« Federal Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Act | Main | King Street bike lanes losing critical support, action needed »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Mandatory talisman laws!

I have a pair of bike shorts that has a stain shaped like J_sus on the chamois. I did not wash them, of course. I could be persuaded to part with it for the right sum of money.

I still think the safety in numbers thing is important. Right now there's substantial push back against cyclists, but I think we can push through that by just continuing to be out there.

Although I did have a guy in a truck with a Romney sticker try to sideswipe and pinch me this week, when I was in a bike lane and he had a stop sign. Some push back is too much, and I am afraid some new cyclists will quit out of fear.

I don't know much about motorcycle helmets and it really isn't my issue, but I still found this disturbing: "There were 10 times as many unhelmeted motorcyclist fatalities in States without universal helmet laws (1,858 unhelmeted fatalities) as in States with universal helmet laws (178 unhelmeted fatalities) in 2012. These States were nearly equivalent with respect to total resident populations."

What in blazes does that mean? Did the motorcycle helmet law reduce the number of per capita fatalities or not? Meaningless statistics like this make me feel as though I'm being lied to.

look at the seasonal pattern. The number of fatals is DOWN in the summer, which certainly supports the safety in numbers concept. The increase was almost entirely in the winter, when the fewest folks are cycling (though probably more than in past years)

Also - texting.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Banner design by creativecouchdesigns.com

City Paper's Best Local Bike Blog 2009


 Subscribe in a reader