if
you end up taking the time you "save" by using a car and spending
that time on an exercise bike in your garage or basement. And for
some (e.g., in very congested areas) a bicycle is faster than a
car because on a bicyle, you only wait at a light for one cycle
of it at most.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

[Jack May]

"Peter Clinch" <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:5gmhgqF3godnqU1@mid.individual.net...
> Jack May wrote:
>
>> The goal of most people is to minimize time. They do not want to make
>> multiple trips to bring back a small amount of food or supplies. Makes
>> perfect sense.
>
> Which is why I use a bigger bike. I've carried a two seater sofa on my
> freight bike with no great trouble, and it easily fits a trolley load of
> groceries. Doesn't take significantly longer, and any degree which it is
> longer is easily repaid by me being fitter and healthier and not spending
> so much on the car, so I lose less time elsewhere.
>
>> If your time is not very valuable, a bike makes sense.
>
> There's more to time than the immediate short term trip. But even if that
> is all there is to it then a bike will often be quicker. Bikes routinely
> work quicker than cars in congested urban settings: if that weren't the
> case, cycle couriers wouldn't exist.

But very few of us live in a congested urban area.

If we ride the bike to the store, there is usually no place to lock it up
making it vulnerable to being stolen and making it a very expensive trip.

[SlowRider]

On my old commute, ~4 miles each way, my commute time by car was
anywhere from 12 minutes to 25 minutes, depending on traffic, lights,
etc. If I really lucked out (hit green for all 7 lights) I could
drive it in 10. In rush hour, I'd have to sit through 2-3 cycles at
some lights. 20 minutes was the norm.

By bike, I'd do the same distance in ~15 minutes. During the rush-
hour peak I was almost guaranteed to make better time by bike since I
never had to sit at a light for more than one cycle.

Another time-saving benefit to using a bike is no parking hassles.
Most stores in our area now have bike racks. Most of those are right
near the front door: easy-peasy. I really appreciate this during the
holiday shopping season(!)


- JR

[Zoot Katz]

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:01:11 +0000 (UTC), D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch
wrote, in part::
\
> People think of their cars move them along at 40 mph or
>whatever because that's what the speed limits signs say, but they forget
>that they spend a lot of time at red lights, stuck in traffic jams, etc.
>My 6 mile commute to work only takes me five or ten minutes longer than
>driving does.
> And this person's calculations didn't take into account the fact that
>he was also spending part of every work day earning the money to pay for
>his car. Figure that in and that average mph number might easily go below
>10 mph, slower than a lot of bikes.

"The typical American male devotes more than 1,600 hours a year to
his car. He sits in it while it goes and while it stands idling. He
parks it and searches for it. He earns the money to put down on it
and to meet the monthly installments. He works to pay for petrol,
tolls, insurance, taxes and tickets. He spends four of his sixteen
waking hours on the road or gathering resources for it. And this
figure does not take account of the time consumed by other activities
dictated by transport: time spent in hospitals, traffic courts and
garages: time spent watching automobile commercials or attending
consumer education meetings to improve quality of the next buy.

The model American puts in 1,600 hours to get 7,500 miles:
less than five miles an hour."

- Ivan Illich

--
zk

[Jens Müller]

D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch wrote:

>
>> If your time is not very valuable, a bike makes sense.
>
> There's a cycling web page out there (someone here will have heard of
> it, or you could Google it) that recounts the experience of a guy who put
> a Hobbes meter in his car. A Hobbes meter looks like an odometer, but
> measures time. After about four years owning the car he read the two
> meters, did the math, and discovered that he and his car had been
> averaging 17 mph. People think of their cars move them along at 40 mph or
> whatever because that's what the speed limits signs say,

Hah, speed limits! Doesn't your highway require the driver (in addition
to obeying speed limits) to adjust his speed to the road, traffic,
weather, sight and other conditions, the properties of his vehicle and
the cargo and his personal abilities? That's the important speed limit.

[Michael Warner]

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 11:50:23 -0700, Zoot Katz wrote:

> garages: time spent watching automobile commercials or attending
> consumer education meetings to improve quality of the next buy.

Americans go to meetings to learn how to buy cars? Wow.

[Jack May]

"Zoot Katz" <zootkatz@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:jbica352hftp3c3jrr0lgphoric4454tqk@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:01:11 +0000 (UTC), D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch
>
> The model American puts in 1,600 hours to get 7,500 miles:
> less than five miles an hour."

