Mary Cheh wants to make it legal for bicyclists for blow stop signs and stop lights

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Riding a bike in a major city is never going to be safe. It is inherently dangerous and there's nothing anyone can do about that. It's like boxing.

The difference between boxers and cyclists is that boxers aren't entitled little ***ches who lobby the government to spend billions of dollars in a doomed campaign to make their hobby safe.

Cycling isn't inherently dangerous. It is only dangerous when drivers insist on every right and responsibility at the expense of all others and think they should be able to drive around in two ton steel cages without any inconvenience or

People want to cycle. People have to cycle. People want to walk. People have to use wheelchairs. People want to take busses and trains or have to because they can't afford a car. Those people are tax paying citizens and have just as much right to advocate for their modes of transportation as drivers do. Drivers are the only ones that literally kill other road users and say that the other modes are inherently dangerous, conveniently leaving out the fact that the other modes work absolutely just fine when there are no cars around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Riding a bike in a major city is never going to be safe. It is inherently dangerous and there's nothing anyone can do about that. It's like boxing.

The difference between boxers and cyclists is that boxers aren't entitled little ***ches who lobby the government to spend billions of dollars in a doomed campaign to make their hobby safe.

Cycling isn't inherently dangerous. It is only dangerous when drivers insist on every right and responsibility at the expense of all others and think they should be able to drive around in two ton steel cages without any inconvenience or

People want to cycle. People have to cycle. People want to walk. People have to use wheelchairs. People want to take busses and trains or have to because they can't afford a car. Those people are tax paying citizens and have just as much right to advocate for their modes of transportation as drivers do. Drivers are the only ones that literally kill other road users and say that the other modes are inherently dangerous, conveniently leaving out the fact that the other modes work absolutely just fine when there are no cars around.

Then please ride your bike where there are no cars around

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Riding a bike in a major city is never going to be safe. It is inherently dangerous and there's nothing anyone can do about that. It's like boxing.

The difference between boxers and cyclists is that boxers aren't entitled little ***ches who lobby the government to spend billions of dollars in a doomed campaign to make their hobby safe.

Cycling isn't inherently dangerous. It is only dangerous when drivers insist on every right and responsibility at the expense of all others and think they should be able to drive around in two ton steel cages without any inconvenience or

People want to cycle. People have to cycle. People want to walk. People have to use wheelchairs. People want to take busses and trains or have to because they can't afford a car. Those people are tax paying citizens and have just as much right to advocate for their modes of transportation as drivers do. Drivers are the only ones that literally kill other road users and say that the other modes are inherently dangerous, conveniently leaving out the fact that the other modes work absolutely just fine when there are no cars around.

Then please ride your bike where there are no cars around

You mean like a protected bike lane? Gladly! Will continue to advocate for more of those as well!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would vote for a politician who promises to get rid of all of the bike lanes.

And I think you'll succeed... in North Dakota maybe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Riding a bike in a major city is never going to be safe. It is inherently dangerous and there's nothing anyone can do about that. It's like boxing.

The difference between boxers and cyclists is that boxers aren't entitled little ***ches who lobby the government to spend billions of dollars in a doomed campaign to make their hobby safe.

Cycling isn't inherently dangerous. It is only dangerous when drivers insist on every right and responsibility at the expense of all others and think they should be able to drive around in two ton steel cages without any inconvenience or

People want to cycle. People have to cycle. People want to walk. People have to use wheelchairs. People want to take busses and trains or have to because they can't afford a car. Those people are tax paying citizens and have just as much right to advocate for their modes of transportation as drivers do. Drivers are the only ones that literally kill other road users and say that the other modes are inherently dangerous, conveniently leaving out the fact that the other modes work absolutely just fine when there are no cars around.

Then please ride your bike where there are no cars around

You mean like a protected bike lane? Gladly! Will continue to advocate for more of those as well!

Yay! More free parking!!! Win-win!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Riding a bike in a major city is never going to be safe. It is inherently dangerous and there's nothing anyone can do about that. It's like boxing.

The difference between boxers and cyclists is that boxers aren't entitled little ***ches who lobby the government to spend billions of dollars in a doomed campaign to make their hobby safe.

Cycling isn't inherently dangerous. It is only dangerous when drivers insist on every right and responsibility at the expense of all others and think they should be able to drive around in two ton steel cages without any inconvenience or

People want to cycle. People have to cycle. People want to walk. People have to use wheelchairs. People want to take busses and trains or have to because they can't afford a car. Those people are tax paying citizens and have just as much right to advocate for their modes of transportation as drivers do. Drivers are the only ones that literally kill other road users and say that the other modes are inherently dangerous, conveniently leaving out the fact that the other modes work absolutely just fine when there are no cars around.

Then please ride your bike where there are no cars around

You mean like a protected bike lane? Gladly! Will continue to advocate for more of those as well!

Yay! More free parking!!! Win-win!!!

I thought drivers always followed the rules to a T?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Riding a bike in a major city is never going to be safe. It is inherently dangerous and there's nothing anyone can do about that. It's like boxing.

The difference between boxers and cyclists is that boxers aren't entitled little ***ches who lobby the government to spend billions of dollars in a doomed campaign to make their hobby safe.

Cycling isn't inherently dangerous. It is only dangerous when drivers insist on every right and responsibility at the expense of all others and think they should be able to drive around in two ton steel cages without any inconvenience or

People want to cycle. People have to cycle. People want to walk. People have to use wheelchairs. People want to take busses and trains or have to because they can't afford a car. Those people are tax paying citizens and have just as much right to advocate for their modes of transportation as drivers do. Drivers are the only ones that literally kill other road users and say that the other modes are inherently dangerous, conveniently leaving out the fact that the other modes work absolutely just fine when there are no cars around.

