LETTERS

0

Damn excellent (thanks) 

Hello BW. All your writers, your paper, the information you share is so welcomed to read.

Matt Cortina’s recent “Charcuterie Board” article [Re: Cuisine, “Board silly,” Nov. 5], was just damn excellent. It sang, flowed, was coherent, came from a slightly different angle, informative and taught me much. Also dug that it was longer than a half page in the cuisine section. Also appreciated all the exhaustive research that Boulder Weekly does in educating voters at election times… critical information.

Keep up the passion… thanks all. 

Phil Brittin/via Internet

That’ll teach ya, Chris Barge.

Many, many signs for Chris Barge were placed illegally on the public right-of-way and on private property without permission. It is with great delight that I see that Chris lost by 500 votes. Of those, some are from me and those I asked not to vote for a candidate who shows so little respect for the rules and for private property. I hope this can be a lesson not only to Chris, but to other candidates: your illegally placed sign can cost you votes.

Davide Andrea/Boudler

An imagined conversation before the next Democratic debate 

“Hello, Hillary, this is Bernie. I thought I would give you a heads up since I caught you by surprise at the first debate by defending you against the media obsession with your damn emails. I’m thinking of proposing expanded educational subsidies starting at the pre-school level as an enhancement of my plan for free tuition at state colleges. Since you have liked some of my other stands on issues such as the TPP and the XL Pipeline, I’m giving you this before our next debate in case you want to incorporate it into your campaign. Does that give you enough time?” “I have to refer this to my campaign committee and let them review it. They have given me good advice so far.”

“Yes, and I’m sure they will let your super delegates know too. By the way, my campaign is working on new ideas that you will be interested in, so stay tuned. See you on Saturday.”

Sharon Rouse/Boulder

Bicycle myths 

A recent letter regarding cyclists and the law contained two myths about bicycle law: “walk your bike across every roadway, no matter what (it’s the rule!); and never, ever ride elbow to elbow; tandem or single file is also the rule. Look them up.” I did, and you can too: http://colobikelaw.com/coloradolaw. html. The first “rule” is a figment of the author’s imagination. The second requires only that riding abreast does not impede traffic. Local rules and signage can override this, such as “single file through curves.”

Another popular myth, usually trotted out to justify any and all menace to cyclists, is that cars and gas taxes pay for roadways, and bicycles can have some rights when they pay their share. It is easy to confirm that state and local roads are only 35 percent funded by gas and use taxes, the rest coming from general funds.

Cycling laws didn’t exist until recently, and most states took the easy way out — bicycles have wheels, so they should be treated like cars. But why aren’t bicycles treated like fast pedestrians? With some notable exceptions like Idaho, bicycle law is lazy and outdated. I submit that the law SHOULD be based on the sensible rationale that equal danger incurs equal restriction. Simply tallying up police reports, it is clear that bicycles pose zero threat to vehicles and minimal threat to anyone else, whereas vehicles are an omnipresent danger to practically everyone. By that reason alone we should exempt cyclists from most traffic laws, requiring only that cyclists ride in such a manner so as not to impede traffic unless there is no other option, and to not pose a danger to anyone else.

People who are driven crazy by the thought of a cyclist running a red light typically say something like “if we are going to refrain from menacing them, the least they can do is follow the law!” But that is nothing more than spite. A cyclist who rolls to a red light, looks around, and proceeds, does no harm and poses no

risk. Conversely, cyclists are put at risk every day by careless or raging drivers. This letter is already too long to list the variety of malicious and reckless moves that cyclists are exposed to. Suffice it to say that, if traffic law effectively protected cyclists, we might take it more seriously. This is not a knock against Boulder County’s efforts to make cycling safer — our roadways are as good as it gets. This is about reasonable laws, equal protection, and equal responsibility.

John Lilley/Boulder