North Korean Anti-Bicycle Campaign

Copenhagenize has recieved a leaked public service film from behind the fortified borders of North Korea that provides insight into the classic manipulative nature of a well-oiled propaganda machine.

Above is a classic Communist propaganda film from North Korea showing the typical use of children in emotional propaganda praising the State and The Great Leader, yada yada. Using children is a classic - and quite regrettable - tactic in such countries. The Soviets were also well versed in using children to promote their ideology, as were most Communist states.


Here is the leaked video that Copenhagenize recieved. It hails from the northern province of Northern Yoo Lan, far from the capital. An agricultural area with an adbundance of tractors and a tradition for using vehicles more than in the populated cities.

Their dialect is difficult to interpret but we've learned that the propaganda film is the intiative of the People's Committee for Glorious Promotion of Farm Vehicles and Safety, started by the Communal Fathers Committee of the capital of Northern Yoo Lan, Aal Bor.

The Communal Fathers view the bicycle as a threat to the glorious progress of their vehicle culture and are trying to restrict the usage of the machine through this constructed fear campaign. Encouraging people to instead stimulate the struggling economy by using vehicles to get around. To get to their communal workplaces or even to transport themselves to their People's Center for Glorious Secular Societal Togetherness - Yoosk Seng Atoys Laya, as it is called in their dialect.

Using children to promote ideology is something that we here in the West find somewhat disgusting. Children as weapons in a self-serving emotional propaganda campaign should not be tolerated and Copenhagenize hopes that an offical letter of complaint is sent to the Communal Fathers Committee. As per usual with such propaganda, there is very little science involved. That would just clutter up the Glorious Message with common sense and rationality. Two societal qualities not tolerated in such societies.


Here is a previous propaganda film from the Communal Fathers of Aal Bor, in Norther Yoo Lan. Like most of their campaigns, they have the blessing of the National Bureau for Traffic Manipulation and Fearspeak - Fa Ken Wang Kaas and the People's Committee for Elderly Persons in Wooly Socks and Sandals, Soo Kal Yelm.

Despite the secretive nature of North Korea, the Communal Fathers have, through third party contacts, negotiated a rare trade agreement with a Western company in the interest of further developing their Glorious Farm Vehicle & Safety Five Year Plan. According to observers, the People's Commune of Aal Bor will send all the now unused bicycles to Great Britian. In exchange for a massive shipment of these Safety Devices to be placed on the heads of the children of Aal Bor at all times. Adorned with the appropriate slogans and graphics that accompany such projects.

A shocking and frightening peek into the inner workings of North Korean society. Thank Odin I live in a region with strong Social-Democratic traditions and a cultural history involving rational thought.

Puncture Repairs Banned in Denmark

Vintage tire repair box.

You'll be excused for thinking that May 25th is the Danish version of April 1st. The press last week featured articles about The Danish Working Environment Authority's [Arbejdstilsynet] new rules regarding working conditions in bicycle shops.

Bike mechanics are now required to wear gloves and masks when repairing punctures using the vulcanized rubber glue for sticking patches on tubes. In addition, they're required to install a ventilation system in their bike shops.

These rules will effectively kill off the possibility of getting a puncture repaired in Denmark.

Sure, many people can fix flats themselves. However, many local bike shops [I have 22 bike shops to choose from within a 1 km radius of my flat], earn a fair chunk of their income repairing flats. I always chuck my bike into the shop to have it done. It costs 50 kroner [$10] and if I'm on my way to a meeting, I don't fancy getting my hands dirty or risk getting oil on my suit. It's quick, easy and supports the bike shops. Yes, the purists will roll their eyes, but such is life for many in established bike cultures.

Or used to be.

"Some of our members have been instructed to a install ventilation system and use masks, but the ventilation system isn't feasible. It's simply too expensive", said Søren Sørensen from the Danish Association of Bicycle Retailers [Danske Cykelhandlere] to Danish TV2. The Association represents over 400 bike shops around the country.

A ventilation system can easily cost 100,000 kroner [ca. $20,000] and that is simply out of reach of most bike shops.

The 'problem' is the glue used in the process. The Working Environment Authority highlights that short term effects include eye and skin irritation, nausea, headaches, and dizziness. Long-term exposure causes similar effects but can also affect the central nervous system and cause brain damage.

Søren Sørensen admits that the only option is putting on a new tube instead of fixing the puncture. A new tube costs roughly 100 kroner [$20] more than a patch on the old tube.

"A new tube is, of course, a better repair option than a patch, so you can't compare it. But in some instances it's overkill with a new tube", says Sørensen.

The Association of Danish Bicycle Retailers isn't thrilled about the new rules. Nevertheless, they sent a sign out to members to put in the window stating that they no longer can repair punctures.

"We think the new rules are unreasonable. Nobody is patching up tubes from 8 in the morning to 7 at night and I've never seen documentation proving that there is more illness or increased mortality rates among bicycle mechanics", added Sørensen.

Indeed, there doesn't seem to be any real documentation about this 'problem'. These new rules are based on "May possibly cause..." instead of "Has been proven to cause several cases of..."

Which is hardly the foundation for rules and regulations. If the Working Environment Authority wishes to be logical, then I am looking forward to their next move: Ventilation systems installed in automobiles used as workplaces, like taxis, minivans, trucks and buses. There are studies that show the level of dangerous microparticles is higher inside of motor vehicles than if you're cycling alongside.

So... masks and ventilation systems for these workers who use their cars/vans/trucks for their work. Wouldn't that make sense? At a glance, such rules would certainly have a greater positive health effect than gloves/masks/ventilation for exposure to a few millilitres of rubber glue each day.

The war on bikes started by the Danish Road Safety Council continues to enlist the strangest mercenaries. It really is rather ridiculous. Fortunately, none of the bike shops that I frequent are bothered by this and I shall continue to have free access to tube repairs and, in the process, continue to support these shops.

Via: TV2 and assorted media.



Not surprisingly, there has been some satire about the issue. The Danish daily, Politiken, satirised it by publishing a fake letter from the Working Environment Authority to a fictional bike shop. I translated it here:

To: Ejvinds Bicycle Shop, Valby

The Danish Working Environment Authority has, on our recent visit, determined that there is bad air in your bicycle tubes, which can in the long run cause serious lung infections in your employees. We have also seen that in your bicycle sale you have a large number of pannier racks on offer, which can cause serious injuries, including broken bones if your finger gets caught in one.

We hereby ask you to immediately establish a ventilation system for your bike tubes according to European Union environmental standards, as well as put up warning signs and alarms near the pannier racks you have on display.

