Re: Reduced sidewalk riding fine & cycle paths - Page 8 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

05-20-2004, 10:49 AM

>"At City Hall, a volunteer committee of 20 activist citizens views every
>issue through the mud-spattered lens of an oppressed cyclist. Their job
>is to develop policy and advise city staff and elected officials on
>cycling matters. Last month, the committee virtually ensured that city
>council will vote to slash the fine for sidewalk cycling to $50 from
>$90. The rationale: The roads are getting too dangerous.

Is it only me who finds this logic strange? Instead of making the roads
safer, they reduce the fine for behaviour that makes them even more
dangerous.

Sounds like some people were promoted beyond their Peter-limit.

05-20-2004, 01:47 PM

Is this stuff about dangerous roads even true? What is the city? How
do they know? I've seen reports of research in Canada that indicates
that the kind of people who like to ride on the sidewalk are indeed
more accident prone than others when riding on the road, but they are
still safer on the road than on the sidewalk.

Jeremy Parker

"Dr Engelbert Buxbaum" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in
message news:c8ir4h$qfs$02$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> >"At City Hall, a volunteer committee of 20 activist citizens views
every
> >issue through the mud-spattered lens of an oppressed cyclist.
Their job
> >is to develop policy and advise city staff and elected officials
on
> >cycling matters. Last month, the committee virtually ensured that
city
> >council will vote to slash the fine for sidewalk cycling to $50
from
> >$90. The rationale: The roads are getting too dangerous.
>
> Is it only me who finds this logic strange? Instead of making the
roads
> safer, they reduce the fine for behaviour that makes them even more
> dangerous.
>
> Sounds like some people were promoted beyond their Peter-limit.
>
>

05-20-2004, 01:47 PM

Is this stuff about dangerous roads even true? What is the city? How
do they know? I've seen reports of research in Canada that indicates
that the kind of people who like to ride on the sidewalk are indeed
more accident prone than others when riding on the road, but they are
still safer on the road than on the sidewalk.

Jeremy Parker

"Dr Engelbert Buxbaum" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in
message news:c8ir4h$qfs$02$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> >"At City Hall, a volunteer committee of 20 activist citizens views
every
> >issue through the mud-spattered lens of an oppressed cyclist.
Their job
> >is to develop policy and advise city staff and elected officials
on
> >cycling matters. Last month, the committee virtually ensured that
city
> >council will vote to slash the fine for sidewalk cycling to $50
from
> >$90. The rationale: The roads are getting too dangerous.
>
> Is it only me who finds this logic strange? Instead of making the
roads
> safer, they reduce the fine for behaviour that makes them even more
> dangerous.
>
> Sounds like some people were promoted beyond their Peter-limit.
>
>

05-20-2004, 01:47 PM

Is this stuff about dangerous roads even true? What is the city? How
do they know? I've seen reports of research in Canada that indicates
that the kind of people who like to ride on the sidewalk are indeed
more accident prone than others when riding on the road, but they are
still safer on the road than on the sidewalk.

Jeremy Parker

"Dr Engelbert Buxbaum" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in
message news:c8ir4h$qfs$02$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> >"At City Hall, a volunteer committee of 20 activist citizens views
every
> >issue through the mud-spattered lens of an oppressed cyclist.
Their job
> >is to develop policy and advise city staff and elected officials
on
> >cycling matters. Last month, the committee virtually ensured that
city
> >council will vote to slash the fine for sidewalk cycling to $50
from
> >$90. The rationale: The roads are getting too dangerous.
>
> Is it only me who finds this logic strange? Instead of making the
roads
> safer, they reduce the fine for behaviour that makes them even more
> dangerous.
>
> Sounds like some people were promoted beyond their Peter-limit.
>
>

05-20-2004, 01:47 PM

Is this stuff about dangerous roads even true? What is the city? How
do they know? I've seen reports of research in Canada that indicates
that the kind of people who like to ride on the sidewalk are indeed
more accident prone than others when riding on the road, but they are
still safer on the road than on the sidewalk.

Jeremy Parker

"Dr Engelbert Buxbaum" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in
message news:c8ir4h$qfs$02$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> >"At City Hall, a volunteer committee of 20 activist citizens views
every
> >issue through the mud-spattered lens of an oppressed cyclist.
Their job
> >is to develop policy and advise city staff and elected officials
on
> >cycling matters. Last month, the committee virtually ensured that
city
> >council will vote to slash the fine for sidewalk cycling to $50
from
> >$90. The rationale: The roads are getting too dangerous.
>
> Is it only me who finds this logic strange? Instead of making the
roads
> safer, they reduce the fine for behaviour that makes them even more
> dangerous.
>
> Sounds like some people were promoted beyond their Peter-limit.
>
>

05-20-2004, 01:47 PM

Is this stuff about dangerous roads even true? What is the city? How
do they know? I've seen reports of research in Canada that indicates
that the kind of people who like to ride on the sidewalk are indeed
more accident prone than others when riding on the road, but they are
still safer on the road than on the sidewalk.