Then please ride your bike where there are no cars around

You mean like a protected bike lane? Gladly! Will continue to advocate for more of those as well!

Yay! More free parking!!! Win-win!!!

I thought drivers always followed the rules to a T?

I've decided to pretend I'm a cyclist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Riding a bike in a major city is never going to be safe. It is inherently dangerous and there's nothing anyone can do about that. It's like boxing.

The difference between boxers and cyclists is that boxers aren't entitled little ***ches who lobby the government to spend billions of dollars in a doomed campaign to make their hobby safe.

Cycling isn't inherently dangerous. It is only dangerous when drivers insist on every right and responsibility at the expense of all others and think they should be able to drive around in two ton steel cages without any inconvenience or

People want to cycle. People have to cycle. People want to walk. People have to use wheelchairs. People want to take busses and trains or have to because they can't afford a car. Those people are tax paying citizens and have just as much right to advocate for their modes of transportation as drivers do. Drivers are the only ones that literally kill other road users and say that the other modes are inherently dangerous, conveniently leaving out the fact that the other modes work absolutely just fine when there are no cars around.

Then please ride your bike where there are no cars around

You mean like a protected bike lane? Gladly! Will continue to advocate for more of those as well!

Yay! More free parking!!! Win-win!!!

I thought drivers always followed the rules to a T?

I've decided to pretend I'm a cyclist.

So you’re going to stop killing people? Cool beans

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Riding a bike in a major city is never going to be safe. It is inherently dangerous and there's nothing anyone can do about that. It's like boxing.

The difference between boxers and cyclists is that boxers aren't entitled little ***ches who lobby the government to spend billions of dollars in a doomed campaign to make their hobby safe.

Cycling isn't inherently dangerous. It is only dangerous when drivers insist on every right and responsibility at the expense of all others and think they should be able to drive around in two ton steel cages without any inconvenience or

People want to cycle. People have to cycle. People want to walk. People have to use wheelchairs. People want to take busses and trains or have to because they can't afford a car. Those people are tax paying citizens and have just as much right to advocate for their modes of transportation as drivers do. Drivers are the only ones that literally kill other road users and say that the other modes are inherently dangerous, conveniently leaving out the fact that the other modes work absolutely just fine when there are no cars around.

Then please ride your bike where there are no cars around

You mean like a protected bike lane? Gladly! Will continue to advocate for more of those as well!

Yay! More free parking!!! Win-win!!!

I thought drivers always followed the rules to a T?

I've decided to pretend I'm a cyclist.

If only you'd pretend to be an intelligent and well-adjusted human being.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Riding a bike in a major city is never going to be safe. It is inherently dangerous and there's nothing anyone can do about that. It's like boxing.

The difference between boxers and cyclists is that boxers aren't entitled little ***ches who lobby the government to spend billions of dollars in a doomed campaign to make their hobby safe.

Cycling isn't inherently dangerous. It is only dangerous when drivers insist on every right and responsibility at the expense of all others and think they should be able to drive around in two ton steel cages without any inconvenience or

People want to cycle. People have to cycle. People want to walk. People have to use wheelchairs. People want to take busses and trains or have to because they can't afford a car. Those people are tax paying citizens and have just as much right to advocate for their modes of transportation as drivers do. Drivers are the only ones that literally kill other road users and say that the other modes are inherently dangerous, conveniently leaving out the fact that the other modes work absolutely just fine when there are no cars around.

Then please ride your bike where there are no cars around

You mean like a protected bike lane? Gladly! Will continue to advocate for more of those as well!

Yay! More free parking!!! Win-win!!!

I thought drivers always followed the rules to a T?

I've decided to pretend I'm a cyclist.

If only you'd pretend to be an intelligent and well-adjusted human being.

No I said I’m pretending to be a cyclist. That means I do what I want when I want with no regard for others.

[Anonymous]

Now when I drive I’m an intelligent and well adjusted.

[Anonymous]

Person

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Riding a bike in a major city is never going to be safe. It is inherently dangerous and there's nothing anyone can do about that. It's like boxing.

The difference between boxers and cyclists is that boxers aren't entitled little ***ches who lobby the government to spend billions of dollars in a doomed campaign to make their hobby safe.

Cycling isn't inherently dangerous. It is only dangerous when drivers insist on every right and responsibility at the expense of all others and think they should be able to drive around in two ton steel cages without any inconvenience or

People want to cycle. People have to cycle. People want to walk. People have to use wheelchairs. People want to take busses and trains or have to because they can't afford a car. Those people are tax paying citizens and have just as much right to advocate for their modes of transportation as drivers do. Drivers are the only ones that literally kill other road users and say that the other modes are inherently dangerous, conveniently leaving out the fact that the other modes work absolutely just fine when there are no cars around.

Then please ride your bike where there are no cars around

You mean like a protected bike lane? Gladly! Will continue to advocate for more of those as well!

Yay! More free parking!!! Win-win!!!

I thought drivers always followed the rules to a T?

Drivers: I just want cyclists to follow the law.

Cyclists: City, please add more bike lanes that are separate from the road where cars may not legally travel.

Drivers: I will just break the law and park in the protected lane!

[Anonymous]

I see about 3 cyclists max during any commute these days. Not sure why the city is spending so much to redesign the streets of dc to accommodate a small minority of predominantly wealthy, white and vocal constituents. Most low-income workers don't live on the metro and aren't riding bikes into DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see about 3 cyclists max during any commute these days. Not sure why the city is spending so much to redesign the streets of dc to accommodate a small minority of predominantly wealthy, white and vocal constituents. Most low-income workers don't live on the metro and aren't riding bikes into DC.

As I and others have mentioned on this thread; DC and DDOT don't shape their policies around your commute observations