Article on kids' safety - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

02-19-2004, 07:45 PM

Here's an interesting article, vaguely related to the recent "Young
Cyclist Killed" thread. Cycling is only part of it, of course, but it's
in there. Note the bit about neighborhood design, near the end.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

--
Frank Krygowski [To reply, omit what's between "at" and "cc"]

02-19-2004, 09:19 PM

>Here's an interesting article, vaguely related to the recent "Young
>Cyclist Killed" thread. Cycling is only part of it, of course, but
>it's in there. Note the bit about neighborhood design, near the end.

It wasn't considered unusual when I was a kid to be outdoors for
most of a vacation day, ranging around and basically doing whatever.

But we did know that what we did had consequences, and we were
regularly reminded by our WWII era parents (who all knew each other)
that if we got in trouble there would be consequences.

There weren't many TVs, and mostly no air conditioning, so unless
you were a reader there wasn't any alternative to the great outdoors.

The question that has to be asked (in the context of the article) is
does the bemoaned lifestyle derive from a failure of parental ideology
or simply the fact that the world has changed.

I'd argue that the world has changed, significantly.

I have to say that my neice and nephew have little opportunity for
what I would consider normal play in the outdoors, they are well
behaved and intelligent but not adventurous.

Somewhat withdrawn, very trusting of adults in their immediate family,
and intensely technical.

But not innovative risk takers.

--

_______________________ALL AMIGA IN MY MIND_______________________
------------------"Buddy Holly, the Texas Elvis"------------------
__________306.350.357.38>>cwhitman@texastwr.utaust in.edu__________

02-19-2004, 09:19 PM

>Here's an interesting article, vaguely related to the recent "Young
>Cyclist Killed" thread. Cycling is only part of it, of course, but
>it's in there. Note the bit about neighborhood design, near the end.

It wasn't considered unusual when I was a kid to be outdoors for
most of a vacation day, ranging around and basically doing whatever.

But we did know that what we did had consequences, and we were
regularly reminded by our WWII era parents (who all knew each other)
that if we got in trouble there would be consequences.

There weren't many TVs, and mostly no air conditioning, so unless
you were a reader there wasn't any alternative to the great outdoors.

The question that has to be asked (in the context of the article) is
does the bemoaned lifestyle derive from a failure of parental ideology
or simply the fact that the world has changed.

I'd argue that the world has changed, significantly.

I have to say that my neice and nephew have little opportunity for
what I would consider normal play in the outdoors, they are well
behaved and intelligent but not adventurous.

Somewhat withdrawn, very trusting of adults in their immediate family,
and intensely technical.

But not innovative risk takers.

--

_______________________ALL AMIGA IN MY MIND_______________________
------------------"Buddy Holly, the Texas Elvis"------------------
__________306.350.357.38>>cwhitman@texastwr.utaust in.edu__________

02-19-2004, 09:53 PM

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 00:19:39 -0500, "Eric S. Sande" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:

>>Here's an interesting article, vaguely related to the recent "Young
>>Cyclist Killed" thread. Cycling is only part of it, of course, but
>>it's in there. Note the bit about neighborhood design, near the end.
>
>It wasn't considered unusual when I was a kid to be outdoors for
>most of a vacation day, ranging around and basically doing whatever.
>
>But we did know that what we did had consequences, and we were
>regularly reminded by our WWII era parents (who all knew each other)
>that if we got in trouble there would be consequences.
>
>There weren't many TVs, and mostly no air conditioning, so unless
>you were a reader there wasn't any alternative to the great outdoors.
>
>The question that has to be asked (in the context of the article) is
>does the bemoaned lifestyle derive from a failure of parental ideology
>or simply the fact that the world has changed.
>
>I'd argue that the world has changed, significantly.

Birthrates have fallen in the first world, as well, which boils down
to much fewer kids on the block. It's tough to get a pickup game of
baseball started.

I'm routinely surprised at how much freedom I used to have as compared
to my younger brothers.

When I was little, we lived in a nice neighbourhood of Tegucigalpa, in
Honduras, and I and the neighbourhood kids would go riding our bikes
around and generally hang out. We'd ride our bikes in construction
sites--best time was when they'd dug foundations but hadn't put in the
forms for pouring yet. This is where I first learned how to descend a
very steep slope--after crashing a few times. No helmets in those
days, of course.