The Census says the average comute in th US is 12.1 miles and takes 22.5
minutes for an average speed of 32,3 MPH. Do you want to attempt
occasionally to tell truth?

http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~pgordon/pdf/commuting.pdf
(page 4)

[Jens Müller]

Jens Müller wrote:

> Hah, speed limits! Doesn't your highway require the driver (in addition
^
Should have been "highway code" ...

> to obeying speed limits) to adjust his speed to the road, traffic,
> weather, sight and other conditions, the properties of his vehicle and
> the cargo and his personal abilities? That's the important speed limit.

[Clive George]

"Jack May" <jack.may@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:8MydnS_0aq6v_DvbnZ2dnUVZ_uSgnZ2d@comcast.com. ..

>> There's more to time than the immediate short term trip. But even if
>> that is all there is to it then a bike will often be quicker. Bikes
>> routinely work quicker than cars in congested urban settings: if that
>> weren't the case, cycle couriers wouldn't exist.
>
> But very few of us live in a congested urban area.
>
> If we ride the bike to the store, there is usually no place to lock it up
> making it vulnerable to being stolen and making it a very expensive trip.

Having no place to lock it up is normally merely a failure to apply
imagination. I can nearly always find such a place.

FWIW we don't live in a congested urban area, yet we use bikes for most
shopping. Things like being able to bring the shopping into the house
without having the tedium of car-unloading trips make the bike more
convenient, any time benefit the car may have for the journey is miniscule
(of the order of 5 minutes), and avoiding the use of the car for trips that
short means it actually lasts rather than wearing out.

cheers,
clive

[Dane Buson]

In rec.bicycles.misc Jack May <jack.may@comcast.net> wrote:
> "Peter Clinch" <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote in message
>> Jack May wrote:
>>
>>> The goal of most people is to minimize time. They do not want to make
>>> multiple trips to bring back a small amount of food or supplies. Makes
>>> perfect sense.
>>
>> Which is why I use a bigger bike. I've carried a two seater sofa on my
>> freight bike with no great trouble, and it easily fits a trolley load of
>> groceries. Doesn't take significantly longer, and any degree which it is
>> longer is easily repaid by me being fitter and healthier and not spending
>> so much on the car, so I lose less time elsewhere.
>>
>>> If your time is not very valuable, a bike makes sense.
>>
>> There's more to time than the immediate short term trip. But even if that
>> is all there is to it then a bike will often be quicker. Bikes routinely
>> work quicker than cars in congested urban settings: if that weren't the
>> case, cycle couriers wouldn't exist.
>
> But very few of us live in a congested urban area.

I don't know about that assertion. More people live in cities than in
rural areas, and the proportion is still shifting towards cities.

Surely someone must live in these huge bustling metropolises. Or are
they perhaps populated by ghosts?
>
> If we ride the bike to the store, there is usually no place to lock it up
> making it vulnerable to being stolen and making it a very expensive trip.

I have trouble believing there are no sign posts, newspaper boxes, light
poles, telephone poles, pipes, or anything else you can lock to
everywhere you go. I'm not saying it's not possible. I'm simply saying
that I've never been somewhere I couldn't lock up if I was willing to
walk one hundred foot.

--
Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org
I don't know everything, but I know a Matrix who does

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 24, 4:29 pm, "Jack May" <jack....@comcast.net> wrote:
> "Peter Clinch" <p.j.cli...@dundee.ac.uk> wrote in message
>
> news:5gmhgqF3godnqU1@mid.individual.net...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Jack May wrote:
>
> >> The goal of most people is to minimize time. They do not want to make
> >> multiple trips to bring back a small amount of food or supplies. Makes
> >> perfect sense.
>
> > Which is why I use a bigger bike. I've carried a two seater sofa on my
> > freight bike with no great trouble, and it easily fits a trolley load of
> > groceries. Doesn't take significantly longer, and any degree which it is
> > longer is easily repaid by me being fitter and healthier and not spending
> > so much on the car, so I lose less time elsewhere.
>
> >> If your time is not very valuable, a bike makes sense.
>
> > There's more to time than the immediate short term trip. But even if that
> > is all there is to it then a bike will often be quicker. Bikes routinely
> > work quicker than cars in congested urban settings: if that weren't the
> > case, cycle couriers wouldn't exist.
>
> But very few of us live in a congested urban area.
>
> If we ride the bike to the store, there is usually no place to lock it up
> making it vulnerable to being stolen and making it a very expensive trip.-

Simply try not to shop there --and let them know.

