We Cannot Win This War Through Force
lolfighter
Snark, Dire Join Date: 2003-04-20 Member: 15693Members
Snark, Dire Join Date: 2003-04-20 Member: 15693Members
in Discussions
So I got to thinking. I ride a bike to class and back each day. Luckily, my route is straight, calm and uncomplicated, so I generally don't have any trouble with traffic. But many cyclists are not so fortunate, and often get into trouble, either by their own doing or by the actions of (other) inconsiderate ######s. And as we all know, the cyclist inevitably gets mauled, mangled and otherwise maltreated, and the car driver is thoroughly annoyed at the dent in their hood.
We cannot win this war through force. Compare us to the chihuahua, the tiniest, most impotent and most choleric dog of them all. A small child could crush a chihuahua. Yet the chihuahua thinks it's a fearsome canine predator, and earns nothing but hate and ridicule for it. Likewise, a cyclist will always, ALWAYS draw the shortest straw in a traffic accident. We're the underdogs, and like the chihuahua, we have the entirely wrong temper for that role.
This has to change. We could mount grenade launchers on our bikes, but that's not REALLY a solution, is it? No, we need to fight this war by other means. We need to gain the sympathy vote. We need to show the world how much our lot (undeservedly) sucks, and thus rally them to the banner of the oppressed, to the banner of the cyclists.
I look at the kids that I saw today, driving their bikes with reckless abandon like the inbred morons they probably are, thinking that traffic laws are null and void to them. I look at stuff like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_Mass" target="_blank">Critical Mass.</a> We can't have this. I actually praised Critical Mass when I first heard of it, but that opinion has changed.
We need to garner and gain the sympathy vote. We need to be not just examples, but <i>exemplars</i> of good traffic etiquette. We need to demonstrate our virtue so that our oppressors may feel rightly ashamed and may find no flaw in us that they could decry. We need to get our ######ing act together and show the traffic how a responsible human being behaves in traffic.
We cannot win this war through force. Compare us to the chihuahua, the tiniest, most impotent and most choleric dog of them all. A small child could crush a chihuahua. Yet the chihuahua thinks it's a fearsome canine predator, and earns nothing but hate and ridicule for it. Likewise, a cyclist will always, ALWAYS draw the shortest straw in a traffic accident. We're the underdogs, and like the chihuahua, we have the entirely wrong temper for that role.
This has to change. We could mount grenade launchers on our bikes, but that's not REALLY a solution, is it? No, we need to fight this war by other means. We need to gain the sympathy vote. We need to show the world how much our lot (undeservedly) sucks, and thus rally them to the banner of the oppressed, to the banner of the cyclists.
I look at the kids that I saw today, driving their bikes with reckless abandon like the inbred morons they probably are, thinking that traffic laws are null and void to them. I look at stuff like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_Mass" target="_blank">Critical Mass.</a> We can't have this. I actually praised Critical Mass when I first heard of it, but that opinion has changed.
We need to garner and gain the sympathy vote. We need to be not just examples, but <i>exemplars</i> of good traffic etiquette. We need to demonstrate our virtue so that our oppressors may feel rightly ashamed and may find no flaw in us that they could decry. We need to get our ######ing act together and show the traffic how a responsible human being behaves in traffic.
Comments
We also have loads upon loads of bicycle lanes where cars can't or are not allowed to go. And the fact that we have a protection law. Well it can be called protection law as the car driver is always responsible when an accident happens if he cannot prove otherwise. Automotorist need to take care of the bicycles (and pedestrians) on the road, is the philosophy behind it. And we have a lot of 30km/h and "woonerf (casual pedestrian speed for cars)<!--coloro:#FFA500--><span style="color:#FFA500"><!--/coloro-->*<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->" zones, enforced by speedbumps and chicanes. Can be annoying at times and also do a little bit more wear and tear on the shocks of cars, but nothing can be said against the positive effect it has on casualties (very close to zero). But as I said, they are annoying at times (for cars)
Changing roads to this kind of form is of course hard work and if bicycles are not a dominant factor on the roads in cities it will most likely not be adressed by the politicians, due to the sheer costs of a project like this all over a country/state... A lot of things have to happen and will cause a certain amount of mayhem within city limits if you want safer roads for the 2 wheelers.
So yeah I do like your idea of rocket launchers, mine layers and other weaponry on bikes much better <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
<!--coloro:#FFA500--><span style="color:#FFA500"><!--/coloro-->*<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
An area in between homes and schools where kids usually play, usually a cul-de-sac where driving trough to get to your location has no use. No need for fast trafficking...
And everytime spring starts my usual routes get swamped with people who normally drive cars, except for 1 or 2 times a year. It's horrible. They have no etiquette, are slow as hell and worst of all: Tend to drive in big blocks, thinking they own the road and never ever attempt to dodge, even when they are driving on the wrong lane.
Or to sum it up: If you get people out of their cars and onto their bikes they will still behave the same!
P.S. I'm usually fairly patient when it comes to you driving at 2 miles per hour up hills.
I'll predict you start to see more motorcycles and bicycles if octane fuels stay at >= $4.00 / gal
I would suspect this issue will start to magnify.
[...]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I used to cycle in frigid weather, then one cold day penile frostbite set in. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad-fix.gif" />
Too. Much. Information.
>_<
<img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
When I was living in OH I biked a lot, but that was a college town and not all that dangerous, now that I am back in NYC I really don't bike as a form of locomotion, only as something to do. However both my parents biked to/from work with some regularity when I was growing up, think my dad still does tbh (only one car, though they worked at the same place).
What do you mean by "efficient"? Something other than MPG? Because the lightness really helps the MPG. What makes the difference between mileage for and SUV and a compact car other than wind resistance and weight? Do you mean pollution, like how diesel has better MPG, but pollutes more?
Efficiency is normally the quotient: [Total amount of energy invested into the system]/[Total amount of energy transformed into usable force]
So if your 1 ton suv moves 50 meters with a gallon and your 1/4 ton motorcycle moves 150 meters with a gallon, then the suv is still more efficient.
On the other hand, what if we assume that a motorbike can only seat one person, but an SUV can seat four? The SUV still guzzles more fuel than a motorbike, but we only need one SUV to transport all four people, and one SUV uses less fuel than four motorbikes (at least in Faskalia's example).
This is why public transport is more efficient, even though a city bus (or even more extreme, a diesel train) consumes far more fuel per kilometer than the most thirsty SUV. Simply because the bus can transport far more people. In essence, public transport gets more "people-kilometers" (people transported times distance traveled) per gallon.
Unfortunately I can NOT find where I saw that statement and thus can't say what it was actually referring to.
Random fun notes:
Some EU country is trying to set up Fuel Cell buses as the norm for them, which would be a big deal as it would get the infrastructure in place so that fuel cell cars could become a reality.
NYC is now rolling out Hybrid Electric buses all over the city (all the ones on Roosevelt Island have been hybrid for a while now).
the MTA (NYC's Metropolitan Transportation Authority) has started going on about sustainability and how green we are , and how our Carbon footprint is so much smaller then the rest of the country, etc etc etc. <a href="http://mta.info/environment/" target="_blank">Info Here</a>