My younger brothers have grown up in the States, and something has
changed. My mother and father, who were quite happy to let me go and
play with the neighborhood kids and go riding my bike wherever, are
extremely wary of my younger brothers straying very far from home
without supervision. Net result: neither of them know how to ride a
bicycle very well. They can do it, but they cant' do any of the usual
kid tricks, like wheelies, bunnyhops, curbsurfing, bike tag....

I'm the loony in the family; I ride my bicycle for ridiculous
distances just to ride my bicycle. My parents are even nervous about
me being out on the public roads. (I can't even take my Dad riding
with me, he's so scared of the roads, but maybe that's another issue
altogether).

I guess the answer is that this is a far more anonymous place (NoVA)
that we live in than we used to when I was a little kid. There are
other kids on the block that I see playing, but they don't play with
my brothers, and my brothers don't play with them. I don't know those
kids other than by face (and sometimes bicycle). I don't say hello (I
do wave every now and then) --is it because I'm afraid of being
misconstrued? At the end of the day, one of those kids could well
vanish, and I wouldn't know or notice--just as one of my brothers
could vanish, and they wouldn't notice either.

-Luigi
"Under neon loneliness,
Motorcycle emptiness..."
-Manic Street Preachers

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Photos, rants, raves

02-19-2004, 09:53 PM

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 00:19:39 -0500, "Eric S. Sande" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:

>>Here's an interesting article, vaguely related to the recent "Young
>>Cyclist Killed" thread. Cycling is only part of it, of course, but
>>it's in there. Note the bit about neighborhood design, near the end.
>
>It wasn't considered unusual when I was a kid to be outdoors for
>most of a vacation day, ranging around and basically doing whatever.
>
>But we did know that what we did had consequences, and we were
>regularly reminded by our WWII era parents (who all knew each other)
>that if we got in trouble there would be consequences.
>
>There weren't many TVs, and mostly no air conditioning, so unless
>you were a reader there wasn't any alternative to the great outdoors.
>
>The question that has to be asked (in the context of the article) is
>does the bemoaned lifestyle derive from a failure of parental ideology
>or simply the fact that the world has changed.
>
>I'd argue that the world has changed, significantly.

Birthrates have fallen in the first world, as well, which boils down
to much fewer kids on the block. It's tough to get a pickup game of
baseball started.

I'm routinely surprised at how much freedom I used to have as compared
to my younger brothers.

When I was little, we lived in a nice neighbourhood of Tegucigalpa, in
Honduras, and I and the neighbourhood kids would go riding our bikes
around and generally hang out. We'd ride our bikes in construction
sites--best time was when they'd dug foundations but hadn't put in the
forms for pouring yet. This is where I first learned how to descend a
very steep slope--after crashing a few times. No helmets in those
days, of course.

My younger brothers have grown up in the States, and something has
changed. My mother and father, who were quite happy to let me go and
play with the neighborhood kids and go riding my bike wherever, are
extremely wary of my younger brothers straying very far from home
without supervision. Net result: neither of them know how to ride a
bicycle very well. They can do it, but they cant' do any of the usual
kid tricks, like wheelies, bunnyhops, curbsurfing, bike tag....

I'm the loony in the family; I ride my bicycle for ridiculous
distances just to ride my bicycle. My parents are even nervous about
me being out on the public roads. (I can't even take my Dad riding
with me, he's so scared of the roads, but maybe that's another issue
altogether).

I guess the answer is that this is a far more anonymous place (NoVA)
that we live in than we used to when I was a little kid. There are
other kids on the block that I see playing, but they don't play with
my brothers, and my brothers don't play with them. I don't know those
kids other than by face (and sometimes bicycle). I don't say hello (I
do wave every now and then) --is it because I'm afraid of being
misconstrued? At the end of the day, one of those kids could well
vanish, and I wouldn't know or notice--just as one of my brothers
could vanish, and they wouldn't notice either.

-Luigi
"Under neon loneliness,
Motorcycle emptiness..."
-Manic Street Preachers

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Photos, rants, raves

02-19-2004, 09:55 PM

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
"Eric S. Sande" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:

> There weren't many TVs, and mostly no air conditioning, so unless
> you were a reader there wasn't any alternative to the great outdoors.
>
> The question that has to be asked (in the context of the article) is
> does the bemoaned lifestyle derive from a failure of parental ideology
> or simply the fact that the world has changed.

