Monsoon wrote:BTW, your second to last paragraph is just so much hogwash. I've lost count of the number of moronic and abusive cyclists that have crossed my path over the years: and this is spoken by someone has been both an ardent cyclist AND a car driver. People taking moral or responsible stances do not have a monopoly on good behaviour. Far from it in fact.
It is not good cyclist and good motorists, versus bad cyclists and bad motorists. That is a fantasy of members of a society who want to engage in so much escapism most upper end motor vehicles tend to have several LCDs or LEDs installed so they can watch television or other media! What predominates in the English speaking countries is exactly a system of transportation apartheid that disadvantages and disenfranchises everyone who out of poverty, personal choice or ill-circumstance cannot or will not use a motor vehicle. There are hundreds of thousands of places, probably millions of places, you cannot get to on foot, by bicycle or any form of public transit.
Here is the most loaded and fictional example in favor a bike vs a car in a head on crash:
I am a bicyclist weighing 300 lbs., on a heavy 60 lbs. bicycle going 60 mph down a very steep hill. I hit a parked car weighing 2000 lbs.
Will the car have anything but superficial damage? Now what about the human cyclist?
Good motorists and bad cyclists, what a load of crap, if I ever heard it. Cars are inherently dangerous, polluting, space wasting and traffic causing. The only way they appear efficient in their false manner is because of apartheid like subsidies and planning that caters to the automobile over all the other more efficient methods like public transport, walking or bicycling.