[frkrygow@gmail.com]

On Jul 24, 1:29 pm, "Jack May" <jack....@comcast.net> wrote:
> "Peter Clinch" <p.j.cli...@dundee.ac.uk> wrote in message
>
>
> > There's more to time than the immediate short term trip. But even if that
> > is all there is to it then a bike will often be quicker. Bikes routinely
> > work quicker than cars in congested urban settings: if that weren't the
> > case, cycle couriers wouldn't exist.
>
> But very few of us live in a congested urban area.

True, perhaps. But for short enough trips, the other benefits of
cycling are worth the slight extra time, in my view. Certainly, up to
about two miles - if level terrain - the increased time is negligible.

>
> If we ride the bike to the store, there is usually no place to lock it up
> making it vulnerable to being stolen and making it a very expensive trip.

There may be no _official_ place to lock it up, but IME there's always
_some_ place I can lock it. You just have to be a little creative.

- Frank Krygowski

[Cathy Kearns]

"Jack May" <jack.may@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:8MydnS_0aq6v_DvbnZ2dnUVZ_uSgnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>
> If we ride the bike to the store, there is usually no place to lock it up
> making it vulnerable to being stolen and making it a very expensive trip.

That would be terrible. I ride my bike on errands, to sporting events, to
the market, and to lunch or dinner in our local entertainment districts. In
every area I've found places to park my bike. And in all those areas it is
closer than where I would have parked my car. You should complain to your
city transportation committee.

[Peter Clinch]

Jack May wrote:

> But very few of us live in a congested urban area.

For some values of "us". Actually, millions live in such areas, it's
entirely normal for a large slice of the population.

> If we ride the bike to the store, there is usually no place to lock it up
> making it vulnerable to being stolen and making it a very expensive trip.

For some values of "usually". I can't think of any stores round here
where I can't lock my bike. Do the stores round your way have no
signposts, lampposts, fenceposts? At the main grocery store I can lock
my bike right by the door: can't park anywhere near that close unless
you're disabled, so I'll be on my way while most people are wheeling
their trolleys over the parking lot.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

[Jens Müller]

Edward Dolan wrote:

>> How can they go fast when they are on the same lane as me?
>
> They will run right over you and then claim that they did not see you. If
> you really piss them off, they will do it on purpose.

Data, please. How often does that happen?

>> They can overtake, but then they are on another lane.
>
> Nope, they will shove you a right off the road. They do not want to be
> bothered overtaking a lowly cyclist.

You're driving too far on the right.

>> How many people get killed with bikes on the carriageway each year? Here
>> in Germany, you can count them on one hand. But there are dozens getting
>> killed by turning cars whose drivers don't look at the bike path.
>
> That is the cyclist's fault. Wherever a bike path crosses a road, it is up
> to the cyclist to stop, look and listen.

No. The cyclist has right of way, at least according to our highway code.


> By the way, bike LANES on streets are worthless. Never trust them.
>
>> Do you have statistical data that would support your last sentence?
>
> I reek of commonsense. Too bad you do not have any!

"Common sense" ...

Common sense might say cycle paths are safer.

Surveys by the Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen (Federal Highway
Institute) say that the accident probabiliy on crossings is 3 to 12
times higher on cycle paths than on the carriageway, depending on the
exact situation.

Surveys from Sweden show similiar results.

These surveys also tried to compare the accident probalities on the part
of the road between crossings. The couldn't find a clear trend, possibly
because there aren't enough accidents that you can mine any statistical
information from it.

[Edward Dolan]

"Jack May" <jack.may@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:udydnW92ptQU_jvbnZ2dnUVZ_sKqnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>
> "Zoot Katz" <zootkatz@operamail.com> wrote in message
> news:jbica352hftp3c3jrr0lgphoric4454tqk@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:01:11 +0000 (UTC), D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch
>>
>> The model American puts in 1,600 hours to get 7,500 miles:
>> less than five miles an hour."
>
> The Census says the average comute in th US is 12.1 miles and takes 22.5
> minutes for an average speed of 32,3 MPH. Do you want to attempt
> occasionally to tell truth?

Anyone who can't do a 12 mile commute on a bicycle should get himself to the
undertaker and arrange with the monument works for a headstone. Of course, I
am assuming bikeable streets and roads. The fact is that 12 miles is
nothing! Even a wimp like me could do it (except in the winter).

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

[D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch]

In rec.bicycles.misc Jack May <jack.may@comcast.net> wrote:

> The Census says the average comute in th US is 12.1 miles and takes 22.5
> minutes for an average speed of 32,3 MPH. Do you want to attempt
> occasionally to tell truth?

