Bike lanes that literally no one uses -- why are we still doing this?

[Anonymous]

https://theonion.com/report-it-probably-fine-that-5-year-old-just-whizzed-by-on-lyft-scooter/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish we could be like Amsterdam but we have hills and disgusting summers. You'll never have a critical mass of bike commuters because it is hugely impractical for office workers. I wish they would invest more in public transit.

e-bikes are the game changer you are looking for

I'd still be sweaty when I got to the office. No thx

Have you ever ridden an e-bike? It’s no more strenuous than getting in and out of your car.

With a helmet on in August? Not going to happen for most professionals.

A lot of professionals I know have no issues donning a helmet in August or any other time of the year. Those professionals who feel the need to showcase all their success by haute couture and six figure rides are a different matter, of course.

I work in a 500 person law firm and can count on one hand how many people bike to work. Sometimes on one finger. Progressives have this weird tendency to try to make other people disbelieve what they can see to be true with their own eyes.

Nice anecdata. I work in a building with a couple of thousands professionals. Bikes outnumber cars most months in the parking garage.

“I reject your anecdata, and hereby substitute my own anecdata!


Very credible 😏

Respectfully, that’s the point. No one’s anecdata is credible. Making unverifiable claims based on personal observations is a very dumb way to make a point, yet is the dominant methodology embraced by the velophobes in this forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://theonion.com/report-it-probably-fine-that-5-year-old-just-whizzed-by-on-lyft-scooter/

You do you realize that these articles are made up, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC needs revenue. The city should require all bikes that go on roads to register and have a machine readable license plate, so when they speed downhill/blow through stop signs and red lights the city can issue tickets like they do for cars. want to use the road? then obey the law

The goal of most drivers is to make sure everyone is as unfree and miserable as they are. No one can escape. Crabs in a bucket mentality.

There's been multiple cyclists going around groping women. They count on the fact that, without license plates, they can't be readily identified. Sounds like you're totally cool with people committing sexual assault so long as they're on a bike when they do it.

Cyclists need license plates, and also insurance.

If ever you want a reminder of just how batty the velophobe set has become, this is a good place to start.

There's something very Trump-y about cyclists in DC. They dont think they have to follow *any* of the rules that everyone else respects and everything is always someone else's fault. Like Trump, they act like a bunch of spoiled, entitled brats.

Cyclists don’t think we need insurance or license plates on bikes because, according to the rules that everyone respects, we don’t. I do have insurance, license plates, and identification for when I’m driving. I don’t need those things on my bike or when I walk or take Metro. I don’t think it’s spoiled or entitled not to comply with your imaginary alternative regulatory scheme that requires insurance and more bureaucracy for bicycles that are very unlikely to cause any damage to anyone except the cyclist.

I actually started thinking through the implications of requiring cyclists to carry insurance and affix license plates to their bikes and, after a couple of seconds, realized that it was such an incredibly silly idea that only someone trying to parody the anti-bike folks would put it forth.

I mean, many cars that are driven dangerously in DC have obscured, fake, or no plates and potentially no insurance, but the problem is a lack of insurance and plates on bikes? Nice trolling . . .

it would be better for everyone if cyclists weren't allowed to be anonymous and unidentifiable on the road.

Why would that be better? How often do authorities need to be able to identify cyclists?

I see cyclists put children in spectacularly dangerous situations on a fairly regular basis. I saw one with an infant in the basket on the front of her bike. It would be great if they could be readily identified to the police.

That person should be arrested for child endangerment.

It's curious how, if you put a 10 year old in the front seat of a car, people would think you're wildly irresponsible and almost no parent would even think to do it, even though that kid is strapped down with a seat belt, there's at least one airbag protecting them and there's two tons of steel around them. But no one bats at eye if you do this:

https://bunchbike.com/products/the-original-4-upgraded-electric-cargo-bike-for-families?srsltid=AfmBOopgF9JVUlhcWqgtCDCqzR1K5nGzwExl3YLCVcHVTkWkoYIYQ6iW

If you only drive 15 mph I wouldn't think it's unsafe. Are you unclear on the differences between driving and biking??

And what happens when this bicyclist going 15 mph is hit by a car going 30 mph? All those kids are dead.

Sounds like a good argument for protected bike lanes until drivers can get themselves under control.

