Bike Outreach Opportunities.

[dasgeh]

@dkel 96400 wrote:

WABA (and probably everyone on this forum) would agree that scofflaw cyclists do need to be educated.

I don’t agree that scofflaws need to be educated. Cyclists don’t run stop signs because they don’t think stop signs mean stop. They know that. They just don’t think it’s worth stopping. For example, I ride the Custis daily, and often see forum members and friends. We start chatting at the IoD and hang out until we hit the light at Nash, which is always red. I stop. They roll on. It’s not like they don’t know what red lights mean. It’s not like they haven’t read arguments here and other places about why we should stop. They know I stopped at all reds and have real reasons why. But they roll on through.

So no, I don’t think people running stop signs need education. I think they need laws and infrastructure that recognize the differences between bikes and cars/pedestrians (which most of the current laws and infrastructure were designed for).

[Dirt]

Thanks for the lively discussion. It was interesting to read. I’m happy that y’all are so passionate about your cycling.

[dkel]

@dasgeh 96407 wrote:

I don’t agree that scofflaws need to be educated. Cyclists don’t run stop signs because they don’t think stop signs mean stop. They know that. They just don’t think it’s worth stopping. For example, I ride the Custis daily, and often see forum members and friends. We start chatting at the IoD and hang out until we hit the light at Nash, which is always red. I stop. They roll on. It’s not like they don’t know what red lights mean. It’s not like they haven’t read arguments here and other places about why we should stop. They know I stopped at all reds and have real reasons why. But they roll on through.

So no, I don’t think people running stop signs need education. I think they need laws and infrastructure that recognize the differences between bikes and cars/pedestrians (which most of the current laws and infrastructure were designed for).

By education, I don’t mean education as to what the laws are, I mean education as to why it’s important to abide by those laws. As you are someone who stops at red lights, I can only assume that you place some importance on those laws, and on following them. In contrast, cyclists of the scofflaw variety seem immediately to assume that the laws no longer apply to them when they get on their bikes, and no longer follow them. Even if their reasons are valid (and I’ll admit I don’t always stop at stop signs myself, because I do believe there are valid reasons not to), some of the scofflaws are really bad (just look at the “missed connection” thread for examples). It seems to me that this is why drivers resent such cyclists, because it projects a smug, deserving attitude (much like the person who drives on the shoulder of the highway to bypass all the traffic). I absolutely agree with you that we “need laws and infrastructure that recognize the differences between bikes and cars/pedestrians.” The only point I’m trying to make is that this WABA initiative is a positive step along a path toward repairing the damaged relationship between cyclists and non-cyclists, and is thereby moving us all towards a place where we can realize better laws and infrastructure for everyone. There is no hole-in-one initiative that WABA should be undertaking instead of this to achieve that goal.

[Dirt]

Thanks dkel! Have a good evening.

[Dirt]

@cvcalhoun 91706 wrote:

And some day, maybe “suburbs” will even include Maryland?

Sorry that I missed this comment earlier, cvcalhoun. My time on the forum is very limited these days and stuff tends to fall through the cracks.

I work in Maryland every month. I haven’t included those activities here because the timing hasn’t been as easy for me to include volunteers. If you’re interested in doing some outreach with us, please send me a private message and I can loop you in.

Best wishes,

Pete

[lordofthemark]

@dkel 96397 wrote:

I’m surprised this WABA initiative is getting such a bad rap. How many threads have there been on this forum about the public’s perception that cyclists are scofflaws? One week after sharrows appeared in Falls Church City, a letter to the Editor of the Falls Church paper was published, stating that sharrows will give cyclists a sense of entitlement and will thereby increase the incidence of illegal cycling behavior. The writer concluded that local law enforcement should either crack down on cyclists, or remove the sharrows. We have an image problem, folks! I can appreciate that this initiative may not be the best use of WABA time and resources at this moment, given the other worthy issues mentioned in this thread. Personally, I think advocating for Idaho stops would be preferable to advocating full stops. But if WABA has an interest in improving cyclists’ image in the region, this initiative is a decent way to go about it. You catch more flies with honey than vinegar, and right now, I think we should be concerned with the lack of support we get from non-cyclists on the road and in the legislative process.

In the ideal world, WABA would educate how to do a proper, safe, Idaho stop, and an activity like this would remind people to do just that. I think its obvious why WABA cannot publicly do that. We can do that however, on the forum and IRL. My hat is off to all those who model correct safe Idaho stops.

[lordofthemark]

@mstone 96401 wrote:

What’s the endgame? Do you think that WABAs initiative will get compliance up to 100%? If not, what level of compliance will make the haters stop hating?

I honestly believe we have problems with SOME people who, while biased by windshield perspective, are not haters and are certainly not on the “wrong” side of the “culture wars”. I do not know what level of compliance will win those people over, but I think its short of 100%.

[lordofthemark]

@dasgeh 96407 wrote:

I don’t agree that scofflaws need to be educated. Cyclists don’t run stop signs because they don’t think stop signs mean stop. They know that.

