[Heinie]

Heinie, how common is this? ...

Dangerous driving is more common than you appear to know, Godstud.

[youtube]jOTIiveesvs[/youtube]

[Godstud]

Yes. you are right.

Cyclist hits pedestrian.

Cmon, Heine! Youd guilty of confirmation bias.

Pedestrian and Bicyclist Crash Statistics(%)
Tripped on an uneven/cracked sidewalk 24
Tripped/fell 17
Hit by a car 12
Wildlife/pets involved 6
Tripped on stone 5
Stepped in a hole 5
http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/data/factsheet_crash.cfm

[QatzelOk]

Godstud is trying to rely on " common sense" to prove all his points in this thread.

And by reading his posts here, it is clear that our " common sense" has been seriously damaged by mass media and the PR industry.

When our civilizations have been destroyed by industrial and social poison, we will comprehend the tragedy of this loss.

He seems to think that bicycles are as life- threatening as cars, and he will stop at nothing to "prove" this piece of mental excrement.

Cmon, Heine! Youd guilty of confirmation bias.

With over a million people killed by car collisions each year, oil wars destroying entire nations, and national obesity rates soaring as fast as personal debt, there's a lot of confirmation out there. Bias isn't really necessary.

[Godstud]

He seems to think that bicycles are as life- threatening as cars, and he will stop at nothing to "prove" this piece of mental excrement.

You're the one peddling excrement. Stop LYING.

I never said that bicycles are as life-threatening as cars. Quote me on it, or STFU.

Most accidents on bicycles are not life-threatening. I never said anything about bicycle accidents, actually. I just said that cars are not involved in most bicycle accidents. That's supported by actual reality. You're trying to change and manipulate what I say, to support your anti-automobile meme.

Bias isn't really necessary.

Then why do you constantly use it? Why do you discuss things and include such sanctimony? Your posts drip of it.

Why do you not respond to actual questions directed at you, and evade them, most of the time? It's like you are against honest debate, Qatzelok.

[QatzelOk]

cars are not involved in most bicycle accidents

That's true. Most bicycle "accidents" happen when you're four years old and learning to bike. Most of these "accidents" involve scraped knees and grass stains. Or losing your lady bug that you had kept in a paper cup. Or dropping your box of juice....

Likewise, all the "head injury" FACTS that are used by car companies (and the people they fund) are based on the fact that most head injuries are scrapes endured by little kids. And helmets don't prevent a significant number of these minor scrapes.

But with the creative use of "FACTS incorporated" (screened using Card Stacking), moneyed sources can "prove" any lie they want to people with relatively normal intelligence. PR is designed to fool people of normal intelligence, and that's where most of the money for facts-collecting is spent in capitalist societies.

When you see information on commercial media, remember... that media exists to turn its audience into gullible consumers. The "facts" have all been pre-selected to prove a pre-selected "point." You won't get very far with THIS as the basis of your society's "common sense."

[Godstud]

Most bicycle "accidents" happen when you're four years old and learning to bike. Most of these "accidents" involve scraped knees and grass stains. Or losing your lady bug that you had kept in a paper cup. Or dropping your box of juice....

Rubbish. I have numerous experience riding a bicycle in the city(from age 6 and up) and have not had ANY collisions with a motor vehicle. The statistics support what I have said, but then again, you are not interested in anything that doesn't further your bullshit "Cyclists are victimized by the media!!" meme. Oh lawdy!!! Oh Lawdy! Won't someone think of the children!!?

Instead, you come up with conspiracies, and utter tripe, because you're just fabricating everything, from nothing. I'm amazed that you aren't trying to blame Jews and banksters for this.

... and bullshit! You wouldn't know what common sense was, if it came up and bit you on the ass!

[Heinie]

... and bullshit! You wouldn't know what common sense was, if it came up and bit you on the ass!

It is wrong to be rude to other members of PoliticsForum in order to further your conviction that cyclists are safe on our roads. It does not serve anyone's interest to deny that some motor drivers are deadly, dangerous, and discourteous.

[youtube]4ua92cASvgw[/youtube]

[Godstud]

It does not serve anyone's interest to deny that some motor drivers are deadly, dangerous, and discourteous.

Yes, there are some(very few) PEOPLE who are dangerous. This is not the norm, nor are there many.

QatzelOk's argument is that cars are bad. Bicycles are good. Everyone who gets hurt on a bicycle, is hurt by a car. These are his opinions, and not supported by a great many facts. Facts, to QatzelOK, are inconvenient, unless they support what he's saying. See Confirmation bais.

I am only as rude to QatzelOk, as he is to me. He chooses not to respond to my arguments, while being patronizing and churlish.

[QatzelOk]

Yes, there are some(very few) PEOPLE who are dangerous. This is not the norm, nor are there many.

Yes, there are only a few driving situations that can kill you when you bike in North American cities. Likewise, drivers-who-kill are not even close to being a majority in the world.

And yet, with only a fraction of motorists involved in killing people... a million people get slaughtered by car collisions each year around the world. Imagine if the majority of car drivers killed. There would be a billion deaths each year. After seven years, there's only be one person left on the earth - a driver! And he would probably continue to kill other species until his own death - perhaps from isolation and carbon monoxide.

The notion that most drivers won't kill you... isn't very comforting, GS. If you walk through a bad part of Karachi, Pakistan wearing gold chains, MOST PEOPLE won't attack you with knives and steal your gold.