You have until Thursday last week. Best regards, Arbejdstilsynet


And it didn't take long for a cartoon like this to appear. The Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen cycling on flat tires rolls past a bike shop with a sign in the window reading "No Puncture Repairs". The two leaders who stand to win the next election - Helle Thorning Schmidt and Villy Søvndal - are peering out with glee at the hapless PM. As seen in Berlingske Tidende newspaper.

The Safety Gang!

It's time to dive headfirst into a shallow pool of Safety! Yay!

Cycling Disclaimer Obsessions

Thanks to Bojana for the link to a strange waiver on the website of the town of Perth, Ontario, Canada. It's not as ridiculous as the waiver required for a quiet bike ride in Chicago, as mentioned in the Go Green, Go Dutch, Go Die post, but what makes it odd is that you have to sign it before downloading... cycling maps.

Cycling maps. I just had to repeat that. In order to download the pdfs of the Perth & District Cycling Route maps, you first need to read this disclaimer text:

Disclaimer:
This cycling map has been developed to assist in planning bicycle trips throughout the County of Lanark. Users of this cycling map are responsible for their own safety and use these routes at their own risk. Users should consider not only route conditions but also their level of experience, comfort level riding in traffic, traffic conditions and traffic volume, weather, time of day, and any obstacles, such as construction or potholes, when cycling on any route within the County of Lanark. Certain of the roads and highways on this cycling map, including Highway #511, have high traffic volume and are used regularly by transport trucks. Cyclists should exercise the same level of caution whether riding on a route designated by this map or any non-designated route.

The County of Lanark, Town of Perth, Perth & District Chamber of Commerce and others involved in the design and publication of this map and the cycling routes are not responsible for any loss or damage users may suffer as a result of using this cycling map or the cycling routes. The County of Lanark, Town of Perth, Perth & District Chamber of Commerce, and their directors, officers, employees, owners, volunteers and staff do not warrant the safety of any route, highway, road, street or designated cycling route shown on this cycling map.

Hang on... you're not finished yet. After reading the disclaimer, you then have to read AND AGREE TO the following waiver:

Waiver: Having read the foregoing material and as a condition of using this cycling map, the users of this cycling map waive, release, and discharge, for themselves and their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, any rights or claims which the users have or may hereafter have against the directors, officers, employees, owners, volunteers and staff of the County of Lanark, Town of Perth, Perth & District Chamber of Commerce and other sponsoring businesses and organizations, for any and all damages which may be sustained by the users directly or indirectly in connection with their use of this cycling map or the cycling routes.

Goodness me. Talking about overcomplicating a simple issue. I wonder if damages include paper cuts?

Do motorists in Ontario have to sign waivers before acquiring road maps? Considering how many car accidents there are, you'd think they would need to/be forced to.

Maybe all GPS gadgets should have the voice state things like:

"Turn left, 500 metres... at your own risk and releasing the company who produced this GPS machine from all liability..."

"Continue straight, 1 point 3 kilometres... fully accepting that you are doing so entirely at your own risk..."

Sheesh.


On the other side of the planet, I am researching things to do and see in Abu Dhabi and read on a tourist website that:

"Though cycling is a common mean of transportation for the locals, it has become a favourite leisure activity these days. Abu Dhabi provides many bicycle lanes that go through the skilfully developed public parks, gardens and roads in the city."

Which sounds lovely. Although on another site they were mentioning the Corniche, a boardwalk along the sea and highlighting that it was perfect for walking/promenading "although the more adventurous visitors could rent a bicycle and ride on the bikes lanes."

Adventurous? I guess I'll be Hillary and the Corniche of Abu Dhabi will be my Everest...

Double sheesh.

Cycling Isn't 'Fun', It's Transport

Richard at Cyclelicio.us blogged this yesterday. It's an online survey from a group called Ecology Action in the US about bicycle commuting.

Right off the bat I agreed with Richard about the fact that the first four reasons are silly and out of touch with basic anthropology. The most important reason of all was left out.

Richard, however, claimed that the most important reason was that it was 'fun'. I got off the bus at that point.

I don't ride a bicycle all over the map because it's fun. I don't think I've ever considered it fun. Enjoyable, perhaps, but even that isn't at the top of the list.

Frisbees are fun. That's why hundreds of millions of them have been sold since Walter Frederick Morrison concieved his flying disk. But there are very, very few people who think that it's so much fun that they want to join a league and do it full time.

When the City of Copenhagen asks its cycling citizens what their main reason for cycling is - and they ask every two years - the majority reply that it is because a bicycle is the quickest and easiest way to get around town. 56% of them say that.

In second place, 19% reply that their main reason is 'good exercise'. They get their 30 minutes a day like the Ministry of Health suggests but riding to and from work and on to the supermarket.

Only 6% ride because it's inexpensive and only 1% ride for environmental reasons.

I agree with Richard when he writes, "No wonder we fail so miserably at cycling promotion. Do car advertisements speak blandly to the raw number crunching, analytical bottom line? Or do they appeal to your desire for visceral, go fast, fantastic feeling of freedom and sexual prowess?"

Cycling advocacy is hopelessly out of touch with basic human anthropology. It doesn't trigger anything universal in it's marketing. If we want large numbers of citizens to choose the bicycle, the main way to do that is what I call A2Bism. It's goal number one in my Four Goals for Promoting Urban Cycling lecture that I travel around with.

People on bicycles are no different than people on foot, on trains, planes and automobiles. They want to get there quick. Homo sapiens are like rivers - we'll always take the quickest route.

People in established bicycle cultures ride because it's quick. Easy. Convenient. If you make that possible in emerging bicycle cultures, you have half the battle won. Sure, it requires safe, separated infrastructure to gain access to the goldmine of societal benefits associated with high levels of urban cycling.

On the Ecology Action - Bike2Work site that hosted that poll I found this:
Why Bike Commute?
- Its good for your health. (I don't give a shit... I want to get there quick)
- Saves you money on gasoline, vehicle maintenance, parking fees and parking tickets. (I don't give a shit... I want to get there quick)
- Reduces air, water and noise pollution associated with driving. (I don't give a shit... I want to get there quick)
- Reduces automobile traffic. (I don't give a shit... I want to get there quick... although fewer cars might be nice...)
- Its good for the community by making our streets safer, quieter, and cleaner. (Yeah, yeah, sounds nice... but I still just want to get there quick.)

"Once you discover the freedom, convenience, and fitness benefits of biking to work, you'll wonder why you didn't start riding sooner. Bicycling can be a convenient, dependable, and virtually free mode of transportation. And bicycling burns about 500 calories an hour, so you can commute and stay fit at the same time."

From a marketing perspective this is really dreadful copy. This isn't selling anything, let alone cycling. And yet this is the standard fare on so many 'advocacy' websites all over the world.

After the above paragraph on the website was this...

Before You Ride - Helmets
Always wear a helmet - it may save your life.

