From: His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock on
On Aug 5, 7:59 am, Kenneth O'Brien <kob22...(a)mac.com> wrote:

> > I do not care about training cyclists looking for fun, performance or
> > whatever on a bike. They don't care about others either. That's a
> > hobby. The revolution is for the SUB (Sport Utility Bike)
>
> OK. But the commuting share isn't at whatever it is because 1 minus that number fraction of the public wouldn't DARE ride their bike on the road. There is a million and one things that add up to commute share.
>
> Ken

Go around, and the reasons you will most likely find are:

1- It's too dangerous: FEAR (it may be a perception, but it's strong
enough to send most cyclists onto the sidewalks, thus rendering
cycling ineffective except for immigrant workers who can't afford a
car)

2- TOO FAR: You may combine it with public transportation or get
another job or move.

3- I WILL SWEAT: True, but then showers at work may be provided. Or
maybe you sweat at work anyway.

Another reason which you will seldom find, but which is very real is:
"What will happen if I get hurt in a bicycle accident --even if I
fall-- and the medical system sucks and my family depends on me?"

A deeper reason is the average sheep is not prepared to challenge the
herd, which in turn receives the messages from the Media: "You need an
SUV to be important, etc."

-------------------------------------------------------------

"TAKE THE LANE, TAKE THE LANE, TAKE THE LANE"

http://webspawner.com/users/BIKEFORPEACE
From: Derek C on
On Aug 8, 2:38 pm, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
Movement of Tantra-Hammock" <comandante.ban...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 5, 7:59 am, Kenneth O'Brien <kob22...(a)mac.com> wrote:
>
> > > I do not care about training cyclists looking for fun, performance or
> > > whatever on a bike. They don't care about others either. That's a
> > > hobby. The revolution is for the SUB (Sport Utility Bike)
>
> > OK. But the commuting share isn't at whatever it is because 1 minus that number fraction of the public wouldn't DARE ride their bike on the road.  There is a million and one things that add up to commute share.
>
> > Ken
>
> Go around, and the reasons you will most likely find are:
>
> 1- It's too dangerous: FEAR (it may be a perception, but it's strong
> enough to send most cyclists onto the sidewalks, thus rendering
> cycling ineffective except for immigrant workers who can't afford a
> car)
>
> 2- TOO FAR: You may combine it with public transportation or get
> another job or move.
>
> 3- I WILL SWEAT: True, but then showers at work may be provided. Or
> maybe you sweat at work anyway.
>
> Another reason which you will seldom find, but which is very real is:
> "What will happen if I get hurt in a bicycle accident --even if I
> fall-- and the medical system sucks and my family depends on me?"
>
> A deeper reason is the average sheep is not prepared to challenge the
> herd, which in turn receives the messages from the Media: "You need an
> SUV to be important, etc."
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------

I used to commute by bike from the South-West London suburbs to
central London where I worked at the time. I gave up when I was
knocked off my bike by a small truck. Cycling was cheap and kept me
fit, but I decided that I would rather pay the railway company to get
me there in one piece. I still had to do some walking at both ends,
which kept me reasonably fit. The other disadvantages you mention also
applied Many train and bus operators will not allow you to take a
conventional bike on board in the rush hour and folding bikes are
fiddly, heavier and slower.

Derek C

Derek C
From: His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock on
On Aug 8, 6:55 am, Derek C <del.copel...(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> On Aug 8, 2:38 pm, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
> Movement of Tantra-Hammock" <comandante.ban...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 5, 7:59 am, Kenneth O'Brien <kob22...(a)mac.com> wrote:
>
> > > > I do not care about training cyclists looking for fun, performance or
> > > > whatever on a bike. They don't care about others either. That's a
> > > > hobby. The revolution is for the SUB (Sport Utility Bike)
>
> > > OK. But the commuting share isn't at whatever it is because 1 minus that number fraction of the public wouldn't DARE ride their bike on the road..  There is a million and one things that add up to commute share.
>
> > > Ken
>
> > Go around, and the reasons you will most likely find are:
>
> > 1- It's too dangerous: FEAR (it may be a perception, but it's strong
> > enough to send most cyclists onto the sidewalks, thus rendering
> > cycling ineffective except for immigrant workers who can't afford a
> > car)
>
> > 2- TOO FAR: You may combine it with public transportation or get
> > another job or move.
>
> > 3- I WILL SWEAT: True, but then showers at work may be provided. Or
> > maybe you sweat at work anyway.
>
> > Another reason which you will seldom find, but which is very real is:
> > "What will happen if I get hurt in a bicycle accident --even if I
> > fall-- and the medical system sucks and my family depends on me?"
>
> > A deeper reason is the average sheep is not prepared to challenge the
> > herd, which in turn receives the messages from the Media: "You need an
> > SUV to be important, etc."
>
> > -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I used to commute by bike from the South-West London suburbs to
> central London where I worked at the time. I gave up when I was
> knocked off my bike by a small truck. Cycling was cheap and kept me
> fit, but I decided that I would rather pay the railway company to get
> me there in one piece. I still had to do some walking at both ends,
> which kept me reasonably fit. The other disadvantages you mention also
> applied Many train and bus operators will not allow you to take a
> conventional bike on board in the rush hour and folding bikes are
> fiddly, heavier and slower.
>
> Derek C
>
> Derek C

