Monday, January 7, 2008

Bike Safety

To all Boro Council Members,

I hope you can help here.

I was on my way home for Angelo’s with dinner about 6:30 Monday night. As I turned up homewards from Walter Foran, I traveled on North Main towards Thatcher Hill.


Shortly before I hit the Flemington Arms, in the dark about 30 feet ahead a kid on bike crossed my path. He was wearing a black ski cap, black jacket, black everything. He was barely visible. I am not much for imposing a lot of personal rules and “regs” with respect to people’s personal preferences but I ask you to consider requiring bike riders, and we have more and more of them in the Boro, to wear reflective vests after dusk.

I have good eyesight but to me he was hardly visible. He was just a child. I am hoping we can find a way to keep these riders safer.

I hope there is a way to address this problem before someone does get hurt.

Thank you for your consideration.

9 comments:

lit n up said...

Wouldn't it be great if there were some kind of bike safety week, with info for all bikers and those who come to the info meetings could get a free safety vest. The churches in the area that offer bilingual worship could help. There are merchants in town who may wish to participate and distribute safety vests. Even the high school could be a source of info. Maybe council could come up with a solution that would insure the safety of bikers and drivers. Just a thought

Courier News Flemington blog said...

Lit n up,

I am with you on that...I think we have enough bicyclists to warrant such a community undertaking. Also the Pedals for Progress program could be more advertised...if they thought is was a good idea.

MediumPetey said...

Hmmm. Government regulation of bicyclists? That's a very slippery slope, Joan Greiner. Soon, the government will be regulating where we walk. Why not require all walkers after dark to wear reflective gear? Why just cyclists? More people walk than cycle. And how about the dogs that people walk? They should be required to wear reflective gear, too. And stray dogs should have to, also. And stray cats. And cats that are outdoor cats, but owned by homeowners who let them out loose. All should be required to wear reflective gear at night.

And how about on days where it is very cloudy---and it is not sunny enough to see all the above in the street. The government should require all walkers, bikers, skateborders, cats, dogs, stray cats and dogs to wear reflective gear in the evening and on all days where it is too cloudy to be seen by drivers.

As you can see---government regulation is a very slippery slope. I prefer your previously stated position----"I am not much for imposing a lot of personal rules and “regs” with respect to people’s personal preferences". I am a functional libertarian ----if people who walk at night by their own personal preference wish to wear black, that is up to their own personal freedom. The local government has no business in getting involved in their lives.

MediumPetey said...

Or maybe the burden should be placed on the car drivers, not the cyclists. They are the ones who would cause the most harm. The local government could require all cars which are driven in Flemington to be covered from front to back with reflective gear. That would be a better solution than imposing the burden on cyclists and walkers.

Or maybe big signs that must be displayed at all times on all vehicles drive in Flemington at night and during cloudy days: "This is a vehicle. All walkers, cyclists and skateboaders must refrain from walking, cycling and skateboarding in front of this vehicle during the night and during cloudy days.". That would be the more equitable answer, rather than impose the burden on the poor walkers, cyclists and skateboaders.

lit n up said...

Already on the books....
39:4-10 Lights on Bicycles.
When in use at nighttime every bicycle shall be equipped with: 1) A front headlamp emitting a white light visible from a distance of at least 500 feet to the front; 2) A rear lamp emitting a red light visible from a distance of at least 500 feet to the rear; 3) In addition to the red lamp a red reflector may be mounted on the rear.

Courier News Flemington blog said...

Lit n up,

You are incredibly versed on rules and "regs" on cycling...Congrats! In this case there was a bit of red on the pedal, no lamps... no nothing... a very dangerous scenario.




Well Mpetey,

Thank you again for you unique perspective…So I take away from you comments that you equate the life of a cat with that of a child…Who’da thunk???!!!

MediumPetey said...

Guess I need to put the sarcasm in my posts in quotes or "italics" next time!

And, yes, all life is precious. Even that of cats, babies, dogs, and people.

Unless, of course, it's the life of a high school student doing drugs. Then you want to make sure that the high school cannot test them for drugs. "Certainly that's worth going to court for, no doubt."

Courier News Flemington blog said...

MP,

Having raised 2 daughters,I feel it is very important to protect our students...Central has yet to produce unbiased evidence that random testing is a deterrent. Read the Univ.of Mich. report on the link I provided. My acquaintance with this topic is more than cursory. Do you think I would take such a stand capriciously? Is Central giving parents a false sense of security here? With the increase of random testing there has been an increase of alcohol intake because alcohol breaks down and passes out of the system more quickly. Hence it is harder to detect. Those who argue that random drug testing is a deterrent need to produce independent figures to support the claim.

Yes,people have given their lives to give us and to protect the principles in the Bill of Rights.

Courier News Flemington blog said...

MP,

PS...the proven anti-drug is parental supervision...meals together etc., parental presence and guidance. Any school seriously interested in addressing drug abuse should be hitting on this theme as hard as possible.