🚀 go-pugleaf

marquis@netcom.com (Roger Marquis) writes:

[flame bait deleted.]

>It doesn't even take common sense to see that the greater the speed
>differential between 2 vehicles the shorter the reaction time.  The
>distance between 2 vehicles also determines reaction times.  When you
>have traffic moving at 45 miles an hour, a lane less that 2 feet wider
>than most cars, and a cyclist (like yourself) riding at 15 mph it's
>_very_ dangerous.  It doesn't matter how many times you disagree, the
>cyclist is in danger and no flawed law stating that its legal to ride
>in those circumstances will make it any safer.

>Roger Marquis

Ah, something of substance.  I agree (!) with Roger that reaction time
is shortend for greater speed differentials.  In fact, I agree that
the situation he describes is very dangerous (!!).

[For the record, I would not advocate cycling Alma unless you can
maintain at least 20mph for the duration.  But it is still an
individual decision.]

As far as safety goes, riding a bicycle is dangerous.  Riding on Alma
is probably more dangerous than most other roads (especially with
drivers who are violently opposed to cyclists riding on Alma).  But
each person makes choices on risk independently.  Once you enter the
traffic arena (whether on bicycle or in car), you are obligated to
obey the traffic laws.  In the case of Alma and cyclists, the law
permits cyclists to ride there and commands motorists to slow down
until it is safe to pass the slower moving vehicle (ref relevant
sections of the CVC).  If, as a motor vehicle operator, you cannot
bear the potential encounter with a cyclist on Alma, I suggest you
choose a different route or an alternative form of transportation.

--wayne