On Fri, 24 May 2019 20:58:03 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 5/24/2019 3:36 PM, Duane wrote:

snip

Jay is correct. Risk is different for different riders and even for the
same rider in different circumstances. All cycling is not the same.
Sometime I’m trudging through the traffic alone commuting to work.
Sometimes I’m out in the country in a group pushing it. Both have
different parameters regarding risk etc. Some cyclists do only one or the
other. Some do both. Hard to group them together statistically. And what
would be the point anyway?

The point is that when the statistics don't support your premise you
have to do something to justify your position. No one would think any
worse of Frank if he used statistics honestly.

Hmmm... On one side of the fence we have someone telling us that to be
safe there need to be special, segregated, bike lanes and on the other
side we have a guy telling us that bicycles really aren't that
dangerous at all.

Given that none of the experienced cyclists posting here seem to be
agreeing with the first guy and demanding these special pathways, and
don't seem to disagree greatly with the other guy it seems likely that
more than a hundred,or even more, man years of experience are on the
side of Guy #2.

One might ask the question of whether there is some ulterior reason
for wanting to build bike paths? After all, the advocate has been
posting here for years with no mention of bicycle paths until very
recently. Was he struck by lightening while on the road to Damascus?
Are there other reasons?
--
cheers,

John B.