Newsstand: February 9, 2010
Duly Quoted: Adam Giambrone
Bob Kinnear isn't Greg Kinnear
Adam Giambrone and Our Need for Political Wives
Scale Model City, Actual-Size Grime
The more people who bike, the safer each biker is. So says ScienceDaily, citing studies done throughout Europe and California, and experts like Dr. Julie Hatfield from the University of New South Wales, who says that "the likelihood that an individual cyclist will be struck by a motorist falls with increasing rate of bicycling in a community. And the safer cycling is perceived to be, the more people are prepared to cycle." Dr. Chris Rissel from Sydney University also notes that "it appears that motorists adjust their behaviour in the presence of increasing numbers of people bicycling because they expect or experience more people cycling." Which makes sense! But we can't help but think that the same logic of safety in numbers applies—probably even more so—to communities who cycle en masse, like Critical or Kidical Mass. [via I Bike T.O.]
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebookTIP US OFF
Most Popular
Newsstand: February 9, 2010 (53)
The Urbanaut (47)- Duly Quoted: Adam Giambrone (31)
Which TTC Trip Planner Gives the Better Way: TTC.ca or MyTTC.ca? (25)
Enough Already with the Bathrooms, Says Mildred (25)
TTC's Trip Planner Officially Online, in "Beta" (24)
Bob Kinnear isn't Greg Kinnear (20)
Mayoral Electograph (17)
StarbucksTapas to Take Over Key Kensington Corner (15)
Adam Giambrone and Our Need for Political Wives (15)
What about the number of accidents involving cyclists only? Presumably they would also go up, especially between those who ride at night without lights, run stop signs and red lights, etc.
Fearsofcorners, you can call it whatever you want. Some call it God weeding out the stupids, but I call it natural sellection.
I can see in some ways how riding en masse would be helpful, but then again, when I compare the touchy-feely PR of Critical Mass to the real practices put in place, like corking... well, I feel much less charitable.
As if CM were done only to ride safely in numbers. (rollseyes)
It's more like a vengeance trip to get back at motorists that lots of cyclist nuts deem to be always "out to get them".
Yeah, that's right. If cyclists think it's okay to lump all motorists together (ie. one asshole SUV driver who ignores cyclists = all drivers in the world) then I feel okay lumping all cyclists together with CM headcases.
I've seen lots of cyclists breaking the rules of the road despite constant claims to have just as much claim to the road as cars do. What do you guys have to say about them? Disowned? They don't speak for your crowd?
I don't think that motorists are out to get me. I just think that some of them don't see me unless I'm wearing a two-tonne metal and glass jacket.
"But we can't help but think that the same logic of safety in numbers applies—probably even more so—to communities who cycle en masse, like Critical or Kidical Mass."
Critical Mass has nothing to do with safety. It has everything to do with going a little funny in the head from cycling too long and pure hatred for automobiles and their drivers. It's an immature "demonstration", and accomplishes nothing other than to rub salt in the wounds and make auto drivers far less charitable when we meet on the roads every day as I cycle to work.
It also completely screws up streetcar traffic as well, but I guess that's considered an acceptable casualty in the "war against cars."
I think all bikers should be forced to drive at least one day a month, and all drivers should bike at least one day a month. If you know how the other uses the road, you'll be a much better driver or cyclist.
I think that motorists and cyclists should hug for one day a month so that they can share a meaningful emotional connection and let their differences melt away into the tenderness of each other's arms.
A nice thing is that Critical Mass can mean whatever you desire, depending on your mood or outlook.
It can be a celebration of riding, a chance to show off a weird bike, a social event, a political demonstration to show we belong on roads, it can be an environmental stance or it can be a general defiance of authority.
I don't consider it a safety lesson though, that would be boring.
Glad to see the opinionated people are out today.
antiboy, I'll give you my take, although it might not be typical:
I've been riding a bike downtown for just over a year now. I'm usually pretty nutty about safety, as much as you can be and still be practical. Got the helmet and lights, I signal, I act just like a vehicle would in most situations.
I also regularly deride "veteran" bikers for running stop signs or reds, and I sneer at the typical Queen St. biker uniform: sandals, no helmet, earphones, cellphone in one hand, big-ass basket in front. But what can you do about it? They're shitheads, and you can't say they don't whatever's coming to them.
At the same time, I encourage Critical Mass. I sure as hell don't look like your typical Masshole, but I believe they're just another facet of highly necessary biker activism in the city. Are they out to get "revenge" on motorists? From the last demonstration I was at, that certainly wasn't the mandate. The leader giving the initial pep talk stressed safety, camaraderie and non-antagonism.
As a biker, do I resent motorists? Yes, inasmuch as I've always detested the North American sprawl culture built around automobiles. Inasmuch as I hate looking out the window and seeing a 24/7 traffic jam spitting out fumes and noise. Inasmuch as, while most motorists know what the fuck they're doing, not a day goes by where I don't encounter at least a couple of drivers who are willing to put others in danger.
Point of this article is, more people should be biking. I don't think that's really in dispute.
Skippy:
Once in a while (when my cat hasn't chewed through my earphones) I listen to music while I ride, whether for leisure or commuting. If I am equal to a car in the eyes of the law, why shouldn't I be allowed to listen to music. Of course, I'm responsible enough to listen at such a volume that allows me to hear what's going on around me. There are some drivers that are far worse. (Do you really need to shake your car with bass?) The cell phone thing is an unnecessary distraction (just wait a half hour to make the phone call, or hey, why not stop and chat on the sidewalk), but I think that I can listen to music and still be a responsible cyclist.
Other than that, I completely agree with you.
Skippy the Magical Racegoat, I'm getting a big ass basket for my bike, please don't condemn me too harshly if we meet.
I'll try not to smirk at your helmet hair.
Even when cyclists are being assholes to each other, they still don't admit that cyclists can be assholes! Awesome!
Skippy: I appreciate your response. I wasn't meaning to imply that I think all cyclists are nuts. I just mean that since there are some nuts who go to CM for all the wrong reasons (ie. revenge), that, according to the logic that all motorists are the same, all CM participants are insane too.
I'm a motorist but only by necessity, because I live in the GTA. When I lived downtown, I walked everywhere. But there are times when driving downtown is also a necessity (for people who don't live downtown) and it sucks that many cyclists don't understand that.
I'm neither a motorist or a cyclist, but I have to say you guys put my life at risk every time I jaywalk. More concern for pedestrians please! Gah!