My current pet peeve is people complaining about the ‘cost’ of protected bike lanes because “people on bikes don’t pay their way”.

Beyond even the data showing just how much private car ownership is already subsidized, can we just take a moment and acknowledge: We wouldn’t need protected lanes at all if cars were not killing and injuring so many people.

It’s like the owner of an animal bemoaning the cost of an enclosure for their animal, which keeps killing and maiming members of the public as they pass by.

It’s not the victim’s fault the enclosure is needed, and it’s not the fault of someone riding a bike they need protection in a public space.

  • vividspecter@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Why not both? Protected bike lanes as much as possible, but have a city wide 30 kmph limit which will make driving itself less dangerous and people can cycle relatively safely on streets while the bike lane infrastructure is being built out.

    • SorteKaninA
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      Sure, both is nice. We already have the bike lane infrastructure in Denmark but I can definitely see why you’d want slower speeds if you have no bike lanes. I do think some road in cities in Denmark are being reduced to 40 km/h.