Sic Semper Tyrannis

More mysterious CCT signage

It always starts slowly like this. Before you know it they'll be coming for our handlebar-mounted Kindles -

Other People's Content, redux

Someone in the CityBike.com forums linked to this video, which is well worth reposting here. It's local to the region, and, while it's largely preaching to the choir, captures the pros and cons pretty well.

(What I really want is to figure out how to mount a camera on my bike frame like these folks did!)

Pedal Power Final Cut from Mike Kurec on Vimeo.

On bike lanes

I have more to say on the subject (I'm a bit of a bike lane skeptic). In the meantime this video provides an interesting entrée.

A tale full of sound and fury; signifying nothing

Two years ago, citing safety concerns, Montgomery County imposed a 15 mph speed limit on the county portion of the Capital Crescent Trail and installed rumble strips on the trail where it crosses Dorset Avenue and Little Falls Parkway at grade. For three or four weeks thereafter, it was not uncommon to see Montgomery County police cruisers conspicuously parked alongside the trail, radar in place, checking for violators.

The rumble strips were taken up after about a year. The speed limit – and the signs stating it – remain in place but enforcement today appears no more substantial than the fading stripes of paint that hint at where the rumble strips once were. Now, two years later, one wonders: What was the point? Are cyclists riding more slowly? Are there fewer accidents? Are pedestrians no longer startled by bicycles speeding past, inches from their elbows?

I confess that on my own almost daily (and always uphill) commute on the CCT I give absolutely no thought to my speed unless the trail is congested, in which case I find a pace to match conditions. It is of course risky extrapolate too freely from one's own experience, but it seems to reinforce the sentiment of several cyclists, expressed when the new rules were instituted, that this "solution" missed the point; that the limit was unrealistically low and that the freer application of common sense and courtesy by all trail users would go further toward enhancing trail safety.

Helmets

I’ve never had much patience for helmet scolds – those self-appointed stewards of safety who, e.g., write into newspapers or magazines chastizing them for running a photograph of someone on (or nearby) a bicycle without a helmet; or who fix you with a condemnatory glare if you should venture out for a ride around the neighborhood with a cloth Campagnolo hat on your head. Yes, helmets reduce the risk of head injuries in an accident. A helmet might even save your life. By all means, wear one. I do, (almost) invariably. But spare me the self-righteousness and disapprobation if I choose not to. Bike riding isn’t significantly more dangerous than any number of things we undertake every day without special protection; going without a helmet on a bike is simply not the foolhardy, unthinking act that some would make it out to be. It’s just a choice.

(Seven hundred cycling deaths each year in the U.S. compared to 33,000+ in autos and 4,500+ for pedestrians. Injuries similarly skewed, away from cyclists. I wonder how many lives would be saved every year, or how many closed head injuries mitigated, by helmet use by everyone at all times? As they say - "if it saves one life, it's worth it".)

Helmets may help, but your best insurance against serious injury is unwavering attentiveness, the constant awareness of your surroundings and everything that moves in and out of them. The great majority of bicycle injuries and deaths result from auto collisions, and avoiding those one-sided encounters altogether is a more effective way to stay safe than relying on some thin piece of styrofoam once you’re headed toward the ground. (Which is why I direct my scorn toward cyclists with iPods, who, unlike bareheaded riders, are actually increasing their odds of a crash.)