All that harping on about the 'benefits' followed by the 'it could kill you' bullshit and the standard propaganda spiel about 'helmets saving lives'. You'd think people would have learned by now, from all the data and experience, that promoting helmets kills off cycling.

Whatever. This isn't about this one little website. It's much more general than that. If you want to continue marginalizing urban cycling, then by all means keep banging on your drum chanting those most failed rallying cries; "It's green!", "It's healthy", "It's cheap!", "It's carbon neutral!" Blah Blah Blah. All you'll be doing is continuing the long, sad tradition of the Greatest Marketing Fiasco in History: Environmentalism.

Think about it. Forty years of noisy awarness and activism. Millions (billions?) of dollars donated to thousands of organisations and spent on 'projects' and what do we have to show for it? The vast majority of our citizens are not 'converts'. They don't wear organic sweaters knitted from the wool of their free-range sheep while gardening biodynamic beetroot in the light of the full moon. They can't even be bothered to turn off their computer at night. Or buy water-saving toilets. Or take the bus one day a week.

Bicycle advocacy, as it is now in so many regions, is the bastard child of the pathetically ineffective environmental marketing of past four decades. There are so few people who have the Know Why - not to be confused with Know How.

Why did the bicycle explode onto the urban landscape all over the world 130 years ago? Merely because it was 'fun'? No. Sure, there was a niche group of rich white boys who first embraced the velocipede and the penny farthing as playthings. They had 'fun' with their expensive machines.

When the Safety bicycle was invented, however, the bicycle went mainstream. Every corner of society embraced it. It was all about mobility and effective transport. It was A2Bism. Sure, it liberated the working classes and women and no other transport form has transformed society so quickly and so effectively as the bicycle. But the workers could merely extend their mobility radius in their search for work. Women could get from A to B without being dependent on their husbands. And so on. And so on.

The bicycle went mainstream because it was quick and easy.

Bicycle advocacy needs to start applying basic marketing principles to this amazing product if we want it to go mainstream again. In the big picture, all we're doing now is getting small numbers to go for 'bike rides' on the weekends - families if we're lucky - and a few more adrenaline-driven men to take to the roads. We're selling frisbees. Whee. Oooh, but remember your plastic safety hat!

100 years ago 20% of all trips in Los Angeles were by bicycle. Now, according to this CNN article, About 27 percent of adults in the United States bike at least once a summer, according to a survey by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

This isn't just about one country. It's a global thing. We're doing so little right in the battle for behavourial transport change and urban mobility - and in an age where the population is ripe for it. It's now. And yet we're missing the point.

If we did stuff purely because it was 'fun' we'd all be living in condos in Spain or Florida playing beach volleyball and drinking daquiris until we died. I use a bicycle because it's quick. I enjoy it quite often. I know it's healthy. But those are just tag-a-long benefits, not primary reasons.

Make the bicycle the quickest way to get around a city or town. THAT'S what people want. THAT'S what will make them choose the bicycle. THAT'S how we will mainstream urban cycling and work effectively towards liveable cities, healthier populations and The Common Good.

Addendum:
That was actually that but then I saw this on the website...

They photoshopped a helmet onto EINSTEIN! That's just sick. The man was a SCIENTIST. Show some respect for SCIENCE. Interestingly, the European Cyclist's Federation's new Scientists for Cycling group use the same photo of Albert. Without a helmet, not surprisingly.

Copenhagenize Quiz Winner(s)!

Disclaimer: The photo does not depict the winners of the quiz. :-)

Thanks to everyone who took part in the Copenhagenize Quiz yesterday. A thrilling battle for a messenger bag from Cykelhjelm.org.

The correct answers are as follows:
Which year did Sweden begin bike helmet promotion?
1988

Which year did Sweden pass a helmet law for under 15's?
2005

To be honest, I've discovered I'm crap at hosting quizzes. The first question is good enough, but the second one is a bit unclear. They passed the law in 2004 and it went into effect in 2005.

Should have been clearer. Sorry. I'll be flexible in choosing the winners. And here they are:

Kim - 1988/2005 (even though he changed his mind later in the comments... :-) )
Crispy Kale: 1988/2004 (benefit of the doubt due to my badly-formulated quiz question)
@brumcyclist: 1988/2005

What you three lucky readers need to do is send me an email at copenhagenize [at] gmail [dot] com with WINNER! in the subject field and your full names and addresses. I'll get a messenger bag shipped off to you quicksmart.

For more reading on child helmet laws and their destructive nature, here's a good page to click on to.

Fewer Swedish Kids Cycling

Here we have a graph from Sweden showing helmet usage and number of cyclists in the 6-15 age group. Erik from Ecoprofile.se blogged about it, in Swedish on his own blog.

While helmet usage is up, the number of kids cycling is going down. They passed each other like ships in the night in 2007. Shocking, really, and a lesson to be learned. The graph is from VTI, Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute.

I can certainly understand why Swedish MP Camilla Lindberg has proposed a motion in the Swedish parliament to repeal the helmet law in her country.

Hey! How about a contest?!

Have a look on the graph and answer these two questions:

1. Which year did helmet promotion begin in Sweden?
2. Which year did the country pass a helmet law for under 15's?

It's bit tricky with the second question, but hey, it's a quiz. No cheating with Google, just look at the graph.

Put your answer in the comments and add your name. The first right answer will recieve this messenger bag from Cykelhjelm.org:



And please feel free to join the Cykelhjelm.org (bike helmet in Danish) Facebook group to support a return to rationality and common sense in Denmark.

Her kan man se konsekvenserne af cykelhjelm promovering og påbud. De samme negative resultater ses over hele verden i samtlige regioner som har promoverede cyklehjelme, for slet ikke at nævne tvunget borgerne i cykelhjelme. Folk holder op med at cykle. Rationalitet er den nye frygtkultur. Kend dine fakta.

I Fought The Law and the Law Run

I finally returned home late last night on yet another spooky flight from Prague with only 6 passengers, with departure from an empty apocalyptic airport in the Czech Capital, just like the airport in Brussels. Strange days.

I ended up getting one of the first flights out of Barcelona. Destination Brussels and on to Prague, where I was scheduled to speak at the first National Bicycle Conference in the Ministry of Transport, together with Jan Gehl who unfortunately couldn't make the trip from Copenhagen due to the ash-ish.

Wonderful to be home although my time in Barcelona was amazing. I was speaking at the 3rd Catalan Bicycle Congress in the city of Lleida before the ash attack forced me to take cover in a four star hotel across from the cathedral in Barcelona. Thank Odin for well-stocked mini-bars and a few thousand cafés/restaurants withing walking/cycling distance.

Barcelona stunned me. The city has gone from bicycle-non existent to bicycle metropolis in only 5 short years. It even makes Paris pale in comparison. Bicycles are everywhere, not least the Bicing bike share bicycles, on which I explored the city with friends. Txell from Barcelona Cycle Chic loaned me her card.

