Thursday, February 11, 2010
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Winter cycling and driver's attitudes
Several times each winter, some irate driver writes a letter to the editor of the Winnipeg Free Press complaining about people riding their bikes in winter. The letter writer usually goes on to say that it should be illegal. If you read the news online there is opportunity to leave comments and the ensuing debate is invariably polarized between the staunch drivers and the diehard cyclists. Almost always the suggestion is put forth that cyclists should be licensed, taxed and be required to carry liability insurance.
Let's examine these three suggestions:
Licensing
My first thought is "no way" but if the licensing required some kind of test that displayed a working knowledge of the rules of the road and competencies on the bike then perhaps it isn't such a bad idea. The problem, we all know, is not the 90% of cyclists who are able to manoeuvre through traffic while minimizing their effect on it, the problem is the 10% of idiots who run stop signs as if the sign isn't even there, ride all over the road, ride 2 or 3 across the road and generally ride in a manner that angers motorists and creates the angst reflected in the original letter writers complaints. I'm not for a moment suggesting that we need to ride in a timid and scaredy cat manner; I've always firmly believed that you have to ride with confidence and a little bit of attitude. I will never compromise my safety on a bike for the convenience of a driver...but if a cyclist had to prove they had competency and knowledge it would take away any defence if their actions caused an accident. The downside is that licensing a cyclist would be impossible to enforce and in that impossibility the idea loses its credibility
Taxing cyclists
This would be political suicide for any politician. We are taxed enough. Too much. And what would this tax pay for? Road maintenance? A cyclist creates no wear on a road whatsoever. Most cyclists are also motorists and we pay our road taxes when we buy gas. I would vehemently oppose any kind of a cyclist tax.
Liability Insurance
This might help a small handful of motorists who are lucky enough that a cyclist who caused an accident might stop and offer his insurance information. This cyclist lives in a magical world where it's always a downhill, tail wind riding environment with bikes that weight 10 lbs and we never get thirsty. We all win every race and Lance Armstrong is our friend.
The cyclist who's actions cause accidents are generally of the ilk that would not stop to offer assistance or information. This is the most ridiculous of all the suggestions.
I'm probably preaching to the choir here, most hard core cyclists try to have as little impact on traffic as they can while achieving their goals of riding or commuting but if or more likely when we get into a conversation with hard core drivers, having intellectual answers to their complaints will allow for a dialogue that will inform and educate drivers and perhaps soften their hatred of us. If you hear of any intellectual responses let me know because my standard response is usually;
"I'll give up my bike for the winter if you give up your car for the summer"
Let's examine these three suggestions:
Licensing
My first thought is "no way" but if the licensing required some kind of test that displayed a working knowledge of the rules of the road and competencies on the bike then perhaps it isn't such a bad idea. The problem, we all know, is not the 90% of cyclists who are able to manoeuvre through traffic while minimizing their effect on it, the problem is the 10% of idiots who run stop signs as if the sign isn't even there, ride all over the road, ride 2 or 3 across the road and generally ride in a manner that angers motorists and creates the angst reflected in the original letter writers complaints. I'm not for a moment suggesting that we need to ride in a timid and scaredy cat manner; I've always firmly believed that you have to ride with confidence and a little bit of attitude. I will never compromise my safety on a bike for the convenience of a driver...but if a cyclist had to prove they had competency and knowledge it would take away any defence if their actions caused an accident. The downside is that licensing a cyclist would be impossible to enforce and in that impossibility the idea loses its credibility
Taxing cyclists
This would be political suicide for any politician. We are taxed enough. Too much. And what would this tax pay for? Road maintenance? A cyclist creates no wear on a road whatsoever. Most cyclists are also motorists and we pay our road taxes when we buy gas. I would vehemently oppose any kind of a cyclist tax.
Liability Insurance
This might help a small handful of motorists who are lucky enough that a cyclist who caused an accident might stop and offer his insurance information. This cyclist lives in a magical world where it's always a downhill, tail wind riding environment with bikes that weight 10 lbs and we never get thirsty. We all win every race and Lance Armstrong is our friend.
The cyclist who's actions cause accidents are generally of the ilk that would not stop to offer assistance or information. This is the most ridiculous of all the suggestions.
I'm probably preaching to the choir here, most hard core cyclists try to have as little impact on traffic as they can while achieving their goals of riding or commuting but if or more likely when we get into a conversation with hard core drivers, having intellectual answers to their complaints will allow for a dialogue that will inform and educate drivers and perhaps soften their hatred of us. If you hear of any intellectual responses let me know because my standard response is usually;
"I'll give up my bike for the winter if you give up your car for the summer"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)