From: kipper@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Kip Ingram)
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.misc
Subject: Re: Punishment for the Driver!
Date: 21 Jan 1993 20:47:43 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: mickey.cc.utexas.edu

Well, I received an email reply to my first posting on this topic.  My reply to
him bounced, so I hope he won't mind if I post his message to me and my reply
to him here.  No flames intended; just wanted to get my reply to him.

Kip


Original transaction:

From vic@ccs-master Thu Jan 21 13:20:00 1993
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 14:17:47 EST
From: vic@ccs-master@ccs-master (Victor Lee)
To: kipper@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Kip Ingram)
Subject: Re: Punishment for the Driver!

In article <1jmi26INNt1a@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu> you write:
>
> The real solution here is bike lanes and bike paths.  One would think that in
> this age of environmental awareness that at the very least a good bike *lane*
> that would take the bikes out of the traffic would be feasible in most places,
> and certainly where any new roads are going in.
>
> Anyway, I understand the monetary issues associated with this.  But I just don
't
> ride my bike in heavy traffic areas; I get to the well-shouldered highway just
> as quickly as I can and do my training.  There's just no way we're going to
> change the attitude of the entire driving public.  There are too many of them
> and too few of us.  And I'm too interested in making sure that my children
> (the first is due July 28!) have an intact father to risk my life making some
> kind of stupid political point.
>
> Kip Ingram
> kipper@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu

Bike lanes and bike paths are not the solution. As many have already pointed out
 that
one is 2.6 times more likely to have an accident on these than on a road way.
What we really need are bicycle streets and roads.  That is we should
take over existing streets and roads and give the bike top priority on them.  Ca
r that
make use of these streets would be prevented from travelling faster than a bicyc
le.
    This trend is happening in the Netherlands under the program called TEMPO 30
 where
streets are modified so that cars are confind to speeds of 30 kph. ( about 18 mp
h )
    For the sake of your children do not give up without a fight just because th
e motorists
out number us cyclists.  If the cause is right, just and honorable then it is wo
rth fighting
for regardless of the odds.  Join an advocacy group or start an advocacy group.
 There
are many people in this world that share the same frustrations.
      Victor Lee, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada

& reply
To: vic@ccs-master@ccs-master
Subject: Re: Punishment for the Driver!

Look, I would like nothing better than to have the roadways all to myself.  But
let's look at this on a "who pays, who benefits" basis.  Bikers comprise a very
small portion of the traveling public.  It makes no sense, and is quite unjust m
to ask *all* citizens to pay for roads and then hand them over to bikers.  We
live in a democracy, and we bikers are a distinct minority.  We don't get to
have others pay our way for us.  The cause is not right, just, or honorable;
what we seek is nothing less than to deny the majority of the American public
the right to use the roadways that they paid for in the way that they choose
(and, incidentally, in the manner they *expected* to be able to use them when
they made the decision to pay for them).  No, that's just not the way a just
democratic system works.

By the way, if we cyclists have the right to deny motorists use of the roads,
then they must have the right to deny us that right.  Which do you think is more
likely to happen?

I'm on the bikers side, but let's get real here.
Kip

------------ End of transcribed message

I think it's pretty clear who wrote what here.  Sorry if it causes any
confusion.

Kip