Alexandria Bike Lobby wins again

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My husband is an avid bike rider. The bike controls EVERYTHING in our household, from where we bought a house to how we will retire. The dedication bike riders have to their sport is beyond anything I’ve ever seen, and it’s supported by other riders. It’s as close to a cult as I’ve ever seen.

Lots and lots of people don't ride bikes as a sport. They ride bikes as a means of transportation.

By choice. That’s a sport

So if you choose to drive a car for transportation then that is just a sport or recreation? Cool logic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My husband is an avid bike rider. The bike controls EVERYTHING in our household, from where we bought a house to how we will retire. The dedication bike riders have to their sport is beyond anything I’ve ever seen, and it’s supported by other riders. It’s as close to a cult as I’ve ever seen.

Lots and lots of people don't ride bikes as a sport. They ride bikes as a means of transportation.

By choice. That’s a sport

You drive by choice. So it's a sport. Right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are very tiny number of cyclists in the city of Alex.

BUT the City is extremely limo liberal and they love to embrace anything that aligns them with liberal ideas and want to make sure they are putting on a good show. They love any kind of environmental activism and causes and do lots of window dressing activities like send out declarations and such but there is very little substance. These actions are easy so they embrace them to avoid the real and tough issues like neglected infrastructure, school issues and so on.

The more safe and useful bike routes there are in Alexandria, the more people will ride bikes in Alexandria.

Wrong.

What do you mean, "wrong"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My husband is an avid bike rider. The bike controls EVERYTHING in our household, from where we bought a house to how we will retire. The dedication bike riders have to their sport is beyond anything I’ve ever seen, and it’s supported by other riders. It’s as close to a cult as I’ve ever seen.

Lots and lots of people don't ride bikes as a sport. They ride bikes as a means of transportation.

By choice. That’s a sport

You drive by choice. So it's a sport. Right?

WRONG, parents drive b/c of NEED to transport their children safely in all types of weather and times of day. There will always be cars, trucks, buses on the road b/c of NEED. Cyclist typically also have cars but they choose to ride-- many others do not have that option for various valid reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My husband is an avid bike rider. The bike controls EVERYTHING in our household, from where we bought a house to how we will retire. The dedication bike riders have to their sport is beyond anything I’ve ever seen, and it’s supported by other riders. It’s as close to a cult as I’ve ever seen.

Lots and lots of people don't ride bikes as a sport. They ride bikes as a means of transportation.

By choice. That’s a sport

So if you choose to drive a car for transportation then that is just a sport or recreation? Cool logic.

I don't know many people who put on heart monitors to drive their car. And most people who use their bikes for transportation also own cars. Because using a bike as a sole means of transportation isn't practical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My husband is an avid bike rider. The bike controls EVERYTHING in our household, from where we bought a house to how we will retire. The dedication bike riders have to their sport is beyond anything I’ve ever seen, and it’s supported by other riders. It’s as close to a cult as I’ve ever seen.

Lots and lots of people don't ride bikes as a sport. They ride bikes as a means of transportation.

By choice. That’s a sport

You drive by choice. So it's a sport. Right?

I drive as a means of getting from point A to point B as a necessity most times. Because it's not practical to ride my bike to the grocery store to buy groceries for an entire family. Or to go visit my family in another state.

So far we've had the avid bikers here claim that a man who had his pants torn and his leg cut by a biker, was in the wrong because it was a 'near miss' and that a woman who was in a right hand turn lane with a biker behind her was in the wrong because somehow the biker has both the right to the road AND the right to come up on the side of the woman and take the right turn in front of her, when he was behind her to begin with. He was supposed to cue up behind her like a car because bikers say that bikes are equivalent to cars.

The problem with avid bikers is they want both the rights of cars, and the ability to cut off cars, block cars, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I drive as a means of getting from point A to point B as a necessity most times. Because it's not practical to ride my bike to the grocery store to buy groceries for an entire family. Or to go visit my family in another state.

So far we've had the avid bikers here claim that a man who had his pants torn and his leg cut by a biker, was in the wrong because it was a 'near miss' and that a woman who was in a right hand turn lane with a biker behind her was in the wrong because somehow the biker has both the right to the road AND the right to come up on the side of the woman and take the right turn in front of her, when he was behind her to begin with. He was supposed to cue up behind her like a car because bikers say that bikes are equivalent to cars.

The problem with avid bikers is they want both the rights of cars, and the ability to cut off cars, block cars, etc.

No, we haven't had "avid bikers". We have had people who ride bikes. Are you an "avid driver"?

Also, lots of people ride bikes as a means of getting from point A to point B, including as a necessity. Probably most of your trips by car do not involve going to the grocery store or visiting your family in another state.

Bicyclists do not say that bikes are equivalent to cars. That would be a foolish thing to say. Bicyclists say that bikes are vehicles. That's what the law says, too. But there are many different types of vehicles in the law, and the different types of vehicles have different laws. In your example, it is entirely legal for a bicyclist to ride towards the front of a line of cars. There is no law requiring bicyclists to line up in the line of cars. A licensed driver should know that, but many don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My husband is an avid bike rider. The bike controls EVERYTHING in our household, from where we bought a house to how we will retire. The dedication bike riders have to their sport is beyond anything I’ve ever seen, and it’s supported by other riders. It’s as close to a cult as I’ve ever seen.