It’s not drivers’ fault that the design of these bikes is completely nuts. There are so many ways for children to be paralyzed or killed that these bikes should be outlawed.

Someone rightly pointed out up thread that it's irresponsible drivers who are the problem. Nothing wrong with the bikes without you nut jobs.

Uh huh. This is like designing a car where the children sit on the front bumper. If you put your kids on one of these bikes, you are 100 percent a terrible parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC needs revenue. The city should require all bikes that go on roads to register and have a machine readable license plate, so when they speed downhill/blow through stop signs and red lights the city can issue tickets like they do for cars. want to use the road? then obey the law

The goal of most drivers is to make sure everyone is as unfree and miserable as they are. No one can escape. Crabs in a bucket mentality.

There's been multiple cyclists going around groping women. They count on the fact that, without license plates, they can't be readily identified. Sounds like you're totally cool with people committing sexual assault so long as they're on a bike when they do it.

Cyclists need license plates, and also insurance.

If ever you want a reminder of just how batty the velophobe set has become, this is a good place to start.

There's something very Trump-y about cyclists in DC. They dont think they have to follow *any* of the rules that everyone else respects and everything is always someone else's fault. Like Trump, they act like a bunch of spoiled, entitled brats.

Cyclists don’t think we need insurance or license plates on bikes because, according to the rules that everyone respects, we don’t. I do have insurance, license plates, and identification for when I’m driving. I don’t need those things on my bike or when I walk or take Metro. I don’t think it’s spoiled or entitled not to comply with your imaginary alternative regulatory scheme that requires insurance and more bureaucracy for bicycles that are very unlikely to cause any damage to anyone except the cyclist.

I actually started thinking through the implications of requiring cyclists to carry insurance and affix license plates to their bikes and, after a couple of seconds, realized that it was such an incredibly silly idea that only someone trying to parody the anti-bike folks would put it forth.

I mean, many cars that are driven dangerously in DC have obscured, fake, or no plates and potentially no insurance, but the problem is a lack of insurance and plates on bikes? Nice trolling . . .

it would be better for everyone if cyclists weren't allowed to be anonymous and unidentifiable on the road.

Why would that be better? How often do authorities need to be able to identify cyclists?

I see cyclists put children in spectacularly dangerous situations on a fairly regular basis. I saw one with an infant in the basket on the front of her bike. It would be great if they could be readily identified to the police.

That person should be arrested for child endangerment.

It's curious how, if you put a 10 year old in the front seat of a car, people would think you're wildly irresponsible and almost no parent would even think to do it, even though that kid is strapped down with a seat belt, there's at least one airbag protecting them and there's two tons of steel around them. But no one bats at eye if you do this:

https://bunchbike.com/products/the-original-4-upgraded-electric-cargo-bike-for-families?srsltid=AfmBOopgF9JVUlhcWqgtCDCqzR1K5nGzwExl3YLCVcHVTkWkoYIYQ6iW

If you only drive 15 mph I wouldn't think it's unsafe. Are you unclear on the differences between driving and biking??

And what happens when this bicyclist going 15 mph is hit by a car going 30 mph? All those kids are dead.

Sounds like a good argument for protected bike lanes until drivers can get themselves under control.

It’s not drivers’ fault that the design of these bikes is completely nuts. There are so many ways for children to be paralyzed or killed that these bikes should be outlawed.

Someone rightly pointed out up thread that it's irresponsible drivers who are the problem. Nothing wrong with the bikes without you nut jobs.

Uh huh. This is like designing a car where the children sit on the front bumper. If you put your kids on one of these bikes, you are 100 percent a terrible parent.

This is basically car brain in action. Bikes are not cars, nor are pedestrians or trains for that matter. What makes sense with one mode of transit may not make sense with another.

This is the fundamental problem with drivers, they literally are unable to think outside the cage (box).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC needs revenue. The city should require all bikes that go on roads to register and have a machine readable license plate, so when they speed downhill/blow through stop signs and red lights the city can issue tickets like they do for cars. want to use the road? then obey the law

The goal of most drivers is to make sure everyone is as unfree and miserable as they are. No one can escape. Crabs in a bucket mentality.

There's been multiple cyclists going around groping women. They count on the fact that, without license plates, they can't be readily identified. Sounds like you're totally cool with people committing sexual assault so long as they're on a bike when they do it.

Cyclists need license plates, and also insurance.

