Stop handing them the stick

It is now common for newspapers and TV news channels to have websites.

News stories and articles are published, and like blogs most allow comments from readers.

I find it disturbing whenever a cycling related story is posted, it is inevitably followed by a stream of anti-cycling rhetoric.

This usually draws counter comments from cyclists, often equally as venomous.

Still more anti-cycling bullshit follows, and so it goes on and on. Nothing good is achieved; if anything the two sides are driven further apart rather than seeing the other’s point of view.

Recently I read this post from a TV news station in New Haven, Connecticut. Strictly speaking this was not a cycling story, but a business story about a business that happened to be a retail bike store.

I was dismayed when it drew the same anti-cycling comments from the general public. One responding to the report that the bike store had been broken into, stated, “I'm glad those liberal enablers got burglarized.”

In this persons eyes not only should people not be allowed to ride bikes on the road but bike store owners are fair game for abuse, because they encourage and enable cycling.

To the credit of the website’s administrators, at least one of the more hateful comments was removed. I read it earlier and it advocated running cyclists down in order to, quote, “Take back our roads.”

Although every cyclist sees this type of comment coming from a viewpoint of ignorance and extreme prejudice, we have to realize our counter responces are probably viewed in exactly the same way.

One also has to realize the person you respond to will never see your point of view, but a carefully worded, intelligent response will win over more moderate readers. It might be better to make a general statement rather than a response counter attacking an individual.

Cyclists are a minority group and as such will be judged by the worst behavior in our group. I can practically guarantee whenever a cycling related article appears, there will be at least one comment from someone that goes something like this:

“Cyclists seem to think they own the damn road, they never obey stop signs and lights.”

To be fair, people do not make this kind of stuff up. People say things like this, and others will readily agree with them, because they have witnessed exactly this behavior from cyclists on many occasions.

I witnessed it myself just a few weeks ago. I was sitting at a light in my car at the end of a long line of vehicles.

A cyclist on a road bike, rode calmly up the outside of the row of cars, and with a cursory glance to the left and right, without slowing, rode across the busy six lane highway against the red light.

With assorted vehicles passing through at about 60mph (Speed limit is 55.) ranging from cars, SUVs, commercial trucks, and eighteen wheelers.

I'm sure like me, these drivers experienced a serious WTF moment as we watched this idiot on a bicycle, weave his way through traffic dodging between gaps in the flow. I wondered his reasoning, a death wish, or outright defiance simply because he could.

I might have chased him down to ask him, but he went straight, and I was in the left turn lane. Would it have inconvenienced this cyclist to wait in line for the green light like everyone else was obliged to do?

Sadly there were at least another twenty or more people waiting at the four corners of this busy intersection, also witnessing this brazen defiance of the law.

In an instant, one cyclist gave forty or more people a reason to hate cyclists.

I question whether we will see an end to this verbal and online beating up of cyclists, when there are those among us who keep handing our critics the stick to do it with.

Bike to work, lose weight

Here is an inspirational story about Englishman Gary Brennan, who at the beginning of 2008 weighed 546 lbs.

He started riding a bike 7 miles each way to work, five days a week and in less that a year lost 224 lbs.

The top picture shows Gary as he was, and the picture on the left is as he is now.

Doctors had previously told him the only way he could lose the weight was to have gastric bipass surgury.

When he started riding to work the seven mile ride took him two hours. I cannot imagine the effort it must have taken to haul over 500 lbs on a bike, up even the slightest incline. Today the daily commute takes Gary about twenty minutes each way.

Read more about Gary Brennan here, and he also has a great cycling promo video here.

Cycling is a great way to burn calories. It can be as gentle or intense as you wish to make it. I can imagine when Gary started out just the amount of weight he had to propel forward burned a lot of calories even at a slow speed.

The great thing about cycling is, the faster you ride the more calories you burn per mile traveled because of the increase in wind resistance.  As Gary lost weight and gained fitness, he rode faster and burned more calories.

Like all exercise, it is a chore at first, but when you reach a certain fitness level cycling becomes a joy and a pleasure.

Regular readers already know the health benefits of cycling, but here is dramatic proof of what can be achieved in extreme circumstances.

Share it with someone you know who could benifit from an inspirational story like this one

Footnote: For US readers, Gary talks about weighing 39 stone. A Stone = 14 lbs. (39 x 14 = 546 lbs.)

Just as long as it doesn't have pedals

The late and great George Carlin said:

"If I am driving at a given speed, anyone who passes me is a Maniac, and anyone driving slower than me is a Moron."

The only reason this is funny is because it is the truth; a trait in human nature that we can all relate.

The other day I observed a guy on an old beat up moped. The engine was screaming, smoke billowed from the exhaust, and he was driving at about 20 mph in the center of the lane on a busy main street.

There was no doubt from the sound of the engine, that this was the top speed this two wheeled clunker was capable of.

