interesting.
too big for the sidewalk and too dangerous for the road is the argument? let's face it bikes are a big enough annoyance on the roads...the gp doesn't care if a cyclist gets hit, hurt a few kids and the status quo might have to change!
what about drafting some legislation that forces towns cities to provide a cycling lane? probably better cents (spent) all round.
I don't like baby carriers. I think they put a small child or baby at too much risk. But, that's just my opinion and I will not tell other parents what to do with their kids. Nor would I support any legislation that would do the same.
I don't like baby carriers. I think they put a small child or baby at too much risk. But, that's just my opinion and I will not tell other parents what to do with their kids. Nor would I support any legislation that would do the same.
I don't like them either, on the road - they're just too low and hard to see for me to feel comfortable dragging my kid along, even with the silly little orange flag.
There isn't any real alternative, though. Bike-mounted baby seats are deathtraps, even with helmets used (and many are designed without taking helmets into account, so they're uncomfortable even if you try to be responsible about it).
I only operate my kid trailer on public bike paths. I have ridden from my house to the path on residential streets in the past and sidewalks and it always made me uncomfortable. I don't know if we need another law to protect us from ourselves though.
My son loves to ride in the burley, but the few times I have had him on the road were enough for me. I will only take him on the road in VERY residential areas where we live, straight streets with no blind turns, 25mph speed limits and only in good light.
Anywhere else and I find a way to go off the road, often the sidewalks. Truth is, not too many people use them anymore so don't bother flaming me for not supporting the team, my kid is more important.
This law avoids the problem, drivers not paying attention, and instead attempts to make things safer indirectly by giving inattentive drivers fewer things and people to hit.
Well, I guess I'll get more time one the trail.
I don't know if we need another law to protect us from ourselves though.
Thank you!
As for kid haulers, I have an uncle who inspired me to get into riding when I was a kid. He got so used to riding hauling his kids (too young to stay at home alone) on his solo training rides, he just kept doing it, even as they started getting bigger. Eventually, his kids patience outgrew going on dads daily 60mile training rides, and he got back on his road bike. He missed the power training of it though, so he grabbed the ancient 40lb cannondale (1985ish) mtb again hooked up the kid trailer, and loaded it with a pile of bricks. He's been riding like that for ten years. Hill country & all. The guys a pure monster. Never races, but on group rides, he takes off like a rocket as soon as it's climbing time. I think of him every time I see one of those things. Not really on topic, but I couldn't help think of that...
This law avoids the problem, drivers not paying attention, and instead attempts to make things safer indirectly by giving inattentive drivers fewer things and people to hit.
Let's ban cars and inattentive drivers.
Or maybe we can just ban kids.
Better yet let's ban lawmakers and safety nazis.
This is just need to know information: Am i supposed to enjoy the irony or pity the sincerity?
My computer won't let me read the link. Are they banning trailers or kids in trailers? Regardless, its a stupid law designed to protect cage drivers "rights" under the guise of saftey for kids and bikers.
2006 Senate Pre-filed Bill 6142 (Prohibiting the use of bicycles with baby carriers on roadways)
Introduced by Sen. Jim Honeyford on December 7, 2005, to prohibit a person from operating a bicycle attached to an occupied baby carrier on a street or other roadway, unless the bicycle is operated within a city or town that prohibits the operation of bicycles on the sidewalk adjacent to the street or other roadway.
I don't know if we need another law to protect us from ourselves though.
We do, because personal responsibility has eroded so much. If we could somehow keep people from suing the state and others for their own mistakes, then we might be able to live with a little more freedom. People are selfish though and they take advantage of every opportunity to try and wring money out of the system.
"It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth
Once upon a time Mom used to put me on the rack on the back of her "cruiser" when I was too young to ride 2-wheels on my own. She didn't even use bungee-cords! Had anything happened I would have been toast. Keep in mind this was the 70's, eh?
So, now it's come to the point where people must restrain themselves and their kids from any enjoyment in life, for sake of the irresponsible @'s that can't slow down a little and use some common sense.
I have a better idea - why not just ban pregnancy altogether. All those stupid little kids getting in the way of everything, right? They cause stress and MUST be the reason the world is such a horrible place to live. Yeah, that's it.
Why can't these politicians do something CONSTRUCTIVE with OUR time and money? Oh wait, that would make sense.
Don't get me wrong - I can really understand how something like this could honestly get in the way of the flow of traffic, BUT if it was really THAT big of a problem wouldn't it make more sense to put in BIKE LANES????????
Nah, the banning pregnancy idea is better, I guess.
Sorry for the unusual attitude with my post, but this stuff is very upsetting to me. People need to learn.
