Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 561 posts

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#501

Post by innocentoldguy »

termos wrote: post #207
innocentoldguy wrote: post #127

Fuck bicyclists. They are freeloaders on the infrastructure bought and paid for by people who buy gas for their automobiles (and heaped upon electric car owners where I live). In my city, there is a push to charge bicyclists an annual licensing fee, similar to cars, and to require they have license plates. Once bicyclists are paying their fair share for the roads, then we can start dreaming bigger than bike lanes.

Fuck drivers. They are freeloaders on the health, space and safety of the people who live, walk, bike, socialise, work and have kids in the city. In my city, there is a push to charge drivers higher toll fees to make it less lucrative to drive, similar to how bikes riders have paid a health and safety fee for years. Once drivers are paying their fair share for the use of highly valuable inner city space, then we can…

Any “safety fees” you may have paid are your own fault. That’s what happens when you play in the street.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#502

Post by alistairSH »

magduf wrote: post #483
alistairSH wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luckily, I'm far enough out (Reston) that I can hop on the W&OD to Leesburg and then bail onto slightly more rural roads. Reston itself is ok, despite the silliness with inconsistent bike lanes and sidewalks. Just have to avoid the major roads.

Just watch out for armed robbers: https://www.insidenova.com/news/crime_police/bicycle-rider-r...

I'm not convinced there's not more to that story. There was a massive organized bike ride that day, so hundreds of people passing along that stretch of trail when the mugging occurred.

Crime happens on the trail, no question. But it also happens in parking lots and at the local 7-11 and many other places.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#503

Post by wool_gather »

willis936 wrote: post #473
wool_gather wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you say whether you are yourself an active cyclist?

Yes I am. It’s nice for all the reasons people beat the drum about, but the biggest one for me is convenience. Driving and parking in a city is a nightmare. Biking is marginally slower than taking the bus and by comparison biking grants much more freedom. Frankly, I think it’s insane that anyone who regularly bikes would not wear a helmet. I push back so hard against this notion of not wearing a helmet because of how…

Thanks. I also bike for my day-to-day transport, and love it.

I go back and forth about the helmet issue personally. Though I've almost never not worn one.

My general feeling is that it's not much of a burden to me. And while the cases where it's actually going to help are narrower than most people think (especially people looking from the perspective of a car impact), it does improve the outcome in those cases quite a bit. So it's worthwhile.

If nothing else helmets are good places to mount lights, which are definitely an important safety measure! :)

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#504

Post by TulliusCicero »

innocentoldguy wrote: post #500
TulliusCicero wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cyclists are already largely subsidizing drivers, because a) it's more than gas taxes and registration fees that go to roads, it's also general income taxes and local/state taxes, and b) bike infrastructure is radically cheaper than car infrastructure. You're looking at at least an order of magnitude difference in cost, which overwhelms the difference in taxes paid. That cyclists may only be paying 50% or even 25% as…

Bike infrastructure IS car infrastructure for the most part. Also, auto drivers pay the exact same taxes that bicyclists do and additionally pay greater taxes in gas and licensing. Bicyclists always like to whine “Share the road.” It’s time they share the costs as well. Fortunately, there appears to be a push in my community to make that happen and I think it is great. Now, if you’re talking bike trails, then yes. Th…

> Bike infrastructure IS car infrastructure for the most part.

It is when it's bad, yes. Good bike infrastructure usually involves things like physically separated bike lanes, or off-street bike paths.

> Also, auto drivers pay the exact same taxes that bicyclists do and additionally pay greater taxes in gas and licensing.

I already addressed this in my comment; it doesn't matter when car infrastructure is VASTLY more expensive. Why would it matter that drivers pay double when they cost 10x?

Cyclists subsidize drivers. Period.

> If they’re on the roads, however, they should be forced to pay all the road fees cars have to pay.

The whole reason roads are super expensive is because of cars, not bikes, so of course drivers pay more. If there were only bikes (and scooters and skateboards) on a given stretch of road, it would be called a multi-use trail, and it could be made for much, much cheaper, since the engineering standards would not have to be nearly as high.

Your argument is exactly like if a city got rid of all its sidewalks, forcing people to walk on the road, and then to add insult to injury forced people to be 'licensed' and pay a registration fee to walk about. No freeloading steppers here, no sir! They need to pay their fair share now that they have no good options of their own!

I get that it doesn't jive with your current worldview that cyclists are subsidizing drivers, but it's true. Those cyclists you deride as 'whiners' are paying your way.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#505

Post by chapium »

brnt wrote: post #372
chapium wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling while cycling or driving are not equivalents. A vehicle is much more massive than a bike and to use a phone while accelerating is far more negligent. The chances of a cyclist accident harming someone other than themselves while on a phone are far lower than distracted driving accident.

Sure, but 'phone-use' while cycling (thanks ;)) is the number two reason bikes cause lethal accidents for themselves or other bicycles, i.e. it's a big deal. Source (in Dutch): https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/fietsers-voor-h...

I can't deny that both activities are bad.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#506

Post by magduf »

alistairSH wrote: post #502
magduf wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just watch out for armed robbers: https://www.insidenova.com/news/crime_police/bicycle-rider-r...