I'll get back to Barcelona - because I have to and you have to hear about it - in coming posts.

In the meantime, an amusing anecdote from this morning. Woke up tired but thrilled to see the kids. Presents were handed out accordingly and breakfast consumed. We hopped onto the Bullitt and headed for drop off duties at school/daycare.

There is often a police officer at the roundabout on the corner where the school is located. I've never really figured out why and have assumed that they keep an eye on the crossing guards or the cars stopping to drop off kids.

We were a bit early and the crossing guards weren't out yet. We rolled gently around the roundabout, with Lulu-Sophia in the box and Felix straddling the crossbar, like in the above photo, which is how we prefer to ride. There is a seat attached to the crossbar, visible in the top photo, for Felix to sit on if he's tired after football practice or something.

The female police officer spotted us halfway round and I could see ants crawling into her police issue pants. We approached her and she waved us over. The first words out of her mouth had a nasal, hysterical quality.

"That is an incredibly dangerous way to ride!"

"No, it is not. (Gud er det ej, in Danish)", replied the Danish Bicycle Ambassador.

"Yes it is..."

"No. It isn't." I replied, getting irritated.

So far, there were no legal implications involved. It was only this individual's perception of safety and rationality that differed from mine. Which really shouldn't even be part of a conversation. Keep your personal fears to yourself. Afraid of flying? Fine. Don't fly. But don't tell me that I shouldn't. And don't bloody well stand there selling your fear within earshot of my children.

Anyway, this agitated policewoman was glacing frantically around the Bullitt, looking for something to scold me about.

"And... and... he isn't allowed to ride like that!", she exclaimed, pointing to Felix.

"Of course he is. This bicycle is fitted to accomodate passengers", said I, pointing at the bicycle seat attached to the crossbar.

"He has to be strapped in!"

"No, he doesn't. He's big enough and besides, you can't strap someone onto a bike seat."

At this point I could see she was out fishing, far from dry land.

"How old is he?", she asked accusingly, trying suddenly and unsuccessfully to appear authoritative.

"I'm eight", replied Felix.

"Oh... um... oh... well... um... then he's just barely over the edge...", she stuttered, meaning over the legal age for having to be 'secured' to a bicycle as a passenger, making it sound like we were THIS CLOSE to being guilty.

She looked at Felix and said, "so you'll be riding your own bike next year", now trying to be cheerful.

"I already ride my bike", said the boy indignantly - you don't diss an eight year old Copenhagen kid by suggesting he hasn't learned to ride - and I added, "What are you talking about? This is Denmark. He's been riding on the bike lanes since he was three and a half!"

"Oh... um... well... then you get a high five..." she mumbled to Felix as she fidgited about, trying to get away. She forgot, however, to put up her hand for the high five and Felix didn't raise his. He just looked at her like she was strange. Which she was. She looked like she was about to say something else but then just turned on her heels and walked away, trying desperately to look busy and important.

Little Lulu-Sophia, in the cargo box, asked with that charming questioning tone that two year olds have, "Wha wa dat?"

"It was a casting call for Police Academy 4", I replied, even though the cinematic reference was lost on both of them. And off to school we went.

What a collossal waste of time and energy, even though it only lasted two minutes. I'm quite sick and tired of such fear-mongering based on personal emotions rather than anything else. When it comes from a police officer, who should be balanced and rational, the irritation is magnified. Perhaps because they spend their days in cars they have been rendered useless in the cause of promoting cycling positively.

When I got home I checked up on the traffic laws just to be sure. The Departmental Order of Bicycle Fittings and Equipment, which is a horrible translation of Bekendtgørelse af cyklers indretning og udstyr m.v. 1). Just to see if I was, indeed, a criminal in need of a fine and firm spanking.

Chapter 1 - Fitting
§ 1. A bicycle and trailer or sidecar must be fitted and kept in such a condition so that it can be used without danger or inconvenience. CHECK

§ 2. A bicycle must not be fitted to accommodate more than three persons. Although there can be room for one or two children under eight years - according to § 10 CHECK

Point 2. A bicycle must have a maximum of four wheels. Trailers must have a maximum of two wheels. CHECK

Point 3. The wheels must be equipped with tyres or other elasctic wheel coverings with similar qualities. UH... CHECK

Chapter 2 - Weight and Dimensions
§ 3. A bicycle must not - in either loaded or unloaded condition - have a width wider than 1 m CHECK

Point 2. On two-wheeled bicycles the handlebars must not exceed 70 cm in width. CHECK

Chapter 6 - Carrying of Passengers
§ 10. A bicycle must not carry more persons that it is intended for. Children under eight years may be brought on the bike when specially fitted seating is included. CHECK

Point 2. Specially fitted seating for children must be fitted according to the child's height and weight and the spokes must be covered. CHECK - BUT NOT REALLY APPLICABLE

Point 3. Children carried on a bicycle must be responsibly secured. CHECK - BUT NOT REALLY APPLICABLE , AS HE IS OVER 8

Point 4. Carrying child passengers must not restrict the cyclist from having complete control over the bicycle or from being able to signal. CHECK

Point 5. The cyclist must be at least 15 years old. CHECK - BY 27 YEARS

The Danish traffic laws for bicycles are at once ridiculously detailed in the rules about technical specs like reflectors, lights and size. Interestingly, there are rules about length and width of bicycles but none dicatating height - so bring on your Tall Bikes!

Generally, any fine you recieve on a number of points are completely open to interpretation by the officer. Which makes it easy to go to court if you think the fine was wrongfully issued.

Hans from Larry vs Harry has a friend who was had a fine overturned in court. He rode a long john with his daughter sitting on an upturned milk crate. She was secured by a rope. The officer was of the hysterical variety and a fine was issued along with a lecture. The judge, however, was more rational and the fine was overturned.

This entire episode was perhaps a notch more irritating as I have just returned from that most amazing cycle city Barcelona, where citizens ride freely and creatively through the streets, unhindered by obsessive and unecessary Nordic lawmaking.

Go Green, Go Dutch, Go Die!

Here we have a couple of Copenhageners who are partipating in a "strenuous activity beyond the capability of some people and that may cause minor, severe and/or permanent injuries or death to people who are not in sufficient physical fitness, training and/or experience."


And here we have two individuals who have "Acknowledged that some Bicycling is a test of their physical and mental limits and carries with it, regardless of physical fitness or experience, the potential for death, serious injury and property loss. They have assumed the risks of participating in Bicycling. They certify that their level of fitness is appropriate to participate in Bicycling which they are voluntarily undertaking."