Enough room for a 454, baby!! And I'm not talking about a Pike!
These things are SERIOUS singlespeed action...
The only con of these is they occupy a lot of garage space and at least the ones used here in Mexico are workhorses with little or no technology. Somebody could make a nice business doing some of these in the USA with a little of creativity.
Thanks Yuri, there's a handy "email" link to tell the Senator what you think.
Here is what I sent,
"Dear Sen. Honeyford,
I do not live in your district or in Washington. I do however ride bikes on trails, MUTs and streets and on occasion with my son in his Burley trailer.
I am an upstanding citizen in my community and strive to make my community a better place.
I am am disturbed by your proposed bill and wonder what the imptus and intnet is.
As near as I can tell this law avoids a percived problem - drivers not paying attention, and instead attempts to make things safer indirectly by giving inattentive drivers fewer things and people to hit.
I hope I am wrong and I hope this pre-bill is put to bed.
If you would be so kind I would like to hear your response.
Regards,
Yuri
Phoenix, AZ"
This is just need to know information: Am i supposed to enjoy the irony or pity the sincerity?
I do not live in your district or in Washington. I do however ride bikes on trails, MUTs and streets and on occasion with my son in his Burley trailer.
I am an upstanding citizen in my community and strive to make my community a better place.
I am am disturbed by your proposed bill and wonder what the imptus and intnet is.
As near as I can tell this law avoids a percived problem - drivers not paying attention, and instead attempts to make things safer indirectly by giving inattentive drivers fewer things and people to hit.
I hope I am wrong and I hope this pre-bill is put to bed.
If you would be so kind I would like to hear your response.
Regards,
Yuri
Phoenix, AZ"
Polite is key. Anything with profanity or threats probably just gets blocked or trashcanned (and investigated if it's bad enough).
I live in Washington but not in his district (I live on the Democratic coast, not the Republican interior), so he probably still doesn't care too much, but if enough messages pile up, it'll do some good.
Everyone seems to ignore the idea of improving drivers because it is perceived as not possible. Thing is and correct me if I am wrong, but in Europe, it takes more than a week of classes and $150 to get your license. You need to spend several thousand Euro and weeks of real training and testing before you get a shot at driving. In America, there is nothing easier than getting a license. Perhaps we should make it a little more difficult.
Everyone seems to ignore the idea of improving drivers because it is perceived as not possible. Thing is and correct me if I am wrong, but in Europe, it takes more than a week of classes and $150 to get your license. You need to spend several thousand Euro and weeks of real training and testing before you get a shot at driving. In America, there is nothing easier than getting a license. Perhaps we should make it a little more difficult.
A drivers license is little more than a movie here. In Germany I think it is like $3000 for a license plus you have to take some lite EMT and fire safety classes.
Imagine if the license fee went up 100 times. People would just crap. But, they would prolly pay more attention to the classes.
This toolbox lives in a mostly rural county here in Washington state. The roads are mostly all two lane roads with wide shoulders. I know, because I've been on long road rides in that area. You get one car every 5 min, 3 cars during rush hour.
Don't bother educating the public on how to be careful when they see cyclist on the road; just take them off the road that solves the problem.
I don't take my son in his trailer on the street, but we do ride it on the sidewalk. I want him to explain to my 4 year old why we can't go on our rides anymore. I assure you, he'll be getting a letter from me.
Imagine if the license fee went up 100 times. People would just crap. But, they would prolly pay more attention to the classes.
Yes, they would crap. And then fewer poor people will drive legally, otherwise not much will change. Inattention is the problem, not driver "qualification". Soccer mom will still drive her H2 with a phone in hand, Joe 6-pack will still steer the P/U with his knee while reaching for another cold one.
Nah. Start prosecuting drivers that hit cyclists for vehicular manslaughter, that'll get their attention.
Without knowing him or his politics, Jim looks like a nice, grandfatherly type of guy. I'm guessing this half baked idea is a result of either him or one of his constituents seeing a parent out for a ride with a kid in one of these trailers and either thinking it was flat out dangerous, or maybe even seeeing a arent actually doing something dumb.
Giving him the benefit of doubt, lets say he actualy witnessed a parent doing something so stupid and dangerous that it ought to be criminal. If so, he could address that much more narrowly than a blanket, state-wide ban on bike trailer use.
Everyone seems to ignore the idea of improving drivers because it is perceived as not possible. Thing is and correct me if I am wrong, but in Europe, it takes more than a week of classes and $150 to get your license. You need to spend several thousand Euro and weeks of real training and testing before you get a shot at driving. In America, there is nothing easier than getting a license. Perhaps we should make it a little more difficult.