If ever you want a reminder of just how batty the velophobe set has become, this is a good place to start.

There's something very Trump-y about cyclists in DC. They dont think they have to follow *any* of the rules that everyone else respects and everything is always someone else's fault. Like Trump, they act like a bunch of spoiled, entitled brats.

Cyclists don’t think we need insurance or license plates on bikes because, according to the rules that everyone respects, we don’t. I do have insurance, license plates, and identification for when I’m driving. I don’t need those things on my bike or when I walk or take Metro. I don’t think it’s spoiled or entitled not to comply with your imaginary alternative regulatory scheme that requires insurance and more bureaucracy for bicycles that are very unlikely to cause any damage to anyone except the cyclist.

I actually started thinking through the implications of requiring cyclists to carry insurance and affix license plates to their bikes and, after a couple of seconds, realized that it was such an incredibly silly idea that only someone trying to parody the anti-bike folks would put it forth.

I mean, many cars that are driven dangerously in DC have obscured, fake, or no plates and potentially no insurance, but the problem is a lack of insurance and plates on bikes? Nice trolling . . .

it would be better for everyone if cyclists weren't allowed to be anonymous and unidentifiable on the road.

Why would that be better? How often do authorities need to be able to identify cyclists?

I see cyclists put children in spectacularly dangerous situations on a fairly regular basis. I saw one with an infant in the basket on the front of her bike. It would be great if they could be readily identified to the police.

That person should be arrested for child endangerment.

It's curious how, if you put a 10 year old in the front seat of a car, people would think you're wildly irresponsible and almost no parent would even think to do it, even though that kid is strapped down with a seat belt, there's at least one airbag protecting them and there's two tons of steel around them. But no one bats at eye if you do this:

https://bunchbike.com/products/the-original-4-upgraded-electric-cargo-bike-for-families?srsltid=AfmBOopgF9JVUlhcWqgtCDCqzR1K5nGzwExl3YLCVcHVTkWkoYIYQ6iW

If you only drive 15 mph I wouldn't think it's unsafe. Are you unclear on the differences between driving and biking??

And what happens when this bicyclist going 15 mph is hit by a car going 30 mph? All those kids are dead.

Sounds like a good argument for protected bike lanes until drivers can get themselves under control.

It’s not drivers’ fault that the design of these bikes is completely nuts. There are so many ways for children to be paralyzed or killed that these bikes should be outlawed.

Someone rightly pointed out up thread that it's irresponsible drivers who are the problem. Nothing wrong with the bikes without you nut jobs.

Uh huh. This is like designing a car where the children sit on the front bumper. If you put your kids on one of these bikes, you are 100 percent a terrible parent.

So strollers too? Parents who put their kids in strollers are bad parents according to your mind rot? It's like being on the bumper?

And where's the large number of injured children from this? Surely if it's so dangerous (and not just your delusions) there would be widespread alarm about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC needs revenue. The city should require all bikes that go on roads to register and have a machine readable license plate, so when they speed downhill/blow through stop signs and red lights the city can issue tickets like they do for cars. want to use the road? then obey the law

The goal of most drivers is to make sure everyone is as unfree and miserable as they are. No one can escape. Crabs in a bucket mentality.

There's been multiple cyclists going around groping women. They count on the fact that, without license plates, they can't be readily identified. Sounds like you're totally cool with people committing sexual assault so long as they're on a bike when they do it.

Cyclists need license plates, and also insurance.

If ever you want a reminder of just how batty the velophobe set has become, this is a good place to start.

There's something very Trump-y about cyclists in DC. They dont think they have to follow *any* of the rules that everyone else respects and everything is always someone else's fault. Like Trump, they act like a bunch of spoiled, entitled brats.

Cyclists don’t think we need insurance or license plates on bikes because, according to the rules that everyone respects, we don’t. I do have insurance, license plates, and identification for when I’m driving. I don’t need those things on my bike or when I walk or take Metro. I don’t think it’s spoiled or entitled not to comply with your imaginary alternative regulatory scheme that requires insurance and more bureaucracy for bicycles that are very unlikely to cause any damage to anyone except the cyclist.

I actually started thinking through the implications of requiring cyclists to carry insurance and affix license plates to their bikes and, after a couple of seconds, realized that it was such an incredibly silly idea that only someone trying to parody the anti-bike folks would put it forth.