Lots and lots of people don't ride bikes as a sport. They ride bikes as a means of transportation.

By choice. That’s a sport

You drive by choice. So it's a sport. Right?

WRONG, parents drive b/c of NEED to transport their children safely in all types of weather and times of day. There will always be cars, trucks, buses on the road b/c of NEED. Cyclist typically also have cars but they choose to ride-- many others do not have that option for various valid reasons.

Why is there the NEED to transport children in all types of weather and times of day BY CAR?

After all, kids can ride bikes, too. And little kids can ride on their parents' bikes. And it's possible ride bikes in the rain. And it's possible to ride bikes at night.

So, why? Because there's little or no safe bike infrastructure, that's why.

But instead of adding safe bike infrastructure, people are saying that there shouldn't be safe bike infrastructure because parents NEED to transport their children BY CAR.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My husband is an avid bike rider. The bike controls EVERYTHING in our household, from where we bought a house to how we will retire. The dedication bike riders have to their sport is beyond anything I’ve ever seen, and it’s supported by other riders. It’s as close to a cult as I’ve ever seen.

Lots and lots of people don't ride bikes as a sport. They ride bikes as a means of transportation.

By choice. That’s a sport

So if you choose to drive a car for transportation then that is just a sport or recreation? Cool logic.

I don't know many people who put on heart monitors to drive their car. And most people who use their bikes for transportation also own cars. Because using a bike as a sole means of transportation isn't practical.

I don't put on a heart monitor when I ride my bike. Maybe the sport bicyclists do that, but the transportation bicyclists don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My husband is an avid bike rider. The bike controls EVERYTHING in our household, from where we bought a house to how we will retire. The dedication bike riders have to their sport is beyond anything I’ve ever seen, and it’s supported by other riders. It’s as close to a cult as I’ve ever seen.

Lots and lots of people don't ride bikes as a sport. They ride bikes as a means of transportation.

By choice. That’s a sport

You drive by choice. So it's a sport. Right?

WRONG, parents drive b/c of NEED to transport their children safely in all types of weather and times of day. There will always be cars, trucks, buses on the road b/c of NEED. Cyclist typically also have cars but they choose to ride-- many others do not have that option for various valid reasons.

Why is there the NEED to transport children in all types of weather and times of day BY CAR?

How exactly do you transport babies and their associated gear such as strollers, etc. on a bike? Please be reasonable and use common sense.

After all, kids can ride bikes, too. And little kids can ride on their parents' bikes. And it's possible ride bikes in the rain. And it's possible to ride bikes at night.

So, why? Because there's little or no safe bike infrastructure, that's why.

But instead of adding safe bike infrastructure, people are saying that there shouldn't be safe bike infrastructure because parents NEED to transport their children BY CAR.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why is there the NEED to transport children in all types of weather and times of day BY CAR?

After all, kids can ride bikes, too. And little kids can ride on their parents' bikes. And it's possible ride bikes in the rain. And it's possible to ride bikes at night.

So, why? Because there's little or no safe bike infrastructure, that's why.

But instead of adding safe bike infrastructure, people are saying that there shouldn't be safe bike infrastructure because parents NEED to transport their children BY CAR.

How exactly do you transport babies and their associated gear such as strollers, etc. on a bike? Please be reasonable and use common sense.

There are lots and lots of child seats for bikes available. See here, for example: https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-kids-bike-seats/

You can also easily transport two children on a bike - or even more. Here's a video full of people on bikes transporting babies and children, from Holland: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfLJ876lXsQ

The difference is that in Holland, unlike here, there's a whole lot of safe bike infrastructure.

[Anonymous]

Why couldn't this have been put to a vote so Wilson couldn't act like a dictator and disregard the will of the people?

[Anonymous]

I am handicap and cannot ride a bike. I doubt I am the only person in Alexandria with this predicament. I am so sick and tired of cyclist with their holier than thou attitude and how bikes are always right, cars are always wrong. Take a step back out of your bubble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why is there the NEED to transport children in all types of weather and times of day BY CAR?

After all, kids can ride bikes, too. And little kids can ride on their parents' bikes. And it's possible ride bikes in the rain. And it's possible to ride bikes at night.

So, why? Because there's little or no safe bike infrastructure, that's why.

But instead of adding safe bike infrastructure, people are saying that there shouldn't be safe bike infrastructure because parents NEED to transport their children BY CAR.

How exactly do you transport babies and their associated gear such as strollers, etc. on a bike? Please be reasonable and use common sense.

There are lots and lots of child seats for bikes available. See here, for example: https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-kids-bike-seats/

You can also easily transport two children on a bike - or even more. Here's a video full of people on bikes transporting babies and children, from Holland: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfLJ876lXsQ

The difference is that in Holland, unlike here, there's a whole lot of safe bike infrastructure.

[Anonymous]

this thread proves there are bike advocates who will not stop until there is bike infrastructure everywhere

For the life of me I have no idea why a mode of transportation used by 5% of the population tops has so much pull it's insane.

We should be making decisions for the 75% plus people who drive not the 5%