Comment 26406

By seancb (registered) - website | Posted August 19, 2008 at 10:25:29

Frank - we are all advocating for obedience to the laws on the part of all road users - drivers, cyclists and pedestrians alike.

But the start of this discussion was a response to a letter writer who singled out cyclists as law breakers who should not be on the road.

So all of this discussion is just to point out that the pot is also black.

The discussion about relative danger of the different modes of transportation is importanbt because cyclists are routinely accused of being serious road hazards, while statistically cars are more dangerous and break more laws.

Would you not agree that for the greater good, we should start by tackling the most dangerous and work our way down to the least dangerous?

If a pedestrian is struck crossing a road - the pedestrian jaywalking and the car speeding at 70 in a 60, that pedestrian will likely be killed. So would police presence be more important in stopping jaywalkers or in enforcing the speed limit? I'd vote that the user capable of doing the most damage should receive the brunt of the enforcement effort.

Regarding segregation - I agree that a completely separate trail network would be ideal - but unless you can convince the city to shut down certain roads completely, we simply do not have the real estate to build it.

But I do not agree with your assertion that physically separate bicycle lanes are necessary for safety purposes. Because there will still be interaction at intersections, and as you said, where space does not permit separation.

A much better option is to make the most dangerous users act more safely - that is to calm the vehicular traffic. This would make EVERY street safer for EVERYONE- drivers, cyclists and pedestrians alike.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools