Q & A

This is taken from a public discussion on the ChainGuard message board between Serge Issakov (italics) and John Forester (bold). I view this as defining what a bicycle advocacy organization should be about. Sadly, in too many cases, they are about the opposite.

> What groups of people are the targets for persuasion?

Off the top of my head... Roadway engineers. Law enforcement officers. Judges. Lawmakers and political leaders. The cycling community. The public at large.

> What concept are these groups to be persuaded to believe or accept?

Bicyclists have the right to act and be treated as drivers on the roadways. Bicycling is relatively safe, and bicycling as drivers on roadways is safer than bicycling otherwise on roadways. Bicycling without using roadways is only rarely a viable means of transportation.

> If the persuasion is successful, what actions would these groups be expected to take?

Roadway engineers - no roadway treatments that do not treat cyclists as drivers.

Law enforcement officers - no harassment/citation s for cyclists acting as legal drivers.

Judges - no rulings against cyclists acting as legal drivers.

Lawmakers and political leaders - no laws or projects that do not treat cyclists as drivers.

The cycling community - greater acceptance and adoption of cycling as drivers.

The public at large - greater acceptance and better treatment of cyclists acting as drivers.

> Finally, what is the desired result from the actions that these groups of persuaded people happen to take?

Roads without features that treat cyclists as non-drivers (no bike lanes except maybe in situations that are truly analogous to truck lanes - long stretches with no intersections, driveways, offramps, etc). Cyclists can travel on roads as drivers without being harassed or cited for doing something wrong. In the rare instance where a cyclist might still be cited, his odds of convincing the judge that the officer was wrong to not treat him as a driver are much better than the crapshoot we have today. FTR and MBL laws repealed. Much bigger percentage of cyclists riding in the vehicular manner. Larger percentage of the population participating in cycling in general, and vehicular cycling in particular. Vehicular cyclists encounter harassment from motorists significantly less often than we do today.

> I think that any proposed program of persuasion needs to be analyzed in these terms to see whether success is likely.

Fair enough, though I don't know how exactly such a program should be formulated (but I have an idea of what some of the key elements might be) or how you would determine if success is likely.