I mean, many cars that are driven dangerously in DC have obscured, fake, or no plates and potentially no insurance, but the problem is a lack of insurance and plates on bikes? Nice trolling . . .

it would be better for everyone if cyclists weren't allowed to be anonymous and unidentifiable on the road.

Why would that be better? How often do authorities need to be able to identify cyclists?

I see cyclists put children in spectacularly dangerous situations on a fairly regular basis. I saw one with an infant in the basket on the front of her bike. It would be great if they could be readily identified to the police.

That person should be arrested for child endangerment.

It's curious how, if you put a 10 year old in the front seat of a car, people would think you're wildly irresponsible and almost no parent would even think to do it, even though that kid is strapped down with a seat belt, there's at least one airbag protecting them and there's two tons of steel around them. But no one bats at eye if you do this:

https://bunchbike.com/products/the-original-4-upgraded-electric-cargo-bike-for-families?srsltid=AfmBOopgF9JVUlhcWqgtCDCqzR1K5nGzwExl3YLCVcHVTkWkoYIYQ6iW

If you only drive 15 mph I wouldn't think it's unsafe. Are you unclear on the differences between driving and biking??

And what happens when this bicyclist going 15 mph is hit by a car going 30 mph? All those kids are dead.

Sounds like a good argument for protected bike lanes until drivers can get themselves under control.

It’s not drivers’ fault that the design of these bikes is completely nuts. There are so many ways for children to be paralyzed or killed that these bikes should be outlawed.

Someone rightly pointed out up thread that it's irresponsible drivers who are the problem. Nothing wrong with the bikes without you nut jobs.

Uh huh. This is like designing a car where the children sit on the front bumper. If you put your kids on one of these bikes, you are 100 percent a terrible parent.

So strollers too? Parents who put their kids in strollers are bad parents according to your mind rot? It's like being on the bumper?

And where's the large number of injured children from this? Surely if it's so dangerous (and not just your delusions) there would be widespread alarm about it.

It looks like more kids are killed in front-over type car accidents than are killed in bike accidents per year. So much for the safety arguments. Sitting high up with a front protruding 8 feet in front of you creates some massive blind spots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://theonion.com/report-it-probably-fine-that-5-year-old-just-whizzed-by-on-lyft-scooter/

You do you realize that these articles are made up, right?

They're made up, but they're funny because they're also true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC needs revenue. The city should require all bikes that go on roads to register and have a machine readable license plate, so when they speed downhill/blow through stop signs and red lights the city can issue tickets like they do for cars. want to use the road? then obey the law

The goal of most drivers is to make sure everyone is as unfree and miserable as they are. No one can escape. Crabs in a bucket mentality.

There's been multiple cyclists going around groping women. They count on the fact that, without license plates, they can't be readily identified. Sounds like you're totally cool with people committing sexual assault so long as they're on a bike when they do it.

Cyclists need license plates, and also insurance.

If ever you want a reminder of just how batty the velophobe set has become, this is a good place to start.

There's something very Trump-y about cyclists in DC. They dont think they have to follow *any* of the rules that everyone else respects and everything is always someone else's fault. Like Trump, they act like a bunch of spoiled, entitled brats.

Cyclists don’t think we need insurance or license plates on bikes because, according to the rules that everyone respects, we don’t. I do have insurance, license plates, and identification for when I’m driving. I don’t need those things on my bike or when I walk or take Metro. I don’t think it’s spoiled or entitled not to comply with your imaginary alternative regulatory scheme that requires insurance and more bureaucracy for bicycles that are very unlikely to cause any damage to anyone except the cyclist.

I actually started thinking through the implications of requiring cyclists to carry insurance and affix license plates to their bikes and, after a couple of seconds, realized that it was such an incredibly silly idea that only someone trying to parody the anti-bike folks would put it forth.

I mean, many cars that are driven dangerously in DC have obscured, fake, or no plates and potentially no insurance, but the problem is a lack of insurance and plates on bikes? Nice trolling . . .

it would be better for everyone if cyclists weren't allowed to be anonymous and unidentifiable on the road.

Why would that be better? How often do authorities need to be able to identify cyclists?

I see cyclists put children in spectacularly dangerous situations on a fairly regular basis. I saw one with an infant in the basket on the front of her bike. It would be great if they could be readily identified to the police.

That person should be arrested for child endangerment.