I'm not convinced there's not more to that story. There was a massive organized bike ride that day, so hundreds of people passing along that stretch of trail when the mugging occurred. Crime happens on the trail, no question. But it also happens in parking lots and at the local 7-11 and many other places.

>Crime happens on the trail, no question.

Really? This was the first I had heard of it since moving to the area last year, and it has me a little worried. I thought NoVA was supposed to be one of the wealthiest places in the US.

Of course, I think it's pertinent to note that people in other countries don't have to worry much about armed robbery while cycling, since people in those countries don't have so many guns like Americans do.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#507

Post by magduf »

lazyjones wrote: post #491
magduf wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn't have carriages in 1438 except maybe for royals.

Carts/coaches were pretty common though.

1438 is pretty far back, before the Renaissance. I seriously doubt carts or coaches were "common", as in every commoner owning one. I'm sure they were around, for carrying goods, doing construction, etc., but this is more like how, today, we have dump trucks and utility vehicles, but the number of dump trucks per citizen is very small. It's just not like today's car-based societies (esp. the US) where every person expects to own a car and use it for getting around.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#508

Post by alistairSH »

magduf wrote: post #506
alistairSH wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not convinced there's not more to that story. There was a massive organized bike ride that day, so hundreds of people passing along that stretch of trail when the mugging occurred. Crime happens on the trail, no question. But it also happens in parking lots and at the local 7-11 and many other places.

>Crime happens on the trail, no question. Really? This was the first I had heard of it since moving to the area last year, and it has me a little worried. I thought NoVA was supposed to be one of the wealthiest places in the US. Of course, I think it's pertinent to note that people in other countries don't have to worry much about armed robbery while cycling, since people in those countries don't have so many guns li…

Fairfax County (and DC metro in general) is wealthy. But, it's also very mixed, just like most large suburban or urban areas. Look at the federally subsidized lunch numbers - despite an average household income well into 6-figures, it's not uncommon for a school to have 20-30% of the students receiving free lunches.

Very little of the crime on the W&OD is "bike specific" - it's just "normal" stuff that happens all over. I'm more concerned about getting run over by a road-raging douchebag in an SUV on my way to the trail than mugged while I'm on the trail. Honestly, I'd be more concerned walking back to my car at the mall than riding down the W&OD.

I've lived in the area most of my life. I can't think of any areas I'd actively avoid during the day. Well, except Tysons Corner, but that's not because of the crime, I just hate the place.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#509

Post by kevstev »

magduf wrote: post #482
ogre_codes wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not debating the same thing. Nobody is suggesting that riding without a helmet is as safe as riding without. The lack of helmet laws makes me safer on my bike regardless of whether I wear a helmet or not because it means fewer people are driving cars. Cars are far more likely to injure/ kill me than a solo crash, adding barriers to getting people to adopt bikes makes cycling more dangerous. The more people on…

I'm not advocating for mandatory helmet laws in that post, I'm just pointing out why you should wear a helmet on a bike, regardless of any laws. You, personally, will be safer with a helmet; it's a simple fact of physics. Sure, fewer cars means it's safer for cyclists, but you keep focusing on cars and ignoring other dangers with cycling: other cyclists, pedestrians, slippery/uneven roads, or just plain mistakes by t…

Do you also wear boots, an armored jacket and pants? Gloves? I bike to work every day, and spent a good part of my childhood on a bike- mountain biking on trails in the woods.

I have had countless banged up knees, elbows, ankles and hands, but never had a head injury. I used to ride a motorcycle, and wore the full getup aside from pants, and I feel cyclists would be far more protected wearing a jacket and gloves.

Anecdotes aside- figures from the UK (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1119262/) show that it takes 8000 years of cycling to produce a clinically severe head injury and 22000 years for one death. From that same source, roughly 1% of all head injuries admitted into hospitals are from cycling, and 60% are alcohol related. Yet people would find it ridiculous if you suggested they wear a drinking helmet.

The fixation on helmets really confuses me. Its not helped that a lot of it seems to be pushed by people who seem to use it as some kind of virtue-signaling issue. There is just such a focus on a fairly burdensome piece of equipment that in a small percentage of rides in which an incident occurs, and in a small percentage of those incidents, this piece of equipment may help reduce the severity of your injuries, while all other equipment is left out of the conversation.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#510

Post by fennecfoxen »

carapace wrote: post #457
fennecfoxen wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> electric biking is expanding your reach a few times over. Electric bikes are motorcycles, and I don't want vehicles with the speed and acceleration characteristics of a motorcycle in my bike lane, if you please. postscript: my very concerns for my safety seem to be getting voted down a lot considering that our friend the Dutchman here has given a rather nice reply recognizing the substantive nature of this conflict

Electric bikes are not motorcycles. However, you're right that they're different from non-motorized bikes. And I agree with you that they can cause issues. I got a eBike (Bionix brand, it's been great!) when I was commuting across town and got sick of riding the bus (these days there's always somebody watching TV on their phone without headphones. It was just a matter of time until I lost it and slapped one out of so…

If you Google image search for "early motorcycle" most things will look a lot like an ordinary bicycles. Some versions of the 1903 Peugeot, for instance, had pedals on a crank, and even those that didn't were pretty slender:

https://cybermotorcycle.com/gallery/peugeot-1903/Peugeot-190...

The fact that your bicycle has an electric motor and remains somewhat slim doesn't change this fact.

Post reply on HN