What am I on about? One of our readers, Dottie, is a lawyer in Chicago and she loves urban cycling. The Dutch Embassy and Consulates in the US and Canada have a bike ride roadshow called Go Green, Go Dutch, Go Bike! wherein they promote cycling and the wonderful Dutch bicycle lifestyle. So far, so good.

Dottie thought she'd sign up for the Dutch bike ride in Chicago on May 8th, 2010, co-sponsored by the Active Transportation Alliance.

After filling in name and address and 'emergency' telephone numbers, she ended up at the Waiver and Release section which takes up two-thirds of the webpage. As Dottie wrote to Copenhagenize.com:

"I thought you might be interested in the following "waiver and release" I was required to agree to when registering for the Go Green Go Dutch Go Bike! event that the Dutch Consulate is sponsoring in various North American cities. The Chicago ride is being hosted by the Active Transportation Alliance, a bicycling and pedestrian advocacy organization, and this is their language.

I'm a lawyer, so I understand the importance of participants signing waivers, but this language seems extreme and unnecessary, not to mention ironic considering the message of the ride. Anyone who stops to read the language should be scared shitless. Also, note that we are apparently required to wear helmets, even though the ride will be on a lakefront bicycle path, completely separated from motorized traffic.

A lot of this language is legally unnecessary, especially this bit that bothers me the most - "Bicycling is a test of a person's physical and mental limits." Ridiculous. I'm hopeful that the helmet rule will not be enforced."

I've included the entire text at the end of this post. But first, here's another intense action shot of highly-trained, risk-taking persons participating in Bicycling. Taken from the 4th etape of the Tour de France last year:

Right... take a minute to recover from THAT intensity... okay... ready?

I wonder what the Dutch Consulate makes of all this? At a similar event in Vancouver, all the participants were clad in Roadside Garbage Collector Chic in the form of hi-viz vests. So much for celebrating the relaxed world of Citizen Cyclists in the Netherlands.
This much be, for example, how the French feel when, after a couple of centuries of exporting excellent cheeses, see 'Cheese in a Tube' in supermarkets in other countries.

"Um... excusez-moi... that's not what we meant..." Lost in translation, indeed.

It's perhaps one thing that the hotel I stayed at in Portland (yes, THAT Portland) had a hellfire and destruction waiver release for guests to sign if they wanted to borrow a bicycle. [The text is in the middle of this previous post.] I would, however, expect more from an advocacy group dedicated to cycling.

So here comes the Waiver and Release text for the Dutch Bike Ride in Chicago. Ambulances will be standing by along the route. And remember to enter to win the Gazelle bike with a top speed of about 12.4 km/h!

What you're about to read is not just a silly, unecessary legal form. It is, quite simply, the death knell for the future of urban cycling in America. Choose a song from this site to listen to whilst you read the text.

If this is the way cycling is marketed, presented to the public - both cyclists and the 'bicycle curious' - and branded - and by an advocacy group to boot, then I firmly believe there is little hope for a sea change in urban cycling.

And before the usual "you don't understand... this isn't Copendam/Amsterhagen... we don't have bike lanes and all that..." comments roll in, just let me say that a sea change IS afloat in many a country without adequate infrastructure (yet) and with a all-dominant car culture. The marketing... the marketing is right on the money. Urban cycling is being sold properly and effectively and those countries will start reaping the societal and health benefits in no time.

Waiver and Release
By clicking below, I hereby acknowledge that bicycle riding, bicycle racing and bicycling events (“Bicycling”) are strenuous activities beyond the capability of some people, and may cause minor, severe and/or permanent injuries or death to people who are not in sufficient physical fitness, training and/or experience. I have made my own determination as to whether I am able to safely participate in Bicycling. I recognize that the Active Transportation Alliance (“Active Trans”) has not evaluated my ability to participate in Bicycling. I also recognize that advice dispensed through Active Trans may not be appropriate for me, and it is my responsibility to make this determination.

I acknowledge that some Bicycling is a test of a person’s physical and mental limits and carries with it, regardless of physical fitness or experience, the potential for death, serious injury and property loss. I assume the risks of participating in Bicycling. I certify that my level of fitness is appropriate to participate in Bicycling which I am voluntarily undertaking. I certify that I have sufficiently trained or prepared for the Bicycling I am undertaking and I have not been advised against participation in such activity by a health care professional. I agree to wear an ANSI, CPSC, or SNELL approved helmet properly at all times while participating in Active Trans bicycling activities.

Aarhus - Bicycle City

Last year the City of Aarhus - Denmark's second largest city - launched a comprehensive campaign to encourage more citizens to cycle. The city's post code is 8000 and the campaign is subsequently called "8000 Advantages to Cycling".

Here's some of the highlights of the campaign. Aarhus lags behind Copenhagen and Odense in the levels of cycle traffic so this campaign is aimed at doing something about it. By and large, from a marketing perspective, the campaign does well to sell urban cycling as positive. There are snippets of fear mongering present in the form of bike helmet promotion, despite the warnings of doing so, but it's impressive in the current Culture of Fear climate in Denmark that the campaign is largely positive.


Photo from the campaign. The eternally iconic Cycling Girl so dear to Danish culture.


There were also various programmes as a part of the campaign to bring the joy of cycling to children.


The city sent people out onto the streets and bike lanes to hand out bottles of water and seat covers as encougagement for choosing the bicycle.

They whipped together a little youtube film, asking the people they stopped why they choose to ride their bikes.

The first girl: "It's healthy and it's fast."
The next chap: "I hate public transport and waiting for buses. And it's healthy, but I don't think about that very much. And it's free!"
The little girl in the plastic hat: "Because I like to ride my bicycle." Bless her cotton socks. And when asked if she rides to daycare, she replies yes.
Next guy: "It's easy and fast. It's not far to school and regarding grocery shopping, it's just the easiest".
Next girl: (I think she says...) "Save money."


A number of facilities were implemented along with the campaign. Posters, websites and banners can't do the job alone. Citizens need to see practical, physical additions on the urban landscape. Here we have a long row of new bike racks outside, I believe, a school. On this stretch leading to the school one of the car lanes was removed to create a safe and wide bike lane for the kids.


And this sign flashes when a truck turning right is present. A little too much ignoring the bull, in Copenhagenize's opinion - that is to say, if it stands on it's own and without any responsibility placed on the vehicle and driver of the vehicle.

Another visible inititative is the possibility for citizens in Aarhus to let the city know about potholes or other irritating problems regarding cycling. The city will prioritize repairing the problems that citizens send in.


Banners were set up throughout the city highlighting various advantages to choosing the bicycle. Here we have advantage 262: Exercise and Fresh Air.


Advantage 7522: Freedom and wind in the hair.

Cycling is hot and with the recent injection of federal money into cycling - 94 billion kroner - many Danish cities are eager to build even more infrastructure and launch campaigns.