Jeremy Parker

"Dr Engelbert Buxbaum" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in
message news:c8ir4h$qfs$02$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> >"At City Hall, a volunteer committee of 20 activist citizens views
every
> >issue through the mud-spattered lens of an oppressed cyclist.
Their job
> >is to develop policy and advise city staff and elected officials
on
> >cycling matters. Last month, the committee virtually ensured that
city
> >council will vote to slash the fine for sidewalk cycling to $50
from
> >$90. The rationale: The roads are getting too dangerous.
>
> Is it only me who finds this logic strange? Instead of making the
roads
> safer, they reduce the fine for behaviour that makes them even more
> dangerous.
>
> Sounds like some people were promoted beyond their Peter-limit.
>
>

05-21-2004, 10:12 AM

On Thu, 20 May 2004 19:49:15 +0200, Dr Engelbert Buxbaum
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>>"At City Hall, a volunteer committee of 20 activist citizens views every
>>issue through the mud-spattered lens of an oppressed cyclist. Their job
>>is to develop policy and advise city staff and elected officials on
>>cycling matters. Last month, the committee virtually ensured that city
>>council will vote to slash the fine for sidewalk cycling to $50 from
>>$90. The rationale: The roads are getting too dangerous.

Jan Wong writes in a sardonic style. You have to be a regular reader
of the Globe and Mail or her columns to know that. It doesn't
translate well to Usenet.

>Is it only me who finds this logic strange? Instead of making the roads
>safer, they reduce the fine for behaviour that makes them even more
>dangerous.

Ummm, have you had the downtown Toronto riding experience?
It makes sense in the local context, screwy as it may seem.

Shirley Hicks
Toronto, Ontario

05-21-2004, 10:12 AM

On Thu, 20 May 2004 19:49:15 +0200, Dr Engelbert Buxbaum
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>>"At City Hall, a volunteer committee of 20 activist citizens views every
>>issue through the mud-spattered lens of an oppressed cyclist. Their job
>>is to develop policy and advise city staff and elected officials on
>>cycling matters. Last month, the committee virtually ensured that city
>>council will vote to slash the fine for sidewalk cycling to $50 from
>>$90. The rationale: The roads are getting too dangerous.

Jan Wong writes in a sardonic style. You have to be a regular reader
of the Globe and Mail or her columns to know that. It doesn't
translate well to Usenet.

>Is it only me who finds this logic strange? Instead of making the roads
>safer, they reduce the fine for behaviour that makes them even more
>dangerous.

Ummm, have you had the downtown Toronto riding experience?
It makes sense in the local context, screwy as it may seem.

Shirley Hicks
Toronto, Ontario

05-21-2004, 10:12 AM

On Thu, 20 May 2004 19:49:15 +0200, Dr Engelbert Buxbaum
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>>"At City Hall, a volunteer committee of 20 activist citizens views every
>>issue through the mud-spattered lens of an oppressed cyclist. Their job
>>is to develop policy and advise city staff and elected officials on
>>cycling matters. Last month, the committee virtually ensured that city
>>council will vote to slash the fine for sidewalk cycling to $50 from
>>$90. The rationale: The roads are getting too dangerous.

Jan Wong writes in a sardonic style. You have to be a regular reader
of the Globe and Mail or her columns to know that. It doesn't
translate well to Usenet.

>Is it only me who finds this logic strange? Instead of making the roads
>safer, they reduce the fine for behaviour that makes them even more
>dangerous.

Ummm, have you had the downtown Toronto riding experience?
It makes sense in the local context, screwy as it may seem.

Shirley Hicks
Toronto, Ontario

05-21-2004, 10:12 AM

On Thu, 20 May 2004 19:49:15 +0200, Dr Engelbert Buxbaum
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>>"At City Hall, a volunteer committee of 20 activist citizens views every
>>issue through the mud-spattered lens of an oppressed cyclist. Their job
>>is to develop policy and advise city staff and elected officials on
>>cycling matters. Last month, the committee virtually ensured that city
>>council will vote to slash the fine for sidewalk cycling to $50 from
>>$90. The rationale: The roads are getting too dangerous.

Jan Wong writes in a sardonic style. You have to be a regular reader
of the Globe and Mail or her columns to know that. It doesn't
translate well to Usenet.

>Is it only me who finds this logic strange? Instead of making the roads
>safer, they reduce the fine for behaviour that makes them even more
>dangerous.

Ummm, have you had the downtown Toronto riding experience?
It makes sense in the local context, screwy as it may seem.

Shirley Hicks
Toronto, Ontario