Re: Stop NY's Anti-Bicycling Bill

[Dude]

I disagree with you.

You should support the bill, we have worked hard to bring it forward.
The NY Bill is a great step in making bicycles more "legal" for use on the
roadways.

It discourages theft, and promotes safety.
We are trying to bring Bicycles out of the "Toy" image and turn it into a
viable transportation device.




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Curtis L. Russell]

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:45:28 -0600, "Dude" >
wrote:

>It discourages theft, and promotes safety.
>We are trying to bring Bicycles out of the "Toy" image and turn it into a
>viable transportation device.

This is a bad attempt at humor. The funniest part is the 'out of the
"Toy" image comment, but the 'promotes safety' merits a nod.

Unfortunately, only people that actually ride bikes will understand
that this is a joke and realize that a license has no impact at all on
safety or image, much less making cycling a 'viable transportation
device' (after all, we all know it already is one). The theft argument
is a bit more oblique - there haven't really been enough places that
used them to make this attempt at humor obvious to even the cyclists.

Also unfortunately, someone may think you are being serious and repeat
or even support this garbage. Please don't post this joke where the
wrong people could see it. I think that's how bike lanes got
started...

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:45:28 -0600, "Dude" >
wrote in message >:

>You should support the bill, we have worked hard to bring it forward.
>The NY Bill is a great step in making bicycles more "legal" for use on the
>roadways.

Or not. In the UK bicycles are legal on the roadways, no anti-cycling
bill necessary. No licenses either.

You going to license shoes next?

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

[Werehatrack]

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:45:28 -0600, "Dude" >
wrote:

>
>I disagree with you.
>
>You should support the bill, we have worked hard to bring it forward.
>The NY Bill is a great step in making bicycles more "legal" for use on the
>roadways.

As written, it sucks. It needs explicit exemptions for riders who are
from outside the regulated area, and it needs to have a requirement
that the NYPD or other siezing agency must follow an explicit set of
consistent rules for notice to owners when a stolen or improperly
parked bike is recovered; the rules are not stated in the present
wording, just required without any schedule or procedure. It has
other major flaws as well. This, in short, is a hastily-written and
badly flawed piece of law. It should not be enacted.

>It discourages theft,

How? Thieves care nothing for *obeying* the law, and this one
actually works in their favor. There is no provision for recording of
serial numbers of bikes (many of which *don't have* serial numbers) as
part of the registration process; as written, a thief need only keep a
bike tag in his pocket, and clip it to the seat just before riding off
with it, to render this "protection" in his own favor.

>and promotes safety.

Once again, how? Nothing in it requires competency or mandates the
presence of safety equipment (as if that was really going to make a
difference anyway), nothing gives bikes explicit rights of the road
beyond that granted by state statutes, there is no provision for an
increase in designated bike rights-of-way or even for the allocation
of revenues collected from fines to that purpose. No, this law has
nothing in it whatsoever to promote safety.

>We are trying to bring Bicycles out of the "Toy" image and turn it into a
>viable transportation device.

Then get your beloved Councilperson to write some laws that *would*
have that effect...if she can, which I doubt. All that the one cited
will do is reduce the number of riders on the street due to the legal
harassment that will be made possible through it. It will not produce
any benefit for the bike-riding public.


--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:45:28 -0600, "Dude" >
wrote:

> and promotes safety.
There is no evidence of that.

JT



****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

[H. M. Leary]

In article >,
"Just zis Guy, you know?" > wrote:

> On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:45:28 -0600, "Dude" >
> wrote in message >:
>
> >You should support the bill, we have worked hard to bring it forward.
> >The NY Bill is a great step in making bicycles more "legal" for use on the
> >roadways.
>
> Or not. In the UK bicycles are legal on the roadways, no anti-cycling
> bill necessary. No licenses either.
>
> You going to license shoes next?
>
> Guy

Dear Guy:

Please do not give our guv-mint any ideas!

HAND

[Doug Huffman]

Did you see that OZ, long with cyclist MHL, is now requiring drovers to wear
gummint approved hell-mutts. They're welcome to it and NY is welcome to the
consequences of their nanny-state.


"H. M. Leary" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Just zis Guy, you know?" > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:45:28 -0600, "Dude" >
>> wrote in message >:
>>
>> >You should support the bill, we have worked hard to bring it forward.
>> >The NY Bill is a great step in making bicycles more "legal" for use on
>> >the
>> >roadways.
>>
>> Or not. In the UK bicycles are legal on the roadways, no anti-cycling
>> bill necessary. No licenses either.
>>
>> You going to license shoes next?
>>
>> Guy
>
> Dear Guy:
>
> Please do not give our guv-mint any ideas!
>
> HAND