This example from Aarhus leads the way.

Death on the Streets - Cars and Mythology of Road Safety

Death on The Streets

Another book which is so interesting that it makes my head hurt is by Robert Davis. Death on the Streets: Cars and the Mythology of Road Safety.

I've been reading it for ages. A couple of pages is enough for me to put it down and reflect. It's chock full of facts and references, as well as thought-provoking observations about the role of the car in our societies.

It discusses how most of the 'road safety improvements' of the past 50 years, from road design to seat belts, have actually resulted in a terrifying increase in danger from cars, which permeates all over lives and the book is also 'a social history of the terrible toll of car surpremacy...'

Worldwide, between 15-20 million people have died and hundreds of millions have been permanently injured in road accidents since the beginnings of motorised society early last century.

The book's publication in 1993 brought about the formation of the Road Danger Reduction Forum, of which Robert Davis is the chair.

Slip Sliding Away

I must be getting old. After laughing at the first few topples I wondered why the chap filming didn't get his ass down there with some sand or salt and remove the slippery spot or call the city and have them hurry out to solve it. Then I laughed some more.

I've been putting my foot down a great deal in the slip-sliding snow this week. The tempo has gone down on the bike lanes, especially today after 15 cm of snow last night, but everyone is taking it easy. When you've been cycling virtually every day of your life, like most Danes and Dutch, you're used to challenges like this.

Sad how so many fearmongerers use accident statistics to whip up a whirlwind. They only present the number of emergency ward visits but hardly ever report that the vast majority of injuries are minor and most of the people either cycled away from the hospital or were back on their bicycles the next day after spraining a wrist or ankle or bumping their tailbone or head.

Even here in Denmark these Number of Admissions stats are readily used by many adherants to a societal Culture of Fear development. They often state in indignant tones that the number of cycling injuries that GO UNREPORTED are massive. As though those subversive people who are injured and don't report it are somehow conspiring against them and the system.

A day later you'll hear how the emergency wards are often overrun by people who don't actually need any treatment and how these people are costing society outrageous amounts of money. Stay away from the hospital unless you're REALLY hurt! Unless you're a cyclist, of course. By staying away you are working against the Goal of Portraying Cycling as Extremely Dangerous [and subsequently affecting car sales].

A propos nothing, the emergency ward at the hospital across the street from here has bike racks for about 40 bikes.

Vaguely related: Cycling nurses help thwart hospitalisation.

Vintage 'Ignoring the Bull' Culture

Ignoring the bull in society's china shop is nothing new. The Danish Road Safety Council have been protecting car culture since at least 1957. Above is their magazine called Watch Out!


Inside the magazine there is even an advert for reflective clothing.


"Cyclist and Pedestrian! Protect yourself and your children! Buy Pasma traffic safety clothing with reflective strips. These strips will warn cars and motorcycles of your presence at a distance of several hundred metres. Pasma clothes are available across the country. See demonstrations of the outerwear and trousers at your closest retailer."

"One must be able to see the danger in order to avoid it. Therefore The Danish Road Safety Council recommends Pasma."

You'd think that we would have learned a lot about traffic calming and reducing the danger that cars and motorists pose to pedestrians and cyclists in all the years since 1957. Alas, Bubble Wrap Society lives on and politicians continue to embrace the 'easy' solutions, both here in Denmark and abroad. Placing the weight on the shoulders of cyclists and pedestrians.


Here's a brochure from - shockhorror - Copenhagen condescending to the elderly by suggesting that they wear "bright clothing and reflexes".


These pedestrian traffic safety messages have appeared on zebra crossings reading "Take care of yourself!" (Note the part of the sticker at the bottom right. Perfect tripping system.)
So no news about campaigns to reduce speed limits to ensure higher levels of traffic safety and reduce death and injury, just fearmongering and motor vehicle protectionism. Just like the pedestrian flags in Berkeley and elsewhere.

In Toronto there have been 10 pedestrian fatalities since January 12th. A reader, Autumn, sent us this link about it from CBC News. Are there calls in the city for lower speed limits? One commenter on the article writes "The red hand means stop", which kind of says it all, really.

Andy sent a link about a school in Norwich. "Children face being ordered by police to get off their bikes and walk on the pavement unless they are wearing reflective safety gear during the hours of darkness, although there is no legal requirement for cyclists, whatever their age, to do so."

Here's the article from www.road.cc.


There is a will to inform in some cities, even with the investment in and the production of solid, permanent signage. Unfortunately the message is sent to the wrong recipients. Cyclists and pedestrians instead of motorists.

Safe but Somehow Scary

The Culture of Fear has a firm grip on even an otherwise rational land like Denmark.

According to a recent survey every fourth parent in the country doesn't feel it safe enough to send their children to school alone on foot or on bike.

This is despite the fact that it has never been safer to walk or cycle in Denmark. The Danish Road Safety Council carried out the survey. It's ironic that the development of this fear culture is largely their own work.

Their warm embrace of a certain type of fear campaigning, especially regarding cycling but also including traffic in general is said to have caused the change in perception in the population.

In Denmark we cycle 30% less than we did in 1990. This is a national figure - things are quite different in cities like Copenhagen and Odense where cycle traffic, for example, has boomed in that period. If we still cycled that 30% we'd save 1500 lives a year - and that number is currently being revised and will end up being a lot higher.

Since the early 1990's, the Road Safety Council's scare tactics are directly responsible for the sad fact that the number of children driven to school has risen 200%.

Now they're scrambling to get parents to change their minds back to pre-1990 perceptions, especially regarding getting kids to school.

They are now encouraging parents to train their kids better to walk or cycle to school and have issued statements this week about how it's the parents fault or responsibility to teach their kids better and to practice walking or cycling the routes to school. In order to teach them to be confident in the traffic.

Ironic, isn't it? You spend two decades trying to scare the shit out of parents and then you have to come out and say, "No, no... it's okay. Really!"

"There are far too many parents who drive their children to school and who are so busy in the morning that they just speed up to the school to drop their kids off. That's not the way to train children to take safe routes to school", says Anders Rosbo from the Road Safety Council.

He says that it's the parents themselves that create dangerous traffic situations with the armada of cars outside schools in the morning.

"The many cars in the areas around schools cause a general insecurity among some parents who don't dare let their children walk or cycle alone to school."

One of the policemen who works towards getting schools and parents to work better together is Michael Bjørkman from the Copenhagen Police. He, too, thinks that it is the parents themselves who make the school routes unsafe.

"When I speak with parents they say that they drive their children to school because it's too dangerous to walk or cycle. But my experience is that there are many, many school routes where children from 3rd Year can walk or cycle alone. All that is required is that parents take the time to practice with their children and train them to understand what to look out for", says Michael Bjørkman.