So why don't you try doing this to see how MOST CYCLISTS feel on the roads, and then think about the folly of using a few select statistics to prove old wive's tales?

[Godstud]

If cats could fly, there's be less birds. Your whole argument is idiotic, Qatz.

A billion cars driving, on average 20 trillion kms each year, mostly by people with minimum training, results in ACCIDENTS, that cause these deaths. A death for every 20 MILLION km travelled doesn't seem as unsafe as you imagine it to be.

[Elyzabeth]

Typical liberal. Government regulation to solve every problem.

No, people on Bicycles need to be licensed.... because they are a vehicle on the road,

and Must be held accountable for their actions, as is every other vehicle on roadways.

[b]As it is now , if they commit a crime or injure a person, they can not be identified and held

accountable for their actions !



[/b]

[Elyzabeth]

Yes, there are some(very few) PEOPLE who are dangerous. This is not the norm, nor are their many.

[b]The same might be said of serial killers ...!
[/b]

[Pants-of-dog]

It is a cost versus benefits issue. The cost of trying to license and regulate every cyclist would be very high, and would never actually acheive its objectives. The benefits of such a program, even if it were to magically succeed, would be much lower than using the same money to do ther things.

Not even the capitalists care about this.

[Stormsmith]

Licensing wouldn't solve the OP's problem of helping ID the cyclist. A photo ID would be in a wallet and I can't see how a plate would be attached to a bike fender

[QatzelOk]

It is a cost versus benefits issue.....
Not even the capitalists care about this.

Oh yes they do. The capitalists care very much because they want to sell cars and oil.

All harassment of cyclists ( helmet laws, ticketing blitzes, licensing) all of these cut down on the ' cyclist problem" for car dealers, oil salesman, and dozens of other parasitic professions. All of these measures reduce the number of cycles on the road which makes cycling more dangerous, and this reduces quality of life.

[Elyzabeth]

It is a cost versus benefits issue. The cost of trying to license and regulate every cyclist would be very high, and would never actually acheive its objectives. The benefits of such a program, even if it were to magically succeed, would be much lower than using the same money to do ther things.Not even the capitalists care about this.

Most Importantly:

It will save people lives !

It will make people on bikes held accountable if someone is
injured or has been hurt..

and it would bring in a tremendous amount of tax,
which can be used to repair roads or even used to support the NHS !

Win- Win all around !

As to where to put the license ?
they used to have places on the backs of the bike which were as visible as car licenses

That can easily be done again

Finally , people on bikes would be accountable for their actions!!!



PS I happen to be very pro -bike, but they must be licensed !!

[Pants-of-dog]

No, it would not save lives, just like license plates and driver's licenses do not save lives.

Nor would it bring in tax, since any cyclist who does not wish to pay the fees would simply not register.

The police themselves do not have the time or money or personnel to run around chasing cyclists with no plates.

[Drlee]

No, it would not save lives, just like license plates and driver's licenses do not save lives.

Am I missing something. Are you saying that ensuring that all motorists understanding the rules of the road a principles of safe driving, as well as a test of driving skills does not save lives?

Are you saying that the licensing of cars which requires that they meet certain safety and often air pollution standards does not save lives?

Ottawa licenses bicycles as do quite a few US cities. It is a money loosing proposition but they do it.

The police "have time" to do whatever we instruct them to do. They work for us after all. Whether or not chasing unlicensed bicycles is a priority is debatable of course.

[Elyzabeth]

Licensing wouldn't solve the OP's problem of helping ID the cyclist. A photo ID would be in a wallet and I can't see how a plate would be attached to a bike fender

And to all of the people on here who keep comparing Bicycles to cars, at some point your brains need to recognize that you really can't keep comparing apples with oranges and come up with any meaningful solution, it does not work !!

Cars are more dangerous, bikes are less dangerous and true. they are environmentally superior.

HOWEVER

Bicycles have hurt and killed people,

and made terrible accidents occur'

they are a wheeled vehicle driving on the road with other wheeled vehicles

as well as crossing pedestrians,

They need to be licensed !

They need to be held accountable !


End of


During the second world war they had license plate on the back of Bicycles !
It is easily do-able !

[Pants-of-dog]

Am I missing something. Are you saying that ensuring that all motorists understanding the rules of the road a principles of safe driving, as well as a test of driving skills does not save lives?

Are you saying that the licensing of cars which requires that they meet certain safety and often air pollution standards does not save lives?

If I were saying these things, then I would be explicit about it.

I am saying that demanding licenses and registrations for cyclists will not ensure that all cyclists understand the rules of the road or principles of safe driving. Nor would it be easy to create a test of driving skills, even if such tests save lives.

Also, you seem to be confusing car construction standards with those standards and regulations that are designed to deal with driver behaviour.

Ottawa licenses bicycles as do quite a few US cities. It is a money loosing proposition but they do it.

Well, I have ridden a bike in Ottawa many, many times without even knowing about this. It would seem that the program is not efffective in ensuring that all cyclists are licensed and registered.

The police "have time" to do whatever we instruct them to do. They work for us after all. Whether or not chasing unlicensed bicycles is a priority is debatable of course.

And part of that debate is pointing out how a cost benefit analysis shows money could be better spent elsewhere.