THEY WOULD BREAK THE CHAIN


i can still hear them saying.

After two days' worth of commentary here (and here) at TWM and four days' worth of (86) comments and commentary over at The Burgh Report, the rhetorical holy war between pro-bikers and pro-drivers (two-wheelers and four-wheelers? pro-chainers and no-choicers?) rages on.

This morning's Post-Gazette features two letters to the editor -- or are they just straw man arguments from people annoyed by being stuck at a red light? -- that raise the issue of bicyclists wantonly and repeatedly ignoring traffic laws on city streets. The first writer, Brendan O'Donnell of Shadyside, suggests half of what I proposed yesterday; he advocates license plates for the bikes, then adds the nice idea of applying all those fees to the creation of more bicycle lanes, though he stops short of proposing, as I do, that all road-riding cyclists be tested and licensed. The second writer, Tim Zenchak of Baldwin, simply argues for safety and equality -- two sensible, fundamentally American principles that you can bet some corners of the biking community's persecution complex wing are right now writing to protest.

It's fun to imagine what those same corners might do and think if they read the two most recent emails I've received on the subject. The first, from a regular reader of TWM -- we'll call him Mr. T. -- whose experiences, especially on his morning commute, lead him to a clear stance and a fairly hard-line approach:

The one thing you rarely read about, and it's one of the major problems, is bikes' inability to travel at a car's speed; hence, they shouldn't be on the road with cars.  I've been behind bikes on the Smithfield Street Bridge going ten miles per hour.  "Sharing" the road with a bike sometimes means having the bike dictate that I must travel at one-fifth the speed limit.

The other, from another regular reader of TWM -- we'll call him M.D. -- takes an even clearer, harder approach:

Bicyclists should just stay the fuck off the road. They don't pay fuel tax to build the road, so they don't have a right to use & inconvenience those who do. Additionally they cannot maintain reasonable speed limits on most roads, making them at worst a rolling hazard, and at best an irritation far exceeding their moral superiority. "Look at me... I'm saving the planet..." while simultaneously delaying and threatening the safety of tens or hundreds of my fellow citizens.

Don't get me wrong... I like bicycles as a form of transport. (In fact, I am in LOVE with women riding bicycles [as seen in the Netherlands.]) But there and in the Nordics or Japan, they actually provide dedicated bicycle lanes, which do not transfer the burden of bicycle riding onto non-bicycle riders.

I'm not saying I agree with these emailers. (I've already stated my willingness to share the road with licensed bikers on licensed bikes.) And I'm not saying I disagree with them either. (I do love women riding bicycles, even if I've never been to the Netherlands.) But I thought they were both interesting, and maybe even provocative, additions to a conversation that looks like it could continue to roll on for quite some time.

Posted: Sat - August 16, 2008 at 10:16 AM          

©