Is Road Riding Worth the Risk?

[ImaCynic]

https://www.outsideonline.com/2267126/road-riding-worth-risk

Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk

[Subby]

That was tough to read. Huge respect for anyone who gets on their bike and goes back out after being hit by a car. The mental hurdle is pretty incredible.

[Brendan von Buckingham]

Yes.

[secstate]

What’s interesting about this story is that the writer wasn’t even doing what most of us consider to be “road riding.” He was in a wide shoulder or bike lane, seemingly on a road with a relatively low speed limit, and on it for only a half mile between stretches of dirt. On the rare occasions that I head out in the countryside on my bike in the U.S., it’s on roads with limits of 55+ and narrow or no shoulder. I’ve pretty much decided to avoid that style of riding. The countryside is beautiful but I just can’t relax enough to enjoy those rides. Ironically the road riding was substantially better in India, where there are country roads where traffic goes slow. Almost everything in the U.S. is fast, fast, fast.

[Bob James]

Seems as if were unsafe anywhere. Just read an article about the potential danger on riding trails with people stringing a line or barbed wire across the trail to harm unsuspecting riders.

[Steve O]

Articles like this create this awful dilemma in my mind. If everyone chose to avoid riding on roads, then we can be absolutely certain that nothing will ever change. But OTOH, it’s senseless to suggest to anyone that they should put themselves at risk. I don’t know the answer.

[sjclaeys]

My opinion is that the article highlights why the fixation with building bicycle-specific physical infrastructure is so misplaced. The focus needs to be changing the institutional infrastructure, like police who fail to enforce the law against drivers and assume the cyclist is almost always at fault. That is a lot harder to do than coming up with elaborate plans and lobbying for money to pay for them, but IMHO will have the greatest benefit in the long run. Instead of only making roads with PBLs safe for everyone, let’s make all roads safe for everyone.

[lordofthemark]

@sjclaeys 189961 wrote:

My opinion is that the article highlights why the fixation with building bicycle-specific physical infrastructure is so misplaced. The focus needs to be changing the institutional infrastructure, like police who fail to enforce the law against drivers and assume the cyclist is almost always at fault. That is a lot harder to do than coming up with elaborate plans and lobbying for money to pay for them, but IMHO will have the greatest benefit in the long run. Instead of only making roads with PBLs safe for everyone, let’s make all roads safe for everyone.

none of the bike advocacy orgs in the region that I know of is focusing only on PBLs and ignoring the range of enforcement, legal, and other policy issues.

[Judd]

@lordofthemark 189962 wrote:

none of the bike advocacy orgs in the region that I know of is focusing only on PBLs and ignoring the range of enforcement, legal, and other policy issues.

WABA has made a deliberate decision to not focus on enforcement versus advocating for infrastructure changes.

[lordofthemark]

@Judd 189963 wrote:

WABA has made a deliberate decision to not focus on enforcement versus advocating for infrastructure changes.

I was thinking of DC BAC, Alex BPAC, etc. It is my understanding that WABA supports local VZ plans that include enforcement and many other policy changes. There are of course lots of policy and legal questions aside from just lobbying about the police.

[ginacico]

This article nailed it.

It’s SO easy (and frankly a whole lot more fun) to be “comfortable among cars.” Until one hits you, erasing the very convenient illusion that drivers value your life and will avoid a crash.

I see it as a change of perception more than a hurdle to overcome. You can do everything safely and defensively, but the reality is many drivers are distracted, impatient, angry and sometimes violent. It’s hard to unsee that inhumanity, and perfectly reasonable to stay clear of them. This week has been a tough reminder.

You can tweak the variables in the algebra — systematic enforcement and driver liability, protected bike infrastructure, etc — but ultimately the risk calculation has to reflect what you think your life is worth.

@Judd 189963 wrote:

WABA has made a deliberate decision to not focus on enforcement versus advocating for infrastructure changes.

If so, that’s a mistake.

[sjclaeys]

@lordofthemark 189962 wrote:

none of the bike advocacy orgs in the region that I know of is focusing only on PBLs and ignoring the range of enforcement, legal, and other policy issues.

I think that an objective examination of local bike advocacy organizations’ activities would show that they are mostly focused on promoting bicycle-specific physical infrastructure. Look at the projects they focus on, the items on their meeting agendas, and what they advocate the cycling community to engage in.
Also, by institutional infrastructure, I don’t just mean law enforcement agencies. This would also include changing the agencies that conduct and oversee roadwork to always ensure that a safe and reasonable accommodation is made for cyclists and pedestrians. Another institutional infrastructure change would behaving an ombuds-person who has authority to advocate for vulnerable road users with the local government. This would be different from agencies like BikeArlington that have a limited mission of promoting cycling (which they do very well).

[Guus]

@sjclaeys 189971 wrote:

I think that an objective examination of local bike advocacy organizations’ activities would show that they are mostly focused on promoting bicycle-specific physical infrastructure. Look at the projects they focus on, the items on their meeting agendas, and what they advocate the cycling community to engage in.
Also, by institutional infrastructure, I don’t just mean law enforcement agencies. This would also include changing the agencies that conduct and oversee roadwork to always ensure that a safe and reasonable accommodation is made for cyclists and pedestrians. Another institutional infrastructure change would behaving an ombuds-person who has authority to advocate for vulnerable road users with the local government. This would be different from agencies like BikeArlington that have a limited mission of promoting cycling (which they do very well).

We have to start somewhere though, right? Physical infrastructure is not easy to obtain — but changes in institutional infrastructure are much harder. To get changes in institutional infrastructure, “the public” or “the voters” will need to consistently push for changes over very long time-lines. To get a critical mass of people that push for that, infrastructure is an crucial first step.

[Judd]

@ginacico 189969 wrote:

If so, that’s a mistake.

It’s mostly based around equity issues, but it’s a conversation that’s best left for in person (which I hope to have with you cause I don’t see you enough these days).

[lordofthemark]

@sjclaeys 189971 wrote:

I think that an objective examination of local bike advocacy organizations’ activities would show that they are mostly focused on promoting bicycle-specific physical infrastructure. Look at the projects they focus on, the items on their meeting agendas, and what they advocate the cycling community to engage in.

I attend meetings of Alexandria BPAC every month, and I can state with certainty that you are incorrect. We spend time on the police report, on discussing city policy issues, Vision Zero (which includes enforcement, education, and culture change in city agencies). We discuss speed limits, no right on red, etc. We even spend time on data and data collection efforts, how police record crashes in their database, etc. Our infrastructure discussions include sidewalks, curb cuts, traffic calming where it mostly is for pedestrians, etc, etc. We have at least three members now who never or rarely ride bikes.

We DO ask the bike community to get involved on behalf of complete streets projects that often include bike lanes as ONE ELEMENT. We also asked people to get involved to support the adoption of VZ, which as I noted, as plenty of non infra components, and is oriented towards peds as much as riders.

Aside from lobbying, we spend time on education and encouragement efforts, such as supporting bike education in Alexandria schools, and holding bike rodeos for kids.

If you don’t like what Arlington BAC spends it time on, I suggest attending meetings, and volunteering your own time on other activities. I would be surprised if they turn you down.

This generalization about the regional bike advocacy community is not helpful, IMO.

[Author]

Posts