3 ms·
> No, that's never been the "purported goal." The goal is to protect people who already ARE cycling. The real goal is often to reduce the number of people biki
by substation13 4y ago
> No, that's never been the "purported goal." The goal is to protect people who already ARE cycling.
The real goal is often to reduce the number of people biking. This is why there is strong correlation between supporting mandatory helmet laws (and bicycle taxes, license plates and mandatory training) and opposing safe infrastructure such as segregated bike lanes.
- halostatue 4y agoMHLs also put the burden back on the vulnerable road users, allowing spineless politicians to blame the victims.
- jacobr1 4y ago> The real goal is often to reduce the number of people biking Where is the evidence of that intention? This seems more like the case of unintended side-effects to me.
- matkoniecz 4y agoNo strong evidence but this things* come from people really disliking cyclists, at least in my experience. *supporting mandatory helmet laws, mandatory insurance on bicycles, other bicycle taxes, license plates on bicycles and applying car-related legal requirements in general, requiring driving license to use bicycle, ban on cycling by children, opposing safe infrastructure such as segregated bike lanes, opposing any bicycle infrastructure, wanting to ban cycling on roads, wanting to remove cycleways.