It's curious how, if you put a 10 year old in the front seat of a car, people would think you're wildly irresponsible and almost no parent would even think to do it, even though that kid is strapped down with a seat belt, there's at least one airbag protecting them and there's two tons of steel around them. But no one bats at eye if you do this:

https://bunchbike.com/products/the-original-4-upgraded-electric-cargo-bike-for-families?srsltid=AfmBOopgF9JVUlhcWqgtCDCqzR1K5nGzwExl3YLCVcHVTkWkoYIYQ6iW

If you only drive 15 mph I wouldn't think it's unsafe. Are you unclear on the differences between driving and biking??

And what happens when this bicyclist going 15 mph is hit by a car going 30 mph? All those kids are dead.

Sounds like a good argument for protected bike lanes until drivers can get themselves under control.

It’s not drivers’ fault that the design of these bikes is completely nuts. There are so many ways for children to be paralyzed or killed that these bikes should be outlawed.

Someone rightly pointed out up thread that it's irresponsible drivers who are the problem. Nothing wrong with the bikes without you nut jobs.

Uh huh. This is like designing a car where the children sit on the front bumper. If you put your kids on one of these bikes, you are 100 percent a terrible parent.

Millions if not billions of man-hours of research have gone into trying to prevent humans who are riding in cars from being hurt in accidents.

Meanwhile, cyclists are like "I'm going to through my four year old in this little basket on the front of my bike and if something goes horribly wrong, I'm guess that will be a lesson to the driver, won't it?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC needs revenue. The city should require all bikes that go on roads to register and have a machine readable license plate, so when they speed downhill/blow through stop signs and red lights the city can issue tickets like they do for cars. want to use the road? then obey the law

The goal of most drivers is to make sure everyone is as unfree and miserable as they are. No one can escape. Crabs in a bucket mentality.

There's been multiple cyclists going around groping women. They count on the fact that, without license plates, they can't be readily identified. Sounds like you're totally cool with people committing sexual assault so long as they're on a bike when they do it.

Cyclists need license plates, and also insurance.

If ever you want a reminder of just how batty the velophobe set has become, this is a good place to start.

There's something very Trump-y about cyclists in DC. They dont think they have to follow *any* of the rules that everyone else respects and everything is always someone else's fault. Like Trump, they act like a bunch of spoiled, entitled brats.

Cyclists don’t think we need insurance or license plates on bikes because, according to the rules that everyone respects, we don’t. I do have insurance, license plates, and identification for when I’m driving. I don’t need those things on my bike or when I walk or take Metro. I don’t think it’s spoiled or entitled not to comply with your imaginary alternative regulatory scheme that requires insurance and more bureaucracy for bicycles that are very unlikely to cause any damage to anyone except the cyclist.

I actually started thinking through the implications of requiring cyclists to carry insurance and affix license plates to their bikes and, after a couple of seconds, realized that it was such an incredibly silly idea that only someone trying to parody the anti-bike folks would put it forth.

I mean, many cars that are driven dangerously in DC have obscured, fake, or no plates and potentially no insurance, but the problem is a lack of insurance and plates on bikes? Nice trolling . . .

it would be better for everyone if cyclists weren't allowed to be anonymous and unidentifiable on the road.

Why would that be better? How often do authorities need to be able to identify cyclists?

I see cyclists put children in spectacularly dangerous situations on a fairly regular basis. I saw one with an infant in the basket on the front of her bike. It would be great if they could be readily identified to the police.

That person should be arrested for child endangerment.

It's curious how, if you put a 10 year old in the front seat of a car, people would think you're wildly irresponsible and almost no parent would even think to do it, even though that kid is strapped down with a seat belt, there's at least one airbag protecting them and there's two tons of steel around them. But no one bats at eye if you do this:

https://bunchbike.com/products/the-original-4-upgraded-electric-cargo-bike-for-families?srsltid=AfmBOopgF9JVUlhcWqgtCDCqzR1K5nGzwExl3YLCVcHVTkWkoYIYQ6iW

If you only drive 15 mph I wouldn't think it's unsafe. Are you unclear on the differences between driving and biking??

And what happens when this bicyclist going 15 mph is hit by a car going 30 mph? All those kids are dead.

Sounds like a good argument for protected bike lanes until drivers can get themselves under control.