This is an average figure, which means there are longer and shorter
commutes. I know a man, for instance, who used to drive 80 miles each way
to and from work, 800 miles per week, +/- 40,000 miles per year. For such
people bicycling does not make sense. Moving closer to the office (as he
eventually did) does.
Shorter commutes, particularly those made in urban areas and at rush
hours, are on the other side of the curve. A couple of months back I was
in a hurry to get to another wedding and took what I thought would be a
shorter, quicker route. I ended up taking thirty minutes to cover the
last mile of the trip. I literally could have gotten to my destination
faster by walking, and I found myself wishing with all my heart for my
bike, even though I don't like to show up at weddings bathed in sweat.
Here's another car-related figure. The American Automobile Association
(they of the famous AAA bumper stickers) says that the average car costs
its owner $650 per month by the time all costs are factored in. The
Census figure takes only driving time into account. This one counts
money, from which we can draw conclusions about the time spent earning
that money. Add that into the commuter's road time and then figure out
his average MPH, and you're down there where a bike becomes a smart
alternative.


Bill

__o | Harry: How could a troll get in?
_`\(,_ | Ron: Not on its own. Trolls are really stupid.
(_)/ (_) |

[John Kane]

On Jul 24, 4:39 pm, "Jack May" <jack....@comcast.net> wrote:
> "Zoot Katz" <zootk...@operamail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:jbica352hftp3c3jrr0lgphoric4454tqk@4ax.com...
>
> > On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:01:11 +0000 (UTC), D_Frumiou...@ndersnat.ch
>
> > The model American puts in 1,600 hours to get 7,500 miles:
> > less than five miles an hour."
>
> The Census says the average comute in th US is 12.1 miles and takes 22.5
> minutes for an average speed of 32,3 MPH. Do you want to attempt
> occasionally to tell truth?
>
> http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~pgordon/pdf/commuting.pdf
> (page 4)

Jack
The problem here is that the authors apparently are using the
arethmetic mean. Unless the distribution is normal the mean is almost
certainly inflated by outliers. Do you know if anyone has done this
type of study using median commuting distance rather than mean ?

in Canada the median commute is about 7.5 km . The Canadian
situtation would seem quite different if you took the mean. If you
look at the actual distribution in Canada the majority of commuters
travel less than 10 km (6.2 miles). See http://ca.geocities.com/jrkrideau/cycling/commute.png.
I would not be terribly surprised to find a similar distribution,
althougth, perhaps with a slightly larger median value for US
commutes.

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada

[Zoot Katz]

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:39:44 -0700, breeze "Jack May"
<jack.may@comcast.net> missed it when he wrote:

>> The model American puts in 1,600 hours to get 7,500 miles:
>> less than five miles an hour."
>
>The Census says the average comute in th US is 12.1 miles and takes 22.5
>minutes for an average speed of 32,3 MPH. Do you want to attempt
>occasionally to tell truth?

Car addicts never do the full accounting. 1600 hours includes time
spent to earn the money to pay for your driving habit. It didn't
include the time you spend in hospitals, courts and garages.

Car addicts don't like to figure in the externalities connected with
their transportation choice. Those externalities end up costing
non-drivers $2.70 for every dollar the driver spends on their car.

Your census figures only demonstrate that the average commuter's
destination is well within bicycling range.

Consider too that there are fewer variables to delay a bicycle so
that commuters can be pretty sure that they're going to arrive on
time regardless of traffic situations.
--
zk

[Cathy Kearns]

"Dane Buson" <dane@unseen.edu> wrote in message
news:4c4in4-npf.ln1@curare.zuvembi.homelinux.org...
>
> There are multiple places I shop that are difficult or very inconvenient
> to park at with a car. It's much easier to shop by bike.
>
> The time difference to get there by car versus bike is pretty minimal.

This made me laugh. I'm getting ready to head off to a WTA tennis tourney
in town this week. Parking is on the Stanford campus, and is attrocious.
On the roads it would take me 20 minutes to get there, and another 20 to
walk in from the dirt parking lots. (Where you pay $6 for the privilege of
getting your car dusty.) I'm taking my bike. Maybe 45 minutes, and I can
park right outside the stadium. Big bonus, the starlit ride home along the
empty MUPS that run along creeks, through parks, and even along side a
cemetary. I don't know what I'm looking forward to more, watching tennis,
or the bike ride home.

[Sancho Panza]

"Dane Buson" <dane@unseen.edu> wrote in message
news:un4in4-npf.ln1@curare.zuvembi.homelinux.org...
> More people live in cities than in
> rural areas, and the proportion is still shifting towards cities.

