Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That may be what they think they are doing. But if you think riding a bike in DC is safe, well, you need your head examined. And convenient? Stop. It is anything but convenient.

Your argument here is that DC shouldn't build bike infrastructure to make bicycling in DC safe and convenient, because bicycling in DC is unsafe and inconvenient due to the lack of bike infrastructure.

No, I'm saying riding a bike in DC is like playing football or boxing: It is inherently dangerous and there is nothing anyone can do to change that.

And unless you can figure out a way to control the weather, it will never be convenient in a city that is borderline tropical for roughly half the year.

Does your office building have a gym in it, like most of the buildings I've worked in? Then you can shower when you get to work instead of before you leave the house. Convenience problem solved.

Agree ... I bike to work and shower when I get there ... it’s fine in the summer ... and 10x more enjoyable than driving to work

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That may be what they think they are doing. But if you think riding a bike in DC is safe, well, you need your head examined. And convenient? Stop. It is anything but convenient.

Your argument here is that DC shouldn't build bike infrastructure to make bicycling in DC safe and convenient, because bicycling in DC is unsafe and inconvenient due to the lack of bike infrastructure.

No, I'm saying riding a bike in DC is like playing football or boxing: It is inherently dangerous and there is nothing anyone can do to change that.

And unless you can figure out a way to control the weather, it will never be convenient in a city that is borderline tropical for roughly half the year.

Ah. If that's what you're saying, then you're just plain wrong on the facts. Fortunately, you're not in charge at DDOT.

Sounds like you're in denial. You should meet my friend, physics. He says that if a 2,000 pound car going 25 mph hits a 200-pound man on a bike, that man goes dead.

In other words, it's not bicycling that's dangerous, it's bicycling around drivers. Yes. That's the reason for protected bike lanes, as well as for prioritizing other means of transportation that aren't cars.

Incidentally, your friend physics says no such thing. If a driver hits a person at 25 mph, the odds of death are only (!) about 10%. And even lower at 20 mph, which is why DC recently lowered the default speed limit on residential streets to 20 mph.

Love the entitled white boy logic here. It's not other people's fault if you get hurt doing something stupid.

It is definitely other people's fault if they hit you while you're on a bike.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That may be what they think they are doing. But if you think riding a bike in DC is safe, well, you need your head examined. And convenient? Stop. It is anything but convenient.

Your argument here is that DC shouldn't build bike infrastructure to make bicycling in DC safe and convenient, because bicycling in DC is unsafe and inconvenient due to the lack of bike infrastructure.

No, I'm saying riding a bike in DC is like playing football or boxing: It is inherently dangerous and there is nothing anyone can do to change that.

And unless you can figure out a way to control the weather, it will never be convenient in a city that is borderline tropical for roughly half the year.

Does your office building have a gym in it, like most of the buildings I've worked in? Then you can shower when you get to work instead of before you leave the house. Convenience problem solved.

Anonymous wrote:I really don’t understand why people who strove want *more* people driving rather than fewer. You realize what happens when you add 5% more car traffic to the roads at rush hour?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That may be what they think they are doing. But if you think riding a bike in DC is safe, well, you need your head examined. And convenient? Stop. It is anything but convenient.

Your argument here is that DC shouldn't build bike infrastructure to make bicycling in DC safe and convenient, because bicycling in DC is unsafe and inconvenient due to the lack of bike infrastructure.

No, I'm saying riding a bike in DC is like playing football or boxing: It is inherently dangerous and there is nothing anyone can do to change that.

And unless you can figure out a way to control the weather, it will never be convenient in a city that is borderline tropical for roughly half the year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

On the other hand, if I'd been driving a car rather than riding a bike when the kid ran out into the street, I could have killed her rather than scraping my knee. Would definitely rather scrape my knee up than run a little kid over.

Yep. The streets would be a lot safer with more people on bikes and fewer people driving cars.

The streets would also be a lot safer if no one was allowed to use them, but some risks are worth the benefits.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

On the other hand, if I'd been driving a car rather than riding a bike when the kid ran out into the street, I could have killed her rather than scraping my knee. Would definitely rather scrape my knee up than run a little kid over.

Yep. The streets would be a lot safer with more people on bikes and fewer people driving cars.

The streets would also be a lot safer if no one was allowed to use them, but some risks are worth the benefits.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

On the other hand, if I'd been driving a car rather than riding a bike when the kid ran out into the street, I could have killed her rather than scraping my knee. Would definitely rather scrape my knee up than run a little kid over.

Yep. The streets would be a lot safer with more people on bikes and fewer people driving cars.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That may be what they think they are doing. But if you think riding a bike in DC is safe, well, you need your head examined. And convenient? Stop. It is anything but convenient.

Your argument here is that DC shouldn't build bike infrastructure to make bicycling in DC safe and convenient, because bicycling in DC is unsafe and inconvenient due to the lack of bike infrastructure.

No, I'm saying riding a bike in DC is like playing football or boxing: It is inherently dangerous and there is nothing anyone can do to change that.

And unless you can figure out a way to control the weather, it will never be convenient in a city that is borderline tropical for roughly half the year.

this is why not very many people ride bicycles

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

On the other hand, if I'd been driving a car rather than riding a bike when the kid ran out into the street, I could have killed her rather than scraping my knee. Would definitely rather scrape my knee up than run a little kid over.

Yep. The streets would be a lot safer with more people on bikes and fewer people driving cars.

They'd also be a lot safer with fewer people on bikes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That may be what they think they are doing. But if you think riding a bike in DC is safe, well, you need your head examined. And convenient? Stop. It is anything but convenient.

Your argument here is that DC shouldn't build bike infrastructure to make bicycling in DC safe and convenient, because bicycling in DC is unsafe and inconvenient due to the lack of bike infrastructure.

No, I'm saying riding a bike in DC is like playing football or boxing: It is inherently dangerous and there is nothing anyone can do to change that.

And unless you can figure out a way to control the weather, it will never be convenient in a city that is borderline tropical for roughly half the year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

On the other hand, if I'd been driving a car rather than riding a bike when the kid ran out into the street, I could have killed her rather than scraping my knee. Would definitely rather scrape my knee up than run a little kid over.

Yep. The streets would be a lot safer with more people on bikes and fewer people driving cars.

Anonymous wrote:

On the other hand, if I'd been driving a car rather than riding a bike when the kid ran out into the street, I could have killed her rather than scraping my knee. Would definitely rather scrape my knee up than run a little kid over.