The big problem with this is, in most places in Europe it is almost convenient to not have a car. Here in the US, we've fubar'd the infrastructure so badly that in a lot of places it's almost impossible to exist without one. Till we address that problem, we're just pissing in the wind...
Just another nighthawk at the diner
Rock -n-roll means well but it can't help tellin' young boys lies...
I sent the Senator a nice letter, but my gut reaction is WTF!! Get out of your FLukkin car, get on a bike then see how it feels to have more of your freedoms squeezed onto the hard shoulder. Try to work on the problem from another point of view than out your car window. Sure the roads aren't safe, and I definitely don't like the idea of putting a small child in a low trailer between me and the metal missiles but FLukk. Let me decide if I should ride that stretch of road to the park, or store, or school, or where ever. Quit encouraging the menacing machines. regulate them for a change.
my nice letter:
Dear Senator Honeyford-
I am writing to you in response of your bill to eliminate the use of baby carriers behind bicycles on public roads. While I completely understand your concern for the children in our country and the need to protect them from unwitting adults, I do not feel that you bill addresses the problem. The safety of cyclist on the road, or lack there of, does seem to be the fault of the cyclist, and to place more restrictions on the victims (bicyclists) will not fix the dangerous driving habits of the auto-piloted drivers of 2-ton missiles (cars).
Again I state that I understand your plight. I too have children. I do not like to subject them to any unnecessary dangers of the world in which we live. However, I enjoy and they also enjoy our time together on the bicycle, not to mention the benefits of cycling versus driving. I limit our time on the road as much as possible, and avoid any major streets, when trying to ride to the park or the store. Bicycling is an activity that is engrained into our family. How would I explain to the wee ones that we can not do it anymore? We have lived in other countries where this is norm for transport, not a nuisance.
How about increasing the safety of cycling from the other direction? For instance: more bike lanes, improved awareness, increasing the number of bicyclists, making them equals on the roads). Keep me safe on the streets, but let me use them also.
Please reconsider your approach to this problem.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Jason M.
concerned citizen,
father, cyclist,
(also own four automobiles)
The big problem with this is, in most places in Europe it is almost convenient to not have a car. Here in the US, we've fubar'd the infrastructure so badly that in a lot of places it's almost impossible to exist without one. Till we address that problem, we're just pissing in the wind...
That couldn't be said better.
Until cyclists and clean machines start driving the economy cars and car interests will rule.
I go back to my original thought, kill a cyclist and it is sad but, thankfully, no need to change policies. if a child was to be injured or worse yet killed - it would not be forgotten...even the biggest auto advocacy groups would struggle with that...it is in their best interest to prevent it!
The big problem with this is, in most places in Europe it is almost convenient to not have a car. Here in the US, we've fubar'd the infrastructure so badly that in a lot of places it's almost impossible to exist without one. Till we address that problem, we're just pissing in the wind...
Yeah, I can't wait untill we have the population density of europe. That will definitely be a step forward.
"It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth
Yeah, I can't wait untill we have the population density of europe. That will definitely be a step forward.
I live in Mexico City and I was three times this year at Madrid, Spain.
Don't blame it on the population density... Mexico City has a population of 25 million people and you don't see as many bikes on the streets. People prefer to drive two or even three hors in the traffic than using the subway or public transportation.
No, it's not because the Subway or buses are not safe or convenient... the subway it's the cheapest and safest way of transportation here in Mexico City...
But, hey!! Driving a gas guzzler gives you status, it's cool, the bigger the better, bling, bling, bling... does that sound familiar to you??
Seriously, it's more a cultural problem than something related to density of population. It sure helps, but it's not like a determining factor.
Our culture is "If you don't have a car, you're no one". Dirvers are irrespectful of cyclist or anything smaller than them on the road. Have you crossed your way with a Trailer truck??
Yeah, I can't wait untill we have the population density of europe. That will definitely be a step forward.
Yeah, it would really suck to be able to do what I need around town by biking or walking and have greenspace a mile or three out of town, instead of that hours-worth of delicious suburbia, strip malls and stop lights. We should just pave the whole pave over, wouldn't that be great?
ah, yes, tricyclo... didn't we do a tricycl rules thread last year sometime?
Was it about rules??? I can barely remember what the thread was all about (I can barely remember what I had for lunch today).
But I think is a convenient design that maybe needs an update/revamping. The position of both rider and carried is good... it just need some acustomization to modern world (gears maybe?)
Was it about rules??? I can barely remember what the thread was all about (I can barely remember what I had for lunch today).
