Re: Code of Conduct (long, but hopefully worth your time)

Matthew Wolpert

2005-01-25



I am cutting and pasting the following post from the "Shift Discussion

List", without the original author's permission, so I have redacted

his name, enjoy:



"

=v= The very fact that hit-and-run driving would lead to a

discussion of a cyclists' "code of conduct" speaks volumes.

"



Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 18:58:15 -0800

Subject: Re: [shift] Code of Conduct (long, but hopefully worth your time)

To: shi-@lists.riseup.net



=v= I think you're barking up the wrong tree. Many bicycle

advocacy groups have taken this tack for the last 35 years

or so. I think we've seen the practical limits of this sort

of approach. But even if you were to somehow find a way to

get 99.9% of bicyclists to strictly adhere to the traffic

code, the .1% who didn't would still be held up as an example

of "those eeevil lawbreaking bikers."



=v= Why? Because this approach doesn't address the root issue:

we are a minority. Motorists *already* break more laws more

frequently and with far costlier and deadlier results, but this

has become so endemic and epidemic that it's barely noticed.

Bicyclists, on the other hand, are seen as inscrutable "others,"

probably kind of crazy. So the minor misdeeds of bicyclists are

seen as the end of civilization while motorized carnage becomes

background noise.



=v= Demanding our place on the road also means demanding that

we be regarded as individuals, just as motorists are. When a

motorist blows a STOP sign, do other motorists get their ears

bent about "you scofflaw car drivers?" Is the AAA held to task

because someone goes 30 MPH over the speed limit? The very idea

is ludicrous. We should demand no less than full acceptance as

individual human beings.



=v= I actually do adhere to traffic codes, and you know what?

Plenty of motorists don't like it. What they want is me out of

their way, so they can speed. Many of them don't even *know*

the law. Hell, many police officers don't even know it.



=v= "The three Rs" (and "Cyclists fare best when they act and

are treated as drivers of vehicles.") are fine in theory, but

I've noticed a one-sidedness in campaigns to put them into

practice. The wanton lawless of "drivers of vehicles" is

overlooked. Their less-than-same rules and more-than-same

rights don't even enter the equation.



=v= The very fact that hit-and-run driving would lead to a

discussion of a cyclists' "code of conduct" speaks volumes.