The last several Censuses demonstrate that you forgot the advent of the
suburbs.

[Jeff Grippe]

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
news:mLqdnftZlNjO9zvbnZ2dnUVZ_tGonZ2d@prairiewave. com...
>
> "Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7.com> wrote in message
> news:13abivvf0a8s401@news.supernews.com...
>>
>> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
>> news:vqudnVAxToMCaTnbnZ2dnUVZ_v-hnZ2d@prairiewave.com...
>>
> Jeff, you are living in a very intense motor vehicle environment. The
> entire country is not like White Plains, New York.
>
> Quiet country roads can be quite safe except for the occasional drunken
> driver.

Well look at what happened to Stephen King. He was walking on a quite
country road and almost had his life taken by a drunken driver.

No matter how small the odds are of this happening to me again, they become
zero if I simply refuse to cycle where there are cars. I love to cycle but
its not the only thing that I enjoy doing.

Jeff

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 24, 5:08 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:

> But you are not far from wrong. Essentially, it is NEVER 100% safe to be on
> the road with motor vehicles. That is why I am such a proponent of bike
> paths. Why there are not more of them is one of the eternal mysteries of
> life.

I think it has to with the lions considering the frugal bikes mere
peanuts.They are still important to the monkey though...

RIDING A BIKE COSTS PEANUTS

OK, since the lion (for whom "peanuts" is not important) refuses to
listen to the monkey asking for bike facilities,* let's scrutinize the
secrets ($$$) of the political jungle, where "democracy" is the word
of choice...

"The highest measure of democracy is neither the 'extent of freedom'
nor the 'extent of equality', but rather the highest measure of
participation" -A. d. Benoist

Then I'd assume that 50% of the American public and 80% of the young
who don't vote do not live in democracy. Or perhaps they see it as a
waste of time --and money.

"Remember the Golden Rule: Those with the Gold, Rule" (saying)

"The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" (title of book)

And this one...

"Freedom is when the people can speak, democracy is when the
government listens" -Alastair Farrugia

Which explains why bike lanes won't happen in the foreseeable future.

[Jack May]

"Zoot Katz" <zootkatz@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:iqtca3pkrnssqctmv3mc9m00lt6rukpao1@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:39:44 -0700, breeze "Jack May"
> <jack.may@comcast.net> missed it when he wrote:
>

>
> Car addicts don't like to figure in the externalities connected with
> their transportation choice. Those externalities end up costing
> non-drivers $2.70 for every dollar the driver spends on their car.


Oh here we go again with somebody throwing everything they can think of into
a cost number to pump it up as high as possible. Useless approach.
>
> Your census figures only demonstrate that the average commuter's
> destination is well within bicycling range.

So what. If people consider a bike an inferior way to commute, then all
your arguments are worthless. All technology survives or fails in an
evolutionary process. Bikes have lost the evolution game.

[donquijote1954]

On Jul 25, 5:52 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
> "donquijote1954" <nolionnoprob...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1185396375.767640.217500@o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
>
> > On Jul 25, 12:30 pm, "Edward Dolan" <edo...@iw.net> wrote:
>
> >> Bike paths are the way to go and surely in the future there will be
> >> thousands and thousands of miles of such paths everywhere. The fact is
> >> that
> >> none of us are safe on the roads and highways where we have to share the
> >> lane with motor vehicles.
>
> > They won't happen without a revolution. No political will. Our roads
> > will remain a jungle until the end of times, which is near if we
> > insist on launching war over precious resources. "Saving" is missing
> > from the American English Dictionary. There's hope though...
>
> Hey Don Quijote, I am hoping that gas goes to $20. a gallon. That is what it
> will take to get America to abandon their cars. And the sooner the better!

The couch potatoes will have to abandon the comfort of their automatic
vehicles. Which, by the way, it's killing them in types of deseases.

The dictatorship of the lazy and stupid over the fit and smart will
end.

[Amy Blankenship]

"Bill Z." <nobody@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:87ejixcmam.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net...
> "Jack May" <jack.may@comcast.net> writes:
>
>> The goal of most people is to minimize time. They do not want to make
>> multiple trips to bring back a small amount of food or supplies. Makes
>> perfect sense.
>
> Multiple trips (e.g., on separate days) to "bring back a small amount of
> food" means the food you eat is fresher. It's a "quality of life" thing.
> Plus, you get some exercise, and most people don't get enough.

Not to men