What they may NOT all know is that A. Old Town is a location where stop sign running has created particular issues B. Its a place with a very high numnber of often clueless peds, so it presents particular safety issues C. Its a place where enforcement against cyclists happens from time to time, so following the law may be particularly in their interest here.

Also I am not at all sure everyone knows that bikes are required to stop at stops. For someone new to riding, or returning to riding for the first time since childhood, who has not joined a forum or taken a class or read articles on biking in the press, and just learned what to do by watching others, it would be pretty hard to figure out that Idaho stops are not legal around here. Though of course in this particular stretch the “bikes must stop at stop signs” sign as you come off the trail should help.

[lordofthemark]

@mstone 96404 wrote:

Go poke around in AAA’s lobbying wing. You’ll find some nice platitudes about safety, and some specific initiatives around specific, limited things like drunk driving, seat belts, aggressive driving, etc.

When the issue of building more roads comes up, everyone from the highway building industry to suburban developers lobby. On safety the insurance institute for highway safety is active, police orgs, MADD, and an entire agency of USDOT. (And to learn how to drive, there are loads of private driving schools, plus drivers ed, and DMV for testing) Then there are the manufacturers, and the UAW. The entire constellation of lobbyists on issues related to autos dwarfs the “all powerful” bike lobby, which necessarily has to wear several hats.

[dasgeh]

@dkel 96410 wrote:

By education, I don’t mean education as to what the laws are, I mean education as to why it’s important to abide by those laws. As you are someone who stops at red lights, I can only assume that you place some importance on those laws, and on following them. In contrast, cyclists of the scofflaw variety seem immediately to assume that the laws no longer apply to them when they get on their bikes, and no longer follow them. Even if their reasons are valid (and I’ll admit I don’t always stop at stop signs myself, because I do believe there are valid reasons not to), some of the scofflaws are really bad (just look at the “missed connection” thread for examples).

This is a fair point – true “education” would be one thing. But that’s not what they’re doing. They’re standing at a stop sign with a (very cute, BTW) sign. That’s not “education” in the sense that you’re talking about. If they’re just going to ride, or stand around with cute signs, then I have LOTS of other rides (kidical mass) and signs (ride a kid to ice cream this weekend!) that I think should take priority over this obviously controversial issue.

@dkel 96410 wrote:

It seems to me that this is why drivers resent such cyclists, because it projects a smug, deserving attitude (much like the person who drives on the shoulder of the highway to bypass all the traffic). I absolutely agree with you that we “need laws and infrastructure that recognize the differences between bikes and cars/pedestrians.” The only point I’m trying to make is that this WABA initiative is a positive step along a path toward repairing the damaged relationship between cyclists and non-cyclists, and is thereby moving us all towards a place where we can realize better laws and infrastructure for everyone. There is no hole-in-one initiative that WABA should be undertaking instead of this to achieve that goal.

I don’t see the campaign as an unambiguously positive step. (I started typing some stuff, but realized that the points have already been made).

@dkel 96410 wrote:

There is no hole-in-one initiative that WABA should be undertaking instead of this to achieve that goal.

Changing the face of cycling would be just that initiative. If decision makers and drivers thought of two smiling kids on the front of a bakfiets, or the adorable sleeping toddler bobbing her head in a front seat, or their friend, or their mom, or their Grandpa, when they think about biking (whether it be in making decisions about infrastructure, policy and enforcement, or deciding how to react as they see a bike on the road), I honestly think that would help in “repairing the damaged relationship between cyclists and non-cyclists, and is thereby moving us all towards a place where we can realize better laws and infrastructure for everyone.”

[dkel]

@dkel 96410 wrote:

There is no hole-in-one initiative that WABA should be undertaking instead of this to achieve that goal.

@dasgeh 96455 wrote:

Changing the face of cycling would be just that initiative. If decision makers and drivers thought of two smiling kids on the front of a bakfiets, or the adorable sleeping toddler bobbing her head in a front seat, or their friend, or their mom, or their Grandpa, when they think about biking (whether it be in making decisions about infrastructure, policy and enforcement, or deciding how to react as they see a bike on the road), I honestly think that would help in “repairing the damaged relationship between cyclists and non-cyclists, and is thereby moving us all towards a place where we can realize better laws and infrastructure for everyone.”

I stand corrected. A WABA initiative supporting Kidical Mass would solve all of cycling’s problems.

Ugh. Sorry. I’m having a hard time continuing to take this argument seriously, and I’m having a very hard time maintaining a positive attitude about it. I support the current initiative; others don’t. WSGFABR.

[rcannon100]

I’m not second guessing how WABA uses their resources. They are a small organization. I think things like what DIRT is doing are simply fantastic! And if I think something else should be done, pretty much, I am going to step up to the plate and do it (and many many members of this forum are doing the same). It takes a village to raise a cyclists or something like that. The idea that Dirt and Nellie and many others are out there with these creative campaigns – tip of the hat to you – and if you want a campaign in your hood – volunteer to be a bicycle ambassador and make it happen. Every time I see these posts – the reaction, in the words of our patron saint – is Rock On.

Thanks Dirt for your hard work. You Rock!

[Author]

Posts