Old thread from 2023 finally hit bump limit >>1955863New thread. "Cycling infrastructure" is harm reduction. But not in the way you probably think. The anti-bike crowd considers riding a bicycle on public roads as an offense against the interests of motorists. An so, they wish to create infrastructure to reduce cycling (harm). Yes! Those who advocate for "separate but equal" are (whether they admit it or not) working against the interests of bicycle users:-The American Automobile Association strongly supports bike lanes-Countries that place responsibility on car drivers have 70-90% fewer fatalities per billion km traveled by bike. This is of course beyond the pale, drivers must always have total immunity. But hey, look, green paint! We solved safety!-The true purpose of bike lanes is to neutralize the opposition by corrupting the discourse. Don't support bike lanes? Then you must not care about safety!-Bike lanes have a curious pattern of appearing where they are superfluous, and vanishing as you approach potential traffic conflict zones. This way, when you get run over by a dump truck making a turn, it's your fault! You shoulda been in the bike lane that wasn't there!In conclusion: bike lane activists hate cyclists and want to eradicate cycling as a form of transportation.
