Brady Brady
Text sent to Greenlick:
Representative Greenlick,
My wife and I voted for you in the last election, and I must say that I am disappointed in learning of your intent to propose a bill prohibiting children from under 6 from riding in a bike seat or trailer. My wife is due with our first child in 5 days, and we are in the process of relocating to a flatter neighborhood precisely so we CAN enjoy bike and stroller excursions with our daughter, in addition to lessening our dependence on our car. The bill you propose would have a negative impact on our family, and many others. In our new location, we will live 1.5 miles from the grocery, bank, etc. This is inconvenient for a walk, but perfectly convenient for a stroll on the bike—and, for people who like biking as we do, inexcusably short for a trip in the car. As someone who has biked 6,000 – 8,000 miles per year in the past, I can say without question that the routes I will choose, the speeds I will travel, and even the type of bike I will ride, will be quite different when traveling with my daughter, than when traveling alone or with a group of adults.
You state: "If it's true that it's unsafe, we have an obligation to protect people. If I thought a law would save one child's life, I would step in and do it. Wouldn't you?" First of all, there is nothing intrinsically unsafe about riding a bike. Driving a 2-plus ton vehicle willfully, wantonly and distractedly—that is unsafe. Walking around without a helmet is not considered unsafe, but it isn’t “safe” to be hit in the head with a baseball bat. Each year, people die from being hit in the head with bats and other blunt objects. Would you introduce a bill to require all citizens to wear football helmets outdoors? It would be better to focus your efforts on the people who carry bats.
If you’re truly interested in saving lives, perhaps you will consider the following; I have conveniently arranged them in increasing order of expected efficacy:
a) Putting real teeth in the “vulnerable roadway users” law—how about a fine of $15,000 (or 6 month’s pay, whichever is greater) and a 1-year license suspension for hitting a cyclist or pedestrian with a motor vehicle. Everyone knows that cyclists don’t simply fall over, nor pedestrians fall to the ground. Of course, this must be coupled with teeth in the punishment for hit-and-runs—a good start would be forfeiture of the vehicle, 1 year in prison, and revocation of driving privileges for life.
b) Limiting motor vehicle operation to those citizens between 25 and 70 years of age: it is well known that people outside this demographic experience a considerably higher rate of motor vehicle accidents than those within this demographic. Judiciously narrowing this band—for example, to those between 44 and 45 years of age—would further optimize results. While you’re at it, you might as well prohibit red cars, as those are positively correlated with accidents. Let’s not worry about correlation vs. causation and the fact that people currently driving red cars will have to choose some other color, taking their driving habits with them—we can get voters behind this without confusing them with the facts.
c) Lowering the motor vehicle speed limit to 5 (five) miles per hour within city limits: this would save MANY lives; it is exceedingly rare for a vehicle-related fatality to occur at speeds below 5 miles per hour.
d) Prohibiting motor vehicle operation within city limits: while I cannot say with certainty that this would remove ALL risk of vehicle-related death, it would come pretty close. You’d still have those who are determined to crush themselves and their young children while working in their garage under the car they can’t drive, so you should probably introduce a bill to outlaw that, too.
The solution you propose, and the logic by which you have justified it, are only slightly more credible than the solutions and justifications outlined above. The fact that your solution may be more achievable than these makes it no more worthy an idea. Chasing symptoms won’t help anyone. We need to embrace and encourage alternative forms of transportation, not discourage people from their use. We need to demand and enforce responsible use and sharing of our roads—by all users, not just those most vulnerable.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Brady Brady
Portland
Brady Brady
JMP Academics
brady.brady@jmp.com
Office: 919.531.9767
Mobile: 503.545.2110
From: obra-bounces@list.obra.org [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org] On Behalf Of sbohaboy@comcast.net
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 9:21 AM
To: obra@list.obra.org
Subject: [OBRA Chat] Proposed ban of children 6 and younger form bikes and trailers
Hello,
Representative Mitchgreenlick has posted a House Bill proposal to ban all children 6 and younger from being carried on a bike or trailer. This could dramatically impact the life style my wife and I are trying to create for our children. Please read the bike Portland article on this proposed bill. http://bikeportland.org/2011/01/12/rep-greenlick-says-safety-concerns-prompted-child-biking-bill-45890 If you feel moved to do so, please contact the Representative to focus his efforts in ways to make our bike infrastructure safer, rather than banning entire segments of society from riding. rep.mitchgreenlick@state.or.us
Thank you,
Spencer Bohaboy