There should be more motorcycle lanes in the US.

I look forward to the debate. I contend. There should NOT be more motorcycle lanes in the United States, based upon the reasons my opponent has stated. "The reason for this is, it would enable a safer area for those that ride such things, because most motorcycle accidents are because a large vehicle such as a car, or truck. " The risks outweigh the benefits (see below). "There are already cops that ride motorcycles, so move those cops to the motorcycle lanes, and they can enforce motorcycle safety laws more strongly. " This, admittedly, could be a benefit for my opponent's proposed motorcycle lane. However, the losses suffered on other aspects would quickly outweigh this benefit in terms of values. As well, it could be safer for motorcyclists to ride in their own separate lane. However, there are a number of harmful effects that could be caused by adding such a lane: First of all, in order to add a motorcycle lane, streets would have to either (a) be expanded, (b) minimize space for other cars, (c) reduce parked car space, or (d) reduce sidewalk space. If Option A were to occur, it would in essence cause a disaster, making entire city blocks change morphology, and would no doubt cost far too much money compared to what is gained. If Option B were to occur, the space for other driving lanes would be reduced, causing smaller room for driving error and potentially hazardous driving conditions (e. g. driving too close to the median). If Option C were to occur, there would either be minimized space to park one's car or other vehicle. It could also be unsafe, having motorcycles zoom by within such a close zone when people are entering and exiting their other vehicles. If Option D were to occur, it would effectively limit pedestrian walking-space area. Pedestrians are much more sustainable than motorcycles, and therefore should be preserved at higher costs, meaning that pedestrian walking space to promote pedestrians is more important than a motorcycle lane to promote motorcycles and other small vehicles. There is, as my opponent will hopefully see evident, no spot to beneficially place a motorcycle lane in most places. And even if there were to be a beneficial place to put a motorcycle lane, I am sure the tax money would be enormous. I would consider it to be more beneficial to use tax dollars to help improve the nation's infrastructure/bridges to make them more safe, and to improve education, rather than aid in the convenience of the few. Of course, motorcycles do indeed use less gasoline, for the most part, compared to cars. However, they still invariably use gasoline. As well, a motorcycle lane might make some motorcyclists less prone to use helmets. Even though they would have a lane reserved for small vehicles, it could promote unsafe habits, such as not wearing a helmet. Even though it might be less likely to get into an accident with such a reserved lane, it is, however, still possible, inevitably. Perhaps it would be more beneficial to simply add more bicycle lanes, to aid is sustainability efforts. Of course, my opponent claims that small vehicles, including bicycles, would be a part of this motorcycle lane. However, I question the safety of the slower vehicles, such as bicycles, in a motorcycle lane. It seems to me to be quite dangerous to them. A mere bicycle lane would also cause less pollution (i. e. none that I can come up with, anyway) than motorcycles. As an additional point, a separate motorcycle lane would quite likely attract more motorcycles. More motorcycles likely means more noise pollution, which has the potential of negatively affecting nearby neighborhoods. Residents would therefore likely be weary of such a lane. I look forward to the remainder of the debate, Oboeman.