It's not hard to see how the Road Safety Council's hardcore helmet promotion of the past year and a half has contributed to this Culture of Fear. Just two years ago you didn't experience conversations with people about how dangerous it was to cycle to school or work or anywhere.

Since intense helmet promotion was started by the Road Safety Council and Danish Cyclists' Federation there has been a paradigm shift in the way people percieve cycling. Now you have conversations at dinner parties or in workplaces about how 'dangerous' cycling is. I constantly hear from friends and collegues about conversations they've been a party to about these 'dangers'. This is not good marketing. It's quite stupid. But The Road Safety Council, and the Danish Cyclists' Federation [believe it or not] have succeeded in branding cycling in one of the safest cycling nations in the world as a 'dangerous' activity.

Despite the lack of statistics to back it up. They've shot themselves in the foot.

I've mentioned before how at a parents meeting last year when my son started in school one of the parents asked the group if anyone "dared" to let their children cycle to school. The question was bizarre for me to hear.

Fortunately, the cycle traffic to my son's school is busy and the bike parking outside the building chaotic - which is a good thing. So many children ride to school, either on their own bikes or in a cargo bike. This is typical of many Copenhagen schools but the story is quite different around the country. Still, there are parents who live within 500 metres of our school and who work within a kilometre or two of the school who still drop their kids off in cars.

There is some political talk about creating safe zones around schools. We've blogged about it before right here.

I fear that we may be well on our way to slowly dismantling our century old perception of cycling as a normal, safe and acceptable transport form. It's not just that the car-centric Road Safety Council is paving the way for a more car-centric society. We're risking losing an important part of our national identity. The part that previously considered the bicycle as an inseparable fifth limb, with all the individual and societal benefits involved.

Even Denmark needs Copenhagenizing it seems.

I often wonder if we're heading in the same direction as other countries. This kind of project in the UK may be in our future unless we start rebranding cycling as a positive thing. There are signs that it may be too late. The Danish Cyclists' Federation has run a campaign called Alle Børn Cykler - All Children Cycle - for years. School classes compete around the country to see who can cycle the most, based on a point system. This year the Cyclists' Federation's campaign was filled to the brim with ideology. Helmets were a main feature and gave extra points. So much for freedom to choose. So much for selling cycling positively and encouraging people to cycle. So much for focusing on the positive aspects of cycling. Where most cyclist federations around Europe have their own traffic consultants who keep their finger on the scientific pulse, the Danish Cyclists' Federation merely get their information from the Road Safety Council. Which explains a lot.

Maybe we're not that far from the British project mentioned above.

As a matter of interest, here's the current guidelines in Denmark for children in the traffic, if the parents have trained the kids in the traffic enough that both parties feel confident. I spent a lot of time training my son, now 7, in cycling to daycare, kindergarten and school. He was confident enough to cycle to daycare from the age of 3 and a half, with training wheels, and from about age 4 without.

3-4 years: Children can learn simple pedestrian rules but they are easily distracted and react impulsively if something catches their attention. Hold the child's hand and keep the child on the side farthest away from the traffic as possible.

4-5 years: Start bicycle training where there is no traffic. It's too early to let children walk or cycle alone. They cannot judge a dangerous situation.

5-7 years: Children can keep focus on the traffic for short periods and walk alone on quiet streets. Most can judge an obvious danger and cross streets with a good view of the traffic but intersections are still hard to tackle. Start with bike riding on streets without too much traffic if the child can cycle in a straight line and is good at braking.

6-7 years: Children can walk alone to school on safe routes. According to the law they have to be six years old to cycle alone in the traffic but it is still tricky for them to judge distance and speed so they should be accompanied by an adult when cycling to school.

8-10 years: Most children are now able to judge the traffic situation and can walk alone to school. They can also take a bus or train if the trip is simple. If the route to school is familiar and safe with light, slow traffic, they can cycle to school alone.

10-12 years: At this age most children can handle a more complicated route to school alone on a bicycle and tackle public transport that requires a change of bus or train.

12 years: Children who have had training and experience can judge the traffic almost as good as an adult and can now freely transport themselves alone. If they are inexperienced on a bicycle they need the same kind of training as small children.

Via: Politiken.

Opinion Piece Comedy

A reader in Indiana sent us this brilliant clipping from the Indianapolis Star in 1980.

This is brilliant. Have a read. It includes such classic quotes as:

"Not only are bicycles dangerous, they are as antiquated a form of transportation as the rickshaw. In no advanced city on earth will you find civilized people cycling to work. The urban cyclist is generally a crank, either profoundly antisocial or hopelessly narcissistic and following the strenuous life in hopes of achieving immortality or a legendary sex life. When you encounter him give him a wide berth and never turn your back on him."

Political Endorsements from Copenhagenize

Some of the indoor bike parking at City Hall in Copenhagen.

So a friend asked me a question the other day. "If there was a 'cyclist vote' in Copenhagen, which parties would top the bill?" The reason he asked was that we're going to the polls on November 17th in municipal and county elections here in Denmark.

Good question. Never really thought of it before. Personally, I look at a variety of issues when considering who to vote for, not just bike stuff. But having a finger on the pulse, I'm willing to give it a shot. Not least because I was just in the States where everyone is keen to make political endorsements, so here goes.

Bicycle infrastructure is a hot topic these days. It's a kind of rebound effect. The whole world has had their eyes on Copenhagen for the past 18 months, having opened their eyes to what we've achieved here. This has bounced back to us and made [some not all] politicians and the press aware of the importance of maintaining our bicycle culture.

This is a local election, so I'm going to stick with my 'hoods. Firstly, I live in Frederiksberg. It's an independent city surrounded by Copenhagen. It's small, with about 90,000 citizens. The city has been ruled by the Conservative party for 100 years. Uninterrupted. It's a great little city with loads of bicycle infrastructure, mostly because they've had to follow Uncle Copenhagen's lead for the past 30 years.

The mayor quiet earlier this year and the vice-mayor took over. For the first time in ages, it looks like the Conservative dominance is wobbly. It's neck and neck at the moment, with the Social Democrats breathing down the right-wing necks.

Here's the funny thing. With many of the other parties mentioning bicycles, infrastructure and safer routes to school, etc., the mayor Jørgen Glenthøj is running these ads all over town:

It reads: "Families and businesses need parking spaces". Seriously. It's hilarious. He's playing the parking card. It's either incredibly stupid or quite clever - given the fact that the competition are talking bikes.

Then again, this is the man who has brought us various campaigns that ignore the bull, as you'd expect from a right-wing party.

These warning stickers showed up recently on zebra crossings. "Watch out!" or "Take care of yourself". Nevermind the cars, place the responsibility on the soft, squishy people. And note the thick sticker isn't even glued down properly so a pedestrian is likely to trip on it. Nice one! He is also the man who brought us this traffic 'safety' campaign:

"She checked her text message and died in the process". We mentioned it in the post about The Sacred Bull in Society's China Shop.

