----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@MSGID: <mpaehi1rdl94kf5tq0jijfrff5kvqvan4u@4ax.com>
3193e586
@REPLY: NvC4.370934@fx06.ams4>
133c61fd
@REPLYADDR Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not>
@REPLYTO 2:5075/128 Catrike Rider
@CHRS: CP866 2
@RFC: 1 0
@RFC-Message-ID:
<mpaehi1rdl94kf5tq0jijfrff5kvqvan4u@4ax.com>
@RFC-References:
<g4i6hitvd9a9ho5e4tchrocu9cmlcunk16@4ax.com> 3@dont-email.me> <nnu6hi9md16navq60rgjc73alef4a52e1d@4ax.com>
1@dont-email.me> <48b90f39-0454-412a-b826-e4e7249161f7n@googlegroups.com>
<5f448413-9927-405e-a6c7-837ddbffa62dn@googlegroups.com> <68ec90b0-1968-4ac1-bb0b-22f5a1ee9293n@googlegroups.com>
<05fahi93cqosrf567a60bp1b369volm5a8@4ax.com> eyS6.563654@fx15.ams4> 1@dont-email.me>
NvC4.370934@fx06.ams4>
@TZUTC: -0400
@PID: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
@TID: FIDOGATE-5.12-ge4e8b94
On Fri, 29 Sep 2023 19:52:16 GMT, Roger Meriman <
roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:
>Frank Krygowski <
frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> On 9/28/2023 5:25 PM, Roger Meriman wrote:
>>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have few problems with bicyclists sharing the road with cars and
>>>> trucks whenever the bicyclist sees that it`s in his best interest to
>>>> do so. I`ve done it myself, many times, but I often, nowdays more then
>>>> ever, see that it`s in my interest to ride where vehicles are not
>>>> allowed to go.
>>>>
>>>> Jackasses like John Forester and his jackass followers are intent upon
>>>> taking away my choice to do that. Thank goodnesss their efforts are
>>>> failing. Here in west central Florida, trails and paths that prohibit
>>>> vehicle traffic are springing up all over.
>>>>
>>> To be fair it?s more road cyclepaths/ways they don?t like but it?s not a
>>> movement or ideology that has much effect, it briefly did in some 40/50
>>> years ago and the name was coined ie Vehicular Cycling but as times have
>>> changed ie don?t want motorways everywhere, the cycleway to work was to be
>>> one of many motorways ringing london!
>>>
>>> Essentially a few older men convinced it is ?the way? but the world has
>>> moved on.
>>
>> The timid tricycle rider rides ONLY on segregated bike paths, with very
>> rare exceptions. As I`ve said, if that keeps him moving, fine. I`d say
>> the same for an invalid that can walk only by using a walker. But being
>> limited to a walker - or a bike path - is a sign of personal weakness.
>>
>Plenty of bike only places lots of MTBer use bike parks I occasionally use
>them but I like well getting into the hills and I like the up?s where as
>the parks are generally down focused.
>
>He cycles for leisure if he enjoys the bike paths? While I do ride in
>london and though traffic for pleasure I?ll generally choose a calmer
>route.
I regularly see high speed, nose to fanny, peloton groups on the bike
trails. Doesn`t look like leisure to me.
>Even my commute the faster way is though Heathrow but it?s a lot more work
>than the parks and cycleway.
>
>> Almost all bike paths are really just linear parks, useful for only easy
>> back-and-forth recreation. I`m in contact with many "vehicular
>> cyclists," and I was a friend of John Forester, who coined the term.
>> Few, if any, object to the existence of those linear parks. None have
>> tried to prohibit their use, despite Mr. Tricycle`s ignorant fears.
>> Personally, I object to their being funded with _transportation_ funds,
>> instead of park funds; but that`s a detail.
>>
>
>> So what is "Vehicular Cycling," which Roger claims to be outmoded? It`s
>> essentially riding a bicycle - which is legally a vehicle - on normal
>> roads, according to the existing laws! What about that enrages people??
>>
>It?s more the anti cycle lanes/paths now granted in the 70?s most of it was
>dubious.
>
>But times have changed and in general old men and it always them are the
>only folks interested in the concept, quite a lot of cycle campaigners out
>there now and it?s a much more rounded demographic.
>
>It?s simply not on the list of ideas to make life better, it popped up on
>the social few weeks back, the response wasn?t favourable, more what on
>earth where they thinking!
>
>I kinda get that it?s a useful tool for some big fast roads, though lots of
>of cyclists particularly roadies tend to do that instinctively so its
>usefulness isn?t huge.
>
>> OK, it may enrage someone like our kiddy-path rider, who is too
>> terrified to do it and embarrassed that others know. He`s like a kid
>> saying "I can let go of Mommy`s hand anytime I want. I just don`t wanna!"
>>
>> But if a person is going to use a bike to explore his world, to do any
>> practical transportation, to really travel, to replace car trips, to do
>> anything but boring out-and-back rides, he is going to have to ride on
>> normal roads.
>>
>No one sane is claiming that every road needs a cycle infrastructure lanes
>but clearly is space for more to be done, london in particular is for most
>part getting its act together.
>
>
>> There are some few special bike facilities that work well for certain
>> few destinations; but those access only a tiny fraction of destinations.
>> Despite the dreamy (and "socialist!") fantasies of the paint-and-path
>> crew there will NEVER be a complete parallel network of bike-only
>> facilities to duplicate the normal road system.
>>
>Again I don?t think you?ve experienced these stuff is changing your using
>experience and prejudice from decades back.
>
>> And anyone who does summon the minimal courage to ride on a normal road
>> will do best to behave as a legal vehicle operator. Nobody has proposed
>> a realistic better alternative.
>>
>> Riding on normal roads, according to the actual traffic laws, takes only
>> a bit of intelligence, knowledge, skill and courage. Those lacking
>> should not mock it. They should strive to improve themselves.
I strive to improve myself regularly. None of it involves riding a
bike as a form of transporation.
>And that is why cycling has continued to drop in % for years due to well
>Car Centric cities and organisations such as CTC and lead to essentially
>survival of the fittest type of cycling which is what Vehicular Cycling is
>hence its supporter?s demographic ie older male roadies.
>
>Roger Merriman
I have no issue with someone using a bike for transportation, only
with the bone-headed jackasses who insist everybody should do it.
--- ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
* Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (2:5075/128)
SEEN-BY: 5001/100 5005/49 5015/255 5019/40 5020/715
848 1042 4441 12000
SEEN-BY: 5030/49 1081 5058/104 5075/128
@PATH: 5075/128 5020/1042 4441