Comments on: Cyclists – Pedestrians or Vehicle?

By: Tim

Tim — Fri, 04 Jan 2013 12:24:33 +0000

Of course MrHappyCyclist is correct.

But at the same time we can’t be expected to spend sparse taxpayers money on specific infrastructure for modes of transport if they aren’t popular enough; very few people would argue for segregated lanes just for segways, for instance.

So is cycling currently popular enough to justify spending money on high-quality subjectively safe cycle networks? This is the wrong question. When deciding whether to put a door in a wall you don’t ask how many people are currently walking through the wall. So how many people would cycle? Only one way to really find out, but there are many examples of how much people enjoy cycling when they have an opportunity to do it without the traffic (center parcs, skyrides, etc).

And of course there are other reasons for wanting to incentivise cycling (public health, environment, etc).

And actually, infrastructure which works well for cycling also works well for some other modes of transport – importantly mobility scooters ( http://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2012/12/06/who-else-benefits-from-the-dutch-cycling-infrastructure/ ), and maybe even the odd segway.

And then

By: Gerry

Gerry — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 14:13:06 +0000

“Yet, non-cyclists probably perceive things in a different light and are more likely to view them as just another vehicle on the road”, so why then do some motorists shout at us to “get in the pavement?”.
Yes we are vehicles on the road so please give us space.

By: Brock

Brock — Sat, 11 Aug 2012 05:10:14 +0000

Well.. I think it’s more like asking how you classify a goat in a sheep and horse gymkhana. You could force the goat to run with the sheep but he’d be slowed greatly by the confused fluffy herding woolly heads. If you make him compete with the horses he may get kicked by an excitable jittery hoof flinging equine giant.
Perhaps there should be a special goat lane to protect the him from the cantering clip-clopper who just feels that the goat is in his way, or maybe horses should be whispered to more often until it gets through to their scatty brains that goats are small and vulnerable but deserve to be in the field because they go just as far but eat less grass and leave more room for the sheep to enjoy…..

By: jbg

jbg — Fri, 10 Aug 2012 22:14:20 +0000

This gets to the crux of a lot of debates about cycling. As a cyclist, I enjoy taking the best of both worlds – riding quickly with traffic, but being more pragmatic about traffic lights than motorised traffic.

The statistics on motorbikes need unpacking a bit. Motorcyclists are disporportionately young, risk-taking men – a demographic at high risk irrespective of how they travel. Precisely because motorbikes are dangerous, they are more likely to be used by risk-takers. If you ban motorbikes, I’ll wager car deaths will rise sharply. Similarly, the statistics on pedestrian casualties are distorted – many fatalities are young children, or the elderly and infirm.

That said, you’re absolutely right to start with the data. The debate is framed too much by subjective impressions. People feel threatened by bicycles, which appear to invade personal space despite statistical irrelevance in terms of actual risk. But pedestrians feel that bikes are especially dangerous – witness hysteria about red light jumping. An interesting perspective is provided by the US, where there are vitriolic discussions of the dangers posed by ‘jaywalkers’ – or pedestrians, as we would call them.

By: MrHappyCyclist

MrHappyCyclist — Fri, 10 Aug 2012 21:40:47 +0000

A bicycle is not a pedestrian, and it is not a motor vehicle, it is a bicycle. This is like trying to argue about whether a goat is a sheep or a horse.