Cars were just following along behind him in a slow procession; no one was honking at him. Traffic was backed up at least a mile, and drivers that were at least six cars back were oblivious to the cause of the hold up anyway.

They were all just calmly following this guy on a moped, and I wondered, what if that were a cyclist riding down the center of the lane at 20 mph?

There would be a medley of car horns blowing, people would be screaming abuse from their open car windows.

Human nature would kick in, a cyclist is someone who must be passed. It doesn't matter if the cyclist is doing close to 25 mph in a 25 mph speed zone.

It doesn't matter if the cyclist is doing 50 mph, plus, down a winding mountain pass. Where it is not safe for a car to travel at above fifty, the cyclist must be passed.

On the other hand, put a motor on the bicycle, electric or gasoline, just as long as the pedals are not going round, and it has some magic calming effect on following drivers.

The actual speed at which the moped or scooter is traveling has no bearing on the situation. Human nature and human behavior is indeed strange.

I am having computer problems

Over a week ago my hard drive failed on my PC and I have been trying since to restore my files that were backed up on online.

The restore kept failing, or so I thought. My latest attempt started last Friday afternoon and the restore process ran for over 48 hours until Sunday evening when I decided it was not working again and I canceled the restore.

This was stupid, stupid, stupid, on my part because it appears the "Cancellation" process may take another 48 hours, proving that it was working, but that it is an extremely long process.

But no one told me that because the tech guys are all "Off Shore" and they don't communicate too well, so I am having to learn myself, the hard way.

When the "Cancellation" process is done, (There is not way I can reverse it, apparently.) I will then be at the point I started. All very frustrating.

The posts I made last week, I did on my old computer, but as I only have one Internet connection, I can only run one at a time. I am posting this on a friend's PC, and setting it to auto-post Monday morning, as I know people will be expecting to hear from me..

Anyway, this too will pass, eventually, and I can get back to my normal bi-weekly posts, so just bear with me and check back later.

In the mean time I just need to let the restore process run its course, and I'll probably go ride my bike while it is doing its thing.

Update: After multiple attempts I finally retrieved my files on Thursday, 19th. November

The difference between rights and privileges

In a recent article I wrote about the Miami Critical Mass event I stated that the people taking part were abusing the "privilege" of riding a bicycle on the road.

A couple of people called me on this, stating that cycling is a right not a privilege. The argument being that a right cannot be taken away, whereas a privilege can.

My choice of words however, did not change the meaning of what I said, and the word "right" actually strengthened my argument.

If it is a right for us to ride our bikes on the road, all the more reason not to abuse that right by assembling in large numbers and blocking city streets to other road users.

It did however get me asking myself, what is a right? There are so called God given rights, but as people have the right to choose whether they believe in God or not, how does that work?

If you don't believe in God, do you have any God given rights? Are you obliged to respect other people's God given rights? As it is, the only one I can think of is our right to live.

Even that doesn’t count for much as laid out in my last piece, where a young couple riding a tandem bicycle had their lives taken by a person in a Ford truck, who was on the road driving as a privilege.

If you look at The Bill of Rights there are very few actual rights. The right to bear arms, the right to practice a religion of your choice, etc.

After that it appears the function of government (In theory anyway.) is to leave us alone, and we are free to do as we please as long as it doesn't include criminal activities. A problem arises when the rights of one group impede the rights of others. 

For example when automobiles first appeared there were no laws or regulations, you could simply buy a car, jump in and drive it. Pretty much in the same way as we can buy a bicycle today and ride it anywhere.

Later because of wholesale carnage on the roads, laws were passed and licenses issued to drivers. Driving became a privilege that could be taken away. Today it seems, this is a privilege that people are rarely deprived of, at least in the US.

It appears to me that rights are rarely granted, they are simply taken for granted. Is riding a bicycle on the highway is a prime example this?

I know to even suggest such a thing will cause outrage among a great many cyclists, but before we all get our anti-bacterial padded shorts in a twist, let’s think about this.

In recent years cell phones have become available and some assume it is their right to own one and talk and send text messages whenever they please, including while driving.

It turns out this is not a good idea so in some places this practice is being outlawed. Have people lost a right, or was it just an assumed right in the first place? 

A few years ago, people had the right to smoke just about anywhere they pleased. However, that right infringed on everyone else’s right not to breathe secondhand smoke. So, now that right has gradually been taken away, and smokers are now privileged to smoke in fewer and fewer places.

Because riding a bicycle on public roads is for the most part not a danger to other road users, it is doubtful than anyone will stop us doing it.

Cycling is a good idea. It cuts down on congestion in our cities, it is better for the environment, and it should be encouraged because it is good for the physical and mental well being of the participant.

My point is, are there any true rights or privileges, or just an ongoing daily debate among millions of people, on the streets, on the talk shows and in the courtrooms?

We all have certain rights, and we get to keep them as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others. If they do we may lose those rights, it is happening all the time.

In which case there is little difference between rights and privileges; either can be taken away.