Voice of reason   0 #181 Posted June 8, 2019 1 minute ago, WiseOwl182 said: You could, but walking on pavements is a necessity, driving cars is a necessity (in many cases), whereas cycling is optional. Cycle lanes help cyclists stay safe on the roads but they are more suited to roads than pavements. Maybe, but its also a thread about cycling to work. A big factor for people not doing it is the danger. So roads being safer for them and the ability to cycles (sensibly) on paths just seems common sense to me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Cyclone   10 #182 Posted June 8, 2019 (edited) 57 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said: I disagree. It's not safe for pedestrians because some cyclists go far too fast. Separate lanes for cycles on pavements is fine, but not on the same area that's for pedestrians. Well, we already have shared spaces, and they seem to improve safety, not decrease it. I've just realised that all I'm really suggesting is that all pavements by default are made into shared spaces, rather than the opposite. 32 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said: You could, but walking on pavements is a necessity, driving cars is a necessity (in many cases), whereas cycling is optional. Cycle lanes help cyclists stay safe on the roads but they are more suited to roads than pavements. Cycling is just as necessary as walking or driving. Edited June 8, 2019 by Cyclone Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
WiseOwl182 Â Â 10 #183 Posted June 8, 2019 1 hour ago, Cyclone said: Â Cycling is just as necessary as walking or driving. No it isn't. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Voice of reason   0 #184 Posted June 8, 2019 1 hour ago, WiseOwl182 said: No it isn't. Popcorn, anybody? 😉 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Cyclone   10 #185 Posted June 8, 2019 2 hours ago, WiseOwl182 said: No it isn't. I need to get to work right, so why is it more necessary that I drive or walk than cycle? That literally makes no sense. If the journey is necessary then whatever means I choose is equally "necessary". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
WiseOwl182   10 #186 Posted June 8, 2019 27 minutes ago, Cyclone said: I need to get to work right, so why is it more necessary that I drive or walk than cycle? That literally makes no sense. If the journey is necessary then whatever means I choose is equally "necessary". Cars are necessary because many people have to travel too far to work for walking, cycling or public transport. Walking is necessary because we're human beings. Cycling provides an overlap between the two as an additional option, rather than a necessity. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
altus   534 #187 Posted June 8, 2019 26 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said: Cars are necessary because many people have to travel too far to work for walking, cycling or public transport. Walking is necessary because we're human beings. Cycling provides an overlap between the two as an additional option, rather than a necessity. That's not necessary though - living far away from work is optional. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
RootsBooster   24 #188 Posted June 8, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, WiseOwl182 said: You could, but walking on pavements is a necessity, driving cars is a necessity (in many cases), whereas cycling is optional. Cycle lanes help cyclists stay safe on the roads but they are more suited to roads than pavements. I don't think that the thousands (likely millions) of people, who own a bicycle but not a car, will agree with you on that. Edited June 8, 2019 by RootsBooster Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
WiseOwl182 Â Â 10 #189 Posted June 8, 2019 3 hours ago, RootsBooster said: I don't think that the thousands (likely millions) of people, who own a bicycle but not a car, will agree with you on that. Maybe not, but as a society and economy, both cars and walking are necessities, whereas cycling isn't. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
RootsBooster   24 #190 Posted June 8, 2019 54 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said: Maybe not, but as a society and economy, both cars and walking are necessities, whereas cycling isn't. ... Except for those in society who have a bike but no car Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Bargepole23 Â Â 337 #191 Posted June 8, 2019 59 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said: Maybe not, but as a society and economy, both cars and walking are necessities, whereas cycling isn't. It is for those who cannot afford a car, only a bicycle, and are not on a public transport route. Â Try to think outside of your own experience. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
WiseOwl182 Â Â 10 #192 Posted June 9, 2019 10 hours ago, Bargepole23 said: It is for those who cannot afford a car, only a bicycle, and are not on a public transport route. Â Try to think outside of your own experience. If somewhere can be cycled to, then it's within range of a combination of walking and public transport. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...