B i l l S o r n s o n wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:

B i l l S o r n s o n wrote:


While linking you with "Wrong-way Willie" /was/ rather low, it
wasn't a non-sequiter in that you both advocate potentially
dangerous riding practices.

I'm not sure what you mean by "potentially dangerous riding
practices."

In reading what Wayne wrote, he seemed to be saying that it's up to
the cyclist whether to take the lane. Are you saying taking the lane
is "potentially dangerous"?


Perhaps I misunderstood him, but the snippets I read /sounded like/ he was
saying a cyclist can take a lane any time s/he damned well pleases. (And
apparently Bob took it the same way I did.) I don't agree with that. Of
course it's advisable and even necessary at times; it's also stupid and even
suicidal at other times.



Bill, having examined thousands of bicyclist collisions, been a
bicycling researcher for seven years, and spent 42 years bicycling, I
can clearly say you don't have a leg to stand on when you claim using
the full lane is "stupid and even suicial." You are fear mongering.

Wayne