From: bfa@igc.apc.org (Bicycle Federation of America)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc
Subject: Re: Politics of Cycling Speed
Date: 18 Dec 92 04:20:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #R:cup.portal.com:71670:cdp:1702500020:000:3560
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!bfa    Dec 17 20:20:00 1992


Well, it's 11 pm and I really didn't have anything better to do, so I waded 
thru this thread... and waited, and waited. I thought Michael Smith was going
to say it, but not quite. Isn't the essence of this issue primarily one of the
perception of *risk*? I believe in the more or less "rational person" concept
that most people act in ways they perceive to have some rational basis... to
them. I've long believed that a certain amount of wrong-way riding is likely
very rational, like a two or three block spin along a high-speed, high volume
arterial on the "wrong" side rather that crossing the same highway twice. I
seem to remember doing such a thing as a kid...'cause it seemed to make a lot
of sense...'cause it seemed to reduce my perception of being at risk. Today,
when I ride, I make all sorts of decisions based on minimizing and managing
risk (actually I do the same thing as a pedestrian, a motor vehicle operator,
someone cutting the grass, moving weights around in the gym). The concept is
one of identify and anticipating situations that represent increased levels
of risk and taking action(s) to reduce or eliminate the risk. In come cases I
select an alternate route; in others I choose to make my left turn at an
intersection with a traffic signal. I choose not to ride at night on routes
that I will ride on during the day (that is, on some routes). 

Hey, we all know it is possible to get into a collision and/or to have a fall.
This is true no matter how good we are: a dog runs out from between parked cars 
and you go down; a taxi stops suddenly in front of you when you are looking
back to see if the left lane is clear to move into (my last crash), and so on.
It's this kind of thing, and acknowledgement of the fact that no matter how
good we are we are NOT in total control over what goes on out there that leads
many good, regular, careful folks to use helmets (and carry car insurance).

So, my point is that I think most of this discussion is about different percep-
tions of risk and various responses to perceived risks. I also believe that
different folks should respond differently BECAUSE they do have different
levels of ability. Some of those folks who think it's dangerous to ride in
traffic are right; it would be dangerous for THEM to ride in traffic, at least
it would knowing what they do (or don't) now. It is equally true that it is
apparently far less risky for other folks (the one who are out there doing it)
or we would have long ago exhausted the supply of these fool-hearty souls.

Final word: as people develop skills and knowledge about a subject they come
to enjoy a sense of confidence born of mastering something. I will assume that
at least some of you have "earned" permits to operate motor vehicles. I will
also bet that you started out scard s......... Perhaps unfortunately, you and
all the others got over this initial fear as you became more familiar with
what goes on and what to expect and what to do about it. And, if you're really
good, you've learned to anticipate what may be developing around you and to
adjust for it. It's pretty much the same thing on a bike with one big 
difference: you don't get away with many "fender-benders" on a bike -- the
margin of error is narrow and the consequences are usually harsh. I think that
warrants an extra margin of care. I think of it as risk management. That's 
probably nothing more than a consultant's work for "fear." Hey, what ever
happened to the notion of "healthy fear"? Enough; good night!

Bill Wilkinson, Bicycle Federation of America
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.soc