It’s not drivers’ fault that the design of these bikes is completely nuts. There are so many ways for children to be paralyzed or killed that these bikes should be outlawed.

Someone rightly pointed out up thread that it's irresponsible drivers who are the problem. Nothing wrong with the bikes without you nut jobs.

Uh huh. This is like designing a car where the children sit on the front bumper. If you put your kids on one of these bikes, you are 100 percent a terrible parent.

So strollers too? Parents who put their kids in strollers are bad parents according to your mind rot? It's like being on the bumper?

And where's the large number of injured children from this? Surely if it's so dangerous (and not just your delusions) there would be widespread alarm about it.

Well, since cars don't typically drive on sidewalks, strollers are probably fine. There probably will never be "large" numbers of injured children because the number of cyclists (let alone cyclists with children) is microscopic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC needs revenue. The city should require all bikes that go on roads to register and have a machine readable license plate, so when they speed downhill/blow through stop signs and red lights the city can issue tickets like they do for cars. want to use the road? then obey the law

The goal of most drivers is to make sure everyone is as unfree and miserable as they are. No one can escape. Crabs in a bucket mentality.

There's been multiple cyclists going around groping women. They count on the fact that, without license plates, they can't be readily identified. Sounds like you're totally cool with people committing sexual assault so long as they're on a bike when they do it.

Cyclists need license plates, and also insurance.

If ever you want a reminder of just how batty the velophobe set has become, this is a good place to start.

There's something very Trump-y about cyclists in DC. They dont think they have to follow *any* of the rules that everyone else respects and everything is always someone else's fault. Like Trump, they act like a bunch of spoiled, entitled brats.

Cyclists don’t think we need insurance or license plates on bikes because, according to the rules that everyone respects, we don’t. I do have insurance, license plates, and identification for when I’m driving. I don’t need those things on my bike or when I walk or take Metro. I don’t think it’s spoiled or entitled not to comply with your imaginary alternative regulatory scheme that requires insurance and more bureaucracy for bicycles that are very unlikely to cause any damage to anyone except the cyclist.

I actually started thinking through the implications of requiring cyclists to carry insurance and affix license plates to their bikes and, after a couple of seconds, realized that it was such an incredibly silly idea that only someone trying to parody the anti-bike folks would put it forth.

I mean, many cars that are driven dangerously in DC have obscured, fake, or no plates and potentially no insurance, but the problem is a lack of insurance and plates on bikes? Nice trolling . . .

it would be better for everyone if cyclists weren't allowed to be anonymous and unidentifiable on the road.

Why would that be better? How often do authorities need to be able to identify cyclists?

I see cyclists put children in spectacularly dangerous situations on a fairly regular basis. I saw one with an infant in the basket on the front of her bike. It would be great if they could be readily identified to the police.

That person should be arrested for child endangerment.

It's curious how, if you put a 10 year old in the front seat of a car, people would think you're wildly irresponsible and almost no parent would even think to do it, even though that kid is strapped down with a seat belt, there's at least one airbag protecting them and there's two tons of steel around them. But no one bats at eye if you do this:

https://bunchbike.com/products/the-original-4-upgraded-electric-cargo-bike-for-families?srsltid=AfmBOopgF9JVUlhcWqgtCDCqzR1K5nGzwExl3YLCVcHVTkWkoYIYQ6iW

If you only drive 15 mph I wouldn't think it's unsafe. Are you unclear on the differences between driving and biking??

And what happens when this bicyclist going 15 mph is hit by a car going 30 mph? All those kids are dead.

Sounds like a good argument for protected bike lanes until drivers can get themselves under control.

It’s not drivers’ fault that the design of these bikes is completely nuts. There are so many ways for children to be paralyzed or killed that these bikes should be outlawed.

Someone rightly pointed out up thread that it's irresponsible drivers who are the problem. Nothing wrong with the bikes without you nut jobs.

Uh huh. This is like designing a car where the children sit on the front bumper. If you put your kids on one of these bikes, you are 100 percent a terrible parent.

So strollers too? Parents who put their kids in strollers are bad parents according to your mind rot? It's like being on the bumper?

And where's the large number of injured children from this? Surely if it's so dangerous (and not just your delusions) there would be widespread alarm about it.

Well, since cars don't typically drive on sidewalks, strollers are probably fine. There probably will never be "large" numbers of injured children because the number of cyclists (let alone cyclists with children) is microscopic.