But I think is a convenient design that maybe needs an update/revamping. The position of both rider and carried is good... it just need some acustomization to modern world (gears maybe?)
lessee, I was raving about the tricyclos I saw on my last trip to Mexico, they run about $300 US. Gears would be good. this bike taxi guy thought I was crazy because I wanted to pedal his taxi.
Yeah, it would really suck to be able to do what I need around town by biking or walking and have greenspace a mile or three out of town, instead of that hours-worth of delicious suburbia, strip malls and stop lights. We should just pave the whole pave over, wouldn't that be great?
Not to mention all the natural resouces and raw materials needed for the type of population density like in europe. Can't wait to cut down more forests, use more raw materials, consume energy, and introduce more people into the world that will do the exact same.
There's no way to win.
"It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth
Ahh, the king of debate chimes in. How in the world did you get pop. density out of what I said? Don't bother answering, troll.
Don't bother asking the question then. You're wasting your own time. Sucks for you!
The way I get "population density" out of building mass-transport systems and intrastructure like in europe is that doing these things will give the go-ahead for developers to develop to a much higher extent. It's basically giving them the green-light. In such situations, the developers will always win.
"It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth
dude, to have wall-to-wall population density throughout the country, you need to have enough people. Without a huge population, you either have seriously crappy sprawl like we have in many places in the US now, or you have less sprawl and more greenspace. sorry, to deviate so far from the original discussion topic, but I just wanted to say that's sorta how it works. So, that's how you win.
I don't think that they need to pass a law! Jeeze we've got enough junk laws on the bookd that try to protect us from ourselves now. Do they work? NO!
Personally I don't like either the bike carrier type seat or the trailer option. I have used each ONCE and both scared the hell out of me on city streets! Especially with the old style brakes that were used at the time (late 80's). Too much extra weight and no options for making brake upgrades back then. I can see the point, it is dangerous on busy city streets, but I would not legislate some one elses choice on whether or not to take that risk. Just another example of how "Big Brother" watches out for use, even when we don't need or want him to.
Not to mention all the natural resouces and raw materials needed for the type of population density like in europe. Can't wait to cut down more forests, use more raw materials, consume energy, and introduce more people into the world that will do the exact same.
There's no way to win.
You think US style sprawl uses less of our resources?!? Where did anyone espouse the European style population density you keep harpin' on, anyhow? You pulled that one out yer azz. You fail debate class AGAIN! Put down the crack pipe, freak.
Just another nighthawk at the diner
Rock -n-roll means well but it can't help tellin' young boys lies...
Not sure how this got to European population density but whatever. Laws in Europe are different or perhaps I should say enforced differently. I initially mentioned the amount of training and cost difference in getting a license in Europe. Applied in the U.S. that alone would not make a huge change. However, add in the change in attitude that it brings, the idea that drivers are more responsible for their actions because they are better trained and educated. It might help, maybe. Right now people feel it is their right to drive in America. I see nothing wrong with adjusting the system to make it clear that being permitted to drive a motor vehicle on public roads is a privilege. One that can and should more often be taken away. Legislating bikers to help prevent drivers from screwing up only enforces the idea that the public way belongs to them and only them. (and myself, I drive much more than I ride) JMO.
The safety of cyclist on the road, or lack there of, does seem to be the fault of the cyclist, and to place more restrictions on the victims (bicyclists) will not fix the dangerous driving habits of the auto-piloted drivers of 2-ton missiles (cars).
Not to be nit picky, but aren't you missing a NOT between does and seem? Something I do more than I cre to admit
Not to mention all the natural resouces and raw materials needed for the type of population density like in europe. Can't wait to cut down more forests, use more raw materials, consume energy, and introduce more people into the world that will do the exact same.
There's no way to win.
So you're not talking about dense population centers, just having that many people per square mile over the whole continent?
Not my intention to change topic here, but if we are talking about safety on the road, when is the use of cell phones (without headset or car kit) going to banned in the US.
Last week I almost got creamed by xMas shopping frenzied lady talking on her phone on her nice SUV crossing an intersection, while I was on my Vespa (yes, I ride a motoscooter in LA..)
It's ridicolous. Once again in Europe is illegal to talk on your cell phone while you drive, at least im most countries. In the US is a corporate kind of safety: it's gotta be safer for you and easier for corporates to sell more stuff... apprently kid's carrier market is not so good/big.
I have a kid trailer and yes, I don't feel comfortable riding with my kid on the streets, but that's because there are irresponsible drivers on the road, expecially the ones on cell phones.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
law banning use of baby carriers?
are probably similar to yours, but lets hear yours (and let them hear yours)
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by bob
All those stupid little kids getting in the way of everything, right? They cause stress and MUST be the reason the world is such a horrible place to live. Yeah, that's it.