I recall chumming around outside with lots of neighbourhood
friends. In fact, looking back, it was quite an elaborate
and intricate social network we kids had. And we'd generally
look out for each other -- parents' supervisions would have
been redundant dead weight, and not particularly welcome in
most of our endeavours, enterprises, activities & adventures.

cheers,
Tom
--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

02-19-2004, 09:55 PM

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
"Eric S. Sande" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:

> There weren't many TVs, and mostly no air conditioning, so unless
> you were a reader there wasn't any alternative to the great outdoors.
>
> The question that has to be asked (in the context of the article) is
> does the bemoaned lifestyle derive from a failure of parental ideology
> or simply the fact that the world has changed.

I recall chumming around outside with lots of neighbourhood
friends. In fact, looking back, it was quite an elaborate
and intricate social network we kids had. And we'd generally
look out for each other -- parents' supervisions would have
been redundant dead weight, and not particularly welcome in
most of our endeavours, enterprises, activities & adventures.

cheers,
Tom
--
-- Powered by FreeBSD
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

02-19-2004, 10:39 PM

Thu, 19 Feb 2004 21:55:21 -0800, <9g741c.n231.ln@bud.garden.local>,
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Tom Keats) wrote:

>In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
> "Eric S. Sande" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:
>
>> There weren't many TVs, and mostly no air conditioning, so unless
>> you were a reader there wasn't any alternative to the great outdoors.
>>
>> The question that has to be asked (in the context of the article) is
>> does the bemoaned lifestyle derive from a failure of parental ideology
>> or simply the fact that the world has changed.
>
>I recall chumming around outside with lots of neighbourhood
>friends. In fact, looking back, it was quite an elaborate
>and intricate social network we kids had. And we'd generally
>look out for each other -- parents' supervisions would have
>been redundant dead weight, and not particularly welcome in
>most of our endeavours, enterprises, activities & adventures.
>
I got grounded for ridin' wrong way on a one way.
Busted by a buddy's mom. We were both walkin' for a week.
Didn't teach me anything. A head-on with a van did.
.. . . I hope.

"There is no question, the street was one of the greatest sources of
my life skills,"
- Bobbie Schultz
--
zk

02-19-2004, 10:39 PM

Thu, 19 Feb 2004 21:55:21 -0800, <9g741c.n231.ln@bud.garden.local>,
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Tom Keats) wrote:

>In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
> "Eric S. Sande" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:
>
>> There weren't many TVs, and mostly no air conditioning, so unless
>> you were a reader there wasn't any alternative to the great outdoors.
>>
>> The question that has to be asked (in the context of the article) is
>> does the bemoaned lifestyle derive from a failure of parental ideology
>> or simply the fact that the world has changed.
>
>I recall chumming around outside with lots of neighbourhood
>friends. In fact, looking back, it was quite an elaborate
>and intricate social network we kids had. And we'd generally
>look out for each other -- parents' supervisions would have
>been redundant dead weight, and not particularly welcome in
>most of our endeavours, enterprises, activities & adventures.
>
I got grounded for ridin' wrong way on a one way.
Busted by a buddy's mom. We were both walkin' for a week.
Didn't teach me anything. A head-on with a van did.
.. . . I hope.

"There is no question, the street was one of the greatest sources of
my life skills,"
- Bobbie Schultz
--
zk

02-20-2004, 04:49 AM

"frkrygow" <"frkrygow"@omitcc.ysu.edu> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].edu...
> Here's an interesting article, vaguely related to the recent "Young
> Cyclist Killed" thread. Cycling is only part of it, of course, but it's
> in there. Note the bit about neighborhood design, near the end.
>
> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

I think Michael Moore got a lot of it right (Bowling for Columbine) when he
claimed media attention ("If it bleeds, it leads") is making everyone
paranoid. That said, while I had a relatively Tom Sawyer-ish childhood in the
50-60's, we took our lumps, one friend lost a kidney (sledding), another got a
skull plate (hockey), and there were several near-drownings.

I do think that cycling is more dangerous for today's kids, since bikes are
becoming so rare, drivers don't expect them. Driving habits, especially in
residential areas, seem to have gotten worse. The real shame of it is that
many of those drivers are parents with children. Despite that behavior, I
still think the benefits outweigh the risks, and I encourage my children to
bike, but I'm very much in the minority here (outside of Boston).