You must be new here. I just saw a video of someone driving on the national mall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC needs revenue. The city should require all bikes that go on roads to register and have a machine readable license plate, so when they speed downhill/blow through stop signs and red lights the city can issue tickets like they do for cars. want to use the road? then obey the law

The goal of most drivers is to make sure everyone is as unfree and miserable as they are. No one can escape. Crabs in a bucket mentality.

There's been multiple cyclists going around groping women. They count on the fact that, without license plates, they can't be readily identified. Sounds like you're totally cool with people committing sexual assault so long as they're on a bike when they do it.

Cyclists need license plates, and also insurance.

If ever you want a reminder of just how batty the velophobe set has become, this is a good place to start.

There's something very Trump-y about cyclists in DC. They dont think they have to follow *any* of the rules that everyone else respects and everything is always someone else's fault. Like Trump, they act like a bunch of spoiled, entitled brats.

Cyclists don’t think we need insurance or license plates on bikes because, according to the rules that everyone respects, we don’t. I do have insurance, license plates, and identification for when I’m driving. I don’t need those things on my bike or when I walk or take Metro. I don’t think it’s spoiled or entitled not to comply with your imaginary alternative regulatory scheme that requires insurance and more bureaucracy for bicycles that are very unlikely to cause any damage to anyone except the cyclist.

I actually started thinking through the implications of requiring cyclists to carry insurance and affix license plates to their bikes and, after a couple of seconds, realized that it was such an incredibly silly idea that only someone trying to parody the anti-bike folks would put it forth.

I mean, many cars that are driven dangerously in DC have obscured, fake, or no plates and potentially no insurance, but the problem is a lack of insurance and plates on bikes? Nice trolling . . .

it would be better for everyone if cyclists weren't allowed to be anonymous and unidentifiable on the road.

Why would that be better? How often do authorities need to be able to identify cyclists?

I see cyclists put children in spectacularly dangerous situations on a fairly regular basis. I saw one with an infant in the basket on the front of her bike. It would be great if they could be readily identified to the police.

That person should be arrested for child endangerment.

It's curious how, if you put a 10 year old in the front seat of a car, people would think you're wildly irresponsible and almost no parent would even think to do it, even though that kid is strapped down with a seat belt, there's at least one airbag protecting them and there's two tons of steel around them. But no one bats at eye if you do this:

https://bunchbike.com/products/the-original-4-upgraded-electric-cargo-bike-for-families?srsltid=AfmBOopgF9JVUlhcWqgtCDCqzR1K5nGzwExl3YLCVcHVTkWkoYIYQ6iW

If you only drive 15 mph I wouldn't think it's unsafe. Are you unclear on the differences between driving and biking??

And what happens when this bicyclist going 15 mph is hit by a car going 30 mph? All those kids are dead.

Sounds like a good argument for protected bike lanes until drivers can get themselves under control.

It’s not drivers’ fault that the design of these bikes is completely nuts. There are so many ways for children to be paralyzed or killed that these bikes should be outlawed.

Someone rightly pointed out up thread that it's irresponsible drivers who are the problem. Nothing wrong with the bikes without you nut jobs.

Uh huh. This is like designing a car where the children sit on the front bumper. If you put your kids on one of these bikes, you are 100 percent a terrible parent.

So strollers too? Parents who put their kids in strollers are bad parents according to your mind rot? It's like being on the bumper?

And where's the large number of injured children from this? Surely if it's so dangerous (and not just your delusions) there would be widespread alarm about it.

Well, since cars don't typically drive on sidewalks, strollers are probably fine. There probably will never be "large" numbers of injured children because the number of cyclists (let alone cyclists with children) is microscopic.

You’ve heard of crosswalks right? That’s where most pedestrian injuries and deaths occur. Those brief interactions with cars…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wish we could be like Amsterdam but we have hills and disgusting summers. You'll never have a critical mass of bike commuters because it is hugely impractical for office workers. I wish they would invest more in public transit.

It's been hotter than hell and humid as a shower out and yet I still see tons of bike commuters every day down town this week and I was biking to work. Go figure.

[Anonymous]

I saw someone biking on AZ ave. He was next to 2 people on MacArthur Blvd biking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I saw someone biking on AZ ave. He was next to 2 people on MacArthur Blvd biking

That's almost 80% capacity. Better widen those bike lanes.