Joeblake wrote:Hangdog98 wrote:.There is a very strong movement to stop cycleway construction and tear up existing ones because of under-use. Then what?
Do you have any substantive evidence for this claim? (And please, don't just supply a link and expect somebody else to do your research for you.)
You're kidding Joe, right? Way out west in WA you might not get the TV coverage that 95% of Australians get, but the whole subject of tearing up cyclepaths has been the stock and trade of talkback radio for 2 years. The fierce battle between the Sydney Lord Mayor and the anti-cycling lobby groups spilled over into the NSW State election. Barry O'Farrell (the Premier of NSW) supported the destruction of bike paths in his election campaign. The danger isn't the bogan on the electric Huffy or Betty on her 500W step-thru but being killed by a lunatic truck driver whipped into an anti-cycling frenzy by Ray Hadley on 2GB.
I thought everybody knew this but I was wrong. Though I'm not going to deliever substantive evidence for this claim nor do I run a cycling lobby appreciation course. You need to get out of your cave and do some reading of your own to catch up or just ignore me.
The point of motor assistance is get more bums on bikes. These bums may not be as fit as you, as fast as you, as wealthy as you, as dedicated as you. have suffered through as many metric centuries as you, eaten as many power-bars as you, bought as many pro jerseys as you, watched as many live telecasts of the tour on SBS while spinning on their fluid trainer as you, participated in the cycling forums as much as you or know what the B tension adjuster does on a derailleur... but these arbitrary restrictions people want to put on others enjoyment of the pathways of travel around our great nation is just being a fitness elitist hiding behind the veil of non-existant safety concerns.
ColinOldnCranky, my advice to you would be to unsubscribe from this thread rather than close it. I'm not done thanks.