Public Service Announcement
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Will on
-
"Ninja mode" refers to not using lights, not to the color of one's clothing. You may not know, but a front light and rear reflector are required by law on all bicycles ridden at night. And as most of my evening riding is done on the lakefront path, that's what I'm referring to. Ninja mode at night is dangerous, whether it's on the path, or on the streets.
I hardly see how this is "blaming the cyclist". You can call it that if you like, but you're wrong.
-
Permalink Reply by Sarah D. on
-
I agree with Will. I see so many people riding without lights lately. WHY, why, people? You're riding fancy bikes and rocking fancy winter bikewear, so buy yourself a set of damn lights! I fear a police crackdown or sting thing is the only thing that will change the hipster mindset.
-
Permalink Reply by Joe Guzzardo on
-
I agree. I'm a LFP rider myself and anything that improves ones visibility is a good thing and it also happens to be the law. Ninja riders are a disaster waiting to happen. They're dangerous not only to themselves but to others around them as well. Along with rights, comes responsibilities, which in this case means see and be seen.
You can get a cheap orange safety vest for 5 bux and a headlight might set you back say $10 to $20, both of which can be easily carried in one's coat pocket, very simple.
Now, don't get me started on the subject of bicycle helmets.
Will V. said:"Ninja mode" refers to not using lights, not to the color of one's clothing. You may not know, but a front light and rear reflector are required by law on all bicycles ridden at night. And as most of my evening riding is done on the lakefront path, that's what I'm referring to. Ninja mode at night is dangerous, whether it's on the path, or on the streets.
I hardly see how this is "blaming the cyclist". You can call it that if you like, but you're wrong.
-
-
Would you consider yourself an enlightened hipster?
122782_ said:Didn't realize this was a "hipster" thing.
And yes, I use lights.
-
-
Surely you're joking. I personally post roughly ten rants about reckless, dangerous drivers, for every one about similar riders. Anyway, this is a cycling forum, and I simply posted a public service announcement. Lights do not have to be costly or complex, but cyclists who ride at night should use them.
h' said:Thanks Will. I think I might have heard something once that there are some kind of laws about bikes in Chicago.
Not sure if you read what I wrote or just skimmed it, but my point about the simplicity of the bicycle still stands-- it should not be a complex and costly thing to get on one and ride.
Why are there 100 rants about other cyclists for every rant about reckless or irresponsible drivers?
Maybe if we can get all the bikes off the road we'll be safer?
-
Permalink Reply by Zoetrope on
-
I've seen far more egregious examples of in-fighting or blaming amongst cyclists on this site than the light-hearted vent by the OP. That said, I agree with both of you.
Rage on.
h' said:I think a better question is: why are cyclists expected to share travel space with speeding hunks of metal weighing several tons? Let's speak up for appropriate infrastructure rather than endlessly grind our wheels in "blame the cyclist" mode.
-
-
Good point. The Wacker Drive project was just completed at a cost of about $300 million, that will buy you a lot of bike infrastructure. Studies have shown the beneficial effects of more bike infrastructure upon the local economy. Plus, its one small way to get around that onerous 75 year parking meter contract the city signed.
Last I checked, the lake front pedestrian/bike overpass near Navy Pier was estimated at about $50 million and while they're at it, they should link up an overpass to the McDonald's bike center at Millennium Park. Navy Pier is the biggest tourist draw in Illinois and there's plenty of room for improvement. Our mayor wants to make Chicago the most bike friendly city in the United States. Chicago is a world class city. If we wish to maintain that status, we need to make the city more livable, as well as drive through-able, or risk going the way of Detroit. One way to take back the streets, and the city, by extension, is to put more bikers on it.
h' said:I think a better question is: why are cyclists expected to share travel space with speeding hunks of metal weighing several tons? Let's speak up for appropriate infrastructure rather than endlessly grind our wheels in "blame the cyclist" mode.
-
-
Umm, yeah, but it also happens to be a very well lit area. Not so true of the LFP. I wish we had bike jams like that here. Did you notice how long that one guy had to wait before making a left turn? Pretty busy out there, I'm surprised there weren't any bike rage incidents. Bike traffic reports on the radio, I long for the day.
Man, this is way cooler than my Surly:
On the same page: http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=vGGlODF7_RY&feature=end...
h' said:I'd say about 1/2 the people in this video don't have lights in use. I wonder if they edited out all the crashes.
-
-
Yeah, because four minutes of well-lit cycling in snow during rush hour in the Netherlands is representative of the Chicago lake front path. Completely.
h' said:
I'd say about 1/2 the people in this video don't have lights in use. I wonder if they edited out all the crashes.
-
-
At this point, I can only assume you're nothing more than a troll. Either that, or you're in the fifth grade.
h' said:Not sure what you're saying... that we don't have rush hour in Chicago? Or we don't have snow on the lakefront path? Or there's never snow during rush hour? Anyway, the video is in Holland, not whatever country you said.
Groups
-
Chicagoland Beer Explora…
203 members
-
Wednesday Night for Mort…
1 member
-
Great Lakes Ultra Cycling
270 members
-
Major Taylor Internation…
1 member
-
Critical Mass discussion
261 members
© 2008-2016 The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.
Powered by
