[arominus]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

Double to triple the speed is significant - "10-20 mph" may not seem so "vast", but but seen in those terms, it really is. Even at much higher speeds (like freeway speeds) we all understand how very frustrating it is to get caught behind someone doing that much less than the speed limit, and how dangerous it can be when those frustrated motorists try to get around one another under those conditions.

You have carefully avoided addressing the "vast delta" in mass - and how that makes it even more dangerous than motorist on motorist at disparate speeds. Oh, and let's not forget visibility - cyclists present a very small profile to pick out against a dynamic background. Most of us can remember seeing them seemingly "coming out of nowhere".



Thank you - I was hoping someone would bring up this tired old saw. I'm fully aware of this funding situation - I used to make this case myself when I was cycling as a way of countering the "you don't pay road taxes" argument. I realized the error in my logic many years ago...

Which brings us right back to my earlier (and intentionally silly) argument - if I pay taxes that support public roads, and some forms of recreation are allowable on those public roads, why can't I play basketball right out in the middle of them? Tennis? O.k., how about taxpayer supported public golf courses? I don't golf, but I do ride dirt bikes - why can't I use these publicly funded venues for my form of recreation? The argument that "I pay taxes, therefore I can utilize (insert public resource of choice) however I like" does not hold water under any other circumstances, especially when my use is so different (and incompatible) with the generally intended and agreed upon use.

Again, we get back to compatible uses. Cyclists claim their use of motorways is "compatible" with motor vehicle use. At least most motorways - we do have the good common sense to disallow them from most stretches of freeway. The speed differential is simply too great out there - most of us agree on that.

What motorists are getting at is that bicycles are no more compatible with motorized traffic on other forms of motorway, even at relatively "low" speed for cars - which is very high speed for cyclists. In their own, dedicated lanes, yes. Mixed in with general traffic, no. Size and speed are too disparate there as well.

So whats your real answer here? ban bikes from all roads? keep in mind this includes children. You ready to put that $70 a year on them for wanting a bike so they can ride to school?

FYI, colorado has had the 3ft rule for years, we survived just fine. We have guys that write in to the local paper stating that they are looking forward to running cyclists down (because they hate them) so i ride on the sidewalk quite a bit these days. Its safer for me.