Comment 77180

By kevlahan (registered) | Posted May 22, 2012 at 15:01:34

The "until" in this phrase made me think (perhaps mistakenly) that your acceptance of cyclists on the roads is contingent on how well they obey certain traffic rules:

"Fair enough - and why not, I tell myself, until I see the unwillingness of some of them to obey traffic laws and rules designed to protect everyone, including bicyclists."

I assume by "knee-jerk reactionism" you mean the reactionism of motorists against giving up road space to cyclists or pedestrians (since a reaction is against a change), but correct me if I'm mis-reading.

I should also add that I'm doubtful about the benefits of public education campaigns to change behaviour: all motorists and the vast majority of adult cyclists have drivers licences and even child cyclists know that you should stop at stop signs and traffic lights. Everyone knows the speed limit is 100km/h on the QEW, but even the police drive at 120km/h!

Speed kills and the only thing that will really make our urban roads safer is to slow the speed of everyone down to below 30km/h. This can best be done by engineering changes (narrower lanes, chicanes, or in some cases woonerf streets that force pedestrians and cyclists to mix).

Comment edited by kevlahan on 2012-05-22 15:05:59

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds