Letter To The Editor
OCN story implies cyclists are crazy & not welcome
To the editor:
I was disapointed about how badly cyclists were portrayed in your article on cyclists and campus safety (OCN Oct. 31, 2003).
I know that the article said that the problem is caused by only a small fraction of the cyclists, but the overall tone of the article was clearly one that cyclists are crazy and should not be allowed on campus. Words such as 'skyrocketing near-misses' and 'cyclists have no rights' clearly drives the message home - cyclists are crazy and should not be allowed campus!
Also, bikers have to give right-of-way to cars at all times? That means that a cyclist at busy crossings such as main library-dentistry would have to wait for about half an hour to an hour for cars to clear out of campus at 4 o'clock rush hour. I am sure that even Campus Security agree that to be a bad idea. Also, what if a car hits both a pedestrian and a cyclist at the same time at a crossing? Quite an interesting triangular drama on who is at fault; the biker is - of course - at fault for getting hit (always is at all times) and I assume that the driver of the car is at fault for hitting the pedestrian. Kind of ironic I think.
Say no to bikes and get more cars on campus! Too bad the cyclist in your article didn't fly more than 30 feet as that should really have taught him/her that cars have right-of-way at all times!
Needless to say, I am biking on campus (branded crazy now I guess).