Thank you. Do you think the new opening of the Velib may change many
people's minds? I think it will here in Miami Beach, adding safety in
numbers.
From: Derek C on
On Aug 8, 3:06 pm, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
Movement of Tantra-Hammock" <comandante.ban...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 8, 6:55 am, Derek C <del.copel...(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 8, 2:38 pm, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
> > Movement of Tantra-Hammock" <comandante.ban...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 5, 7:59 am, Kenneth O'Brien <kob22...(a)mac.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > I do not care about training cyclists looking for fun, performance or
> > > > > whatever on a bike. They don't care about others either. That's a
> > > > > hobby. The revolution is for the SUB (Sport Utility Bike)
>
> > > > OK. But the commuting share isn't at whatever it is because 1 minus that number fraction of the public wouldn't DARE ride their bike on the road.  There is a million and one things that add up to commute share.
>
> > > > Ken
>
> > > Go around, and the reasons you will most likely find are:
>
> > > 1- It's too dangerous: FEAR (it may be a perception, but it's strong
> > > enough to send most cyclists onto the sidewalks, thus rendering
> > > cycling ineffective except for immigrant workers who can't afford a
> > > car)
>
> > > 2- TOO FAR: You may combine it with public transportation or get
> > > another job or move.
>
> > > 3- I WILL SWEAT: True, but then showers at work may be provided. Or
> > > maybe you sweat at work anyway.
>
> > > Another reason which you will seldom find, but which is very real is:
> > > "What will happen if I get hurt in a bicycle accident --even if I
> > > fall-- and the medical system sucks and my family depends on me?"
>
> > > A deeper reason is the average sheep is not prepared to challenge the
> > > herd, which in turn receives the messages from the Media: "You need an
> > > SUV to be important, etc."
>
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > I used to commute by bike from the South-West London suburbs to
> > central London where I worked at the time. I gave up when I was
> > knocked off my bike by a small truck. Cycling was cheap and kept me
> > fit, but I decided that I would rather pay the railway company to get
> > me there in one piece. I still had to do some walking at both ends,
> > which kept me reasonably fit. The other disadvantages you mention also
> > applied Many train and bus operators will not allow you to take a
> > conventional bike on board in the rush hour and folding bikes are
> > fiddly, heavier and slower.
>
> > Derek C
>
>
> Thank you. Do you think the new opening of the Velib may change many
> people's minds? I think it will here in Miami Beach, adding safety in
> numbers.- Hide quoted text -
>

I would use decent marked cycle paths, separated from the main road,
if they where available. Unfortunately the psycholists would rather
die (literally) than use them, because they would no longer be able to
ride in the 'primary position' and hold up the drivers of motor
vehicles.

Derek C

From: His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the Movement of Tantra-Hammock on
On Aug 8, 9:29 am, Derek C <del.copel...(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> On Aug 8, 3:06 pm, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
> Movement of Tantra-Hammock" <comandante.ban...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 8, 6:55 am, Derek C <del.copel...(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 8, 2:38 pm, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, Creator of the
> > > Movement of Tantra-Hammock" <comandante.ban...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Aug 5, 7:59 am, Kenneth O'Brien <kob22...(a)mac.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I do not care about training cyclists looking for fun, performance or
> > > > > > whatever on a bike. They don't care about others either. That's a
> > > > > > hobby. The revolution is for the SUB (Sport Utility Bike)
>
> > > > > OK. But the commuting share isn't at whatever it is because 1 minus that number fraction of the public wouldn't DARE ride their bike on the road.  There is a million and one things that add up to commute share.
>
> > > > > Ken
>
> > > > Go around, and the reasons you will most likely find are:
>
> > > > 1- It's too dangerous: FEAR (it may be a perception, but it's strong
> > > > enough to send most cyclists onto the sidewalks, thus rendering
> > > > cycling ineffective except for immigrant workers who can't afford a
> > > > car)
>
> > > > 2- TOO FAR: You may combine it with public transportation or get
> > > > another job or move.
>
> > > > 3- I WILL SWEAT: True, but then showers at work may be provided. Or
> > > > maybe you sweat at work anyway.
>
> > > > Another reason which you will seldom find, but which is very real is:
> > > > "What will happen if I get hurt in a bicycle accident --even if I
> > > > fall-- and the medical system sucks and my family depends on me?"
>
> > > > A deeper reason is the average sheep is not prepared to challenge the
> > > > herd, which in turn receives the messages from the Media: "You need an
> > > > SUV to be important, etc."
>
> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > > I used to commute by bike from the South-West London suburbs to
> > > central London where I worked at the time. I gave up when I was
> > > knocked off my bike by a small truck. Cycling was cheap and kept me
> > > fit, but I decided that I would rather pay the railway company to get
> > > me there in one piece. I still had to do some walking at both ends,
> > > which kept me reasonably fit. The other disadvantages you mention also
> > > applied Many train and bus operators will not allow you to take a
> > > conventional bike on board in the rush hour and folding bikes are
> > > fiddly, heavier and slower.
>
> > > Derek C
>
> > Thank you. Do you think the new opening of the Velib may change many
> > people's minds? I think it will here in Miami Beach, adding safety in
> > numbers.- Hide quoted text -
>
> I would use decent marked cycle paths, separated from the main road,
> if they where available. Unfortunately the psycholists would rather
> die (literally) than use them, because they would no longer be able to
> ride in the 'primary position' and hold up the drivers of motor
> vehicles.
>
> Derek C

Right, such is the fate of bike facilities when money gets dumped in
war. But whatever we got here (a mixed path) is so wasteful and poorly
designed that it's better designed for the people walking dogs.

I'm for both at this point: TAKE THE LANE for the adventurous, and
BIKE PATHS for the peace of mind. Dedicated bike lanes don't take you
where you need to go and are not connected.