So basically, he's hardly a candidate for the Copenhagenize vote. His competition is a young woman from the Social Democrats, Katrine Lester:

Some of her ads read: "More bike lanes in Frederiksberg" and she goes on about safer routes to school, too. Given the fact that her party is large enough to challenge the Conservatives, I'm going with her. Plus if her party DO manage to defeat 100 years of Conservative rule, I want to be a part of THAT action.

One party that won't be attracting my vote, from a bicycle perspective, is the Socialist Peoples' Party - SF. They make a lot of noise about bicycles but after their ridiculous - and flopped - attempt to get a helmet law passed in the national parliament - and after I conversed with them about it and discovered their lack of research - I won't be making an 'X' anywhere near their candidates.


If we look at Uncle Copenhagen, it's same same but different. The Social Democrats have occupied the throne for a million years and it looks like they'll stay there. The Lord Mayor is quitting so another candidate, Frank Jensen, is running for the spot. Actual quote from this man about one of his goals, "Less 'fuck you' attitude, more sense of community". Cool.

They're not really threatened, but what is interesting is who they're going to rule with. Here, it's the aforementioned Socialist Peoples' Party that are looking to win a load of votes. The coolishly-named Radical Left [De Radikale] were princes to the throne last election but now they are lagging way behind, which sucks.

From a bicycle perspective, anyway. Klaus Bondam has profiled himself as The Bicycle Mayor and many of the fantastic initiatives we've been seeing in Copenhagen are thanks to him. Nørrebrogade closed to cars, the Green Wave for cyclists, 117 intersections with the stop line pulled back 5 metres for cars, etc.

Whatever you may think of him, he is the visionary we've been waiting for with regards to urban cycling. He risks losing his post as mayor of the department of transport, which would not be pleasing.

The Radical Left, in my opinion, are running a cool, fresh campaign and they seem to be talking sense on all matter of environmental issues. It would be a shame to see Klaus Bondam lose the Department of Transport gig.

So. In Copenhagen, vote for The Radical Left [de radikale] or the Social Democrats. The latter because I think Frank Jensen is keen to profile himself with some great projects, among them bike infrastructure. I saw him and Klaus Bondam out for a bike ride around the city not long ago, so that's a positive sign.

For Danes there is an interesting poll on DR's website where you answer the same 15 questions that all the politicians have and you can see which party/person you are in most agreement with - or farthest from. One of the questions is actually about bicycles. "We need to invest in more bicycle lanes/cycle tracks instead of developing the road network". Needless to say I "completely agreed" with that one.

Meanwhile, back in Frederiksberg like most places in Denmark, campaigning by bicycle is a given.

This is also amusing. You have a candidate from the Social Democrats on the left with his bike and one from The Radical Left on the... uh... right with his bike. In the middle, with a campaign car is a candidate from... hmm... let me guess... The Conservatives. It's all right there in one simple photograph.
Right. We're done. Local Danish politics is probably not the most exciting thing for most of you out there, but thanks for putting up with it.

'Tis The Season to Be Scary

It's autumn and that usually means that various organisations who pride themselves on ignoring the sacred bull are probably gearing up for campaigns that serve to scare people off of bicycles here in Denmark.

Let's see what our favourite car salesmen and women - The Danish Road Safety Council - Rådet for Større Færdselssikkerhed has up their sleeves this year, as well as their partner in fear, Trygfonden [an insurance company] and let's see if the Danish Cyclists' Federation once again just shrug and go along with it.

A classic example is previous campaigns for bike lights. While we're waiting for this year's crop of negative bicycle promotion, in this blog post from last year you can compare the Dutch approach with the Danish: Promoting Bike Lights Positively.

I spoke last Friday at a conference in Copenhagen hosted by The International Sport and Culture Association called Move2009. The European Cyclists' Federation was present, with Dr. Randy Rzewnicki and the ECF's Secretary General Dr. Bernhard Ensink speaking wonderfully about promoting cycling positively, backed up with a wealth of science by Dr Lars Bo Andersen from the University of Southern Denmark who has put firm and astounding numbers on just how healthy urban cycling is for society. I also had a quick but inspiring chat with Gil Penalosa from Walk and Bike for Life.

It was refreshing to be a part of this panel of positivists given the current climate of fear gripping Denmark.

Safety Fears Stop Bikes For Africa

Here's an appropriate little 'wedgie' in the Fear of Cycling series. The Isle of Wight County Press Online [big name for a little paper :-)] reports that the Hampshire Constabulary has cut off supplying unclaimed stolen bikes to a charity that sends bikes to Africa.

They are, get this... afraid of being sued if someone gets hurt whilst using one of them. You'd think that they were talking about barrels of toxic waste.

Here's the link to the article, and thanks to Sally for the link.

Cyclist versus Goliath - Fighting Australian Bike Helmet Laws

Australian cyclist goes to court to fight ticket for cycling without a helmet.

Cyclists have been fighting for their rights for more than a century. It has largely been an uphill battle but in some countries, like Denmark and the Netherlands, political lobbying has paid off and the bicycle is a main feature on the urban landscape. Much of the battle has been waged from the grassroots angle.

In Australia there is a woman named Sue. She has always cycled and when Australia passed mandatory, all-ages bike helmet laws in the 1990's, Sue kept on cycling while many Australians parked their bikes in the garage. Despite the helmet laws, Sue continued to cycle without a helmet and she has never felt as though she needed one.

It took the better part of 15 years before Sue was finally stopped by the Austalian police earlier this year and ticketed for not wearing a helmet. After the formalities, Sue struck up a conversation with the policemen:

"One of the policemen expressed interest in why I wasn't wearing one. I mentioned I had done some research which had confirmed my view that helmets put me at risk. He was somewhat surprised, and so I continued that there was further information to show that there is a correlation between fat nations and helmet laws, and that in some parts of the US, much of Europe, the UK and Asia there were no such laws. I mentioned that now I had been issued with an infringement ticket I intended to take this matter to court.

Both he and his mate were really startled at that, and he wished me good
luck in my quest and hoped I got somewhere with it. He admitted that he had
given up cycling when the legislation became enacted in the early 90s, and
that his bicycle had sat in his garage since that time."

Sue has recently had her preliminary day in court in Australia. Normally defending traffic violations is a speedy process but Sue's solicitor surprised the magistrate by asking to be served with a 'brief of evidence' from the prosecution on 'the grounds of necessity' in order to adjourn the case to a later date for a defended hearing.


"The police prosecutor was not happy about this and raised the issue with the magistrate that the crime of 'not wearing a helmet' is one that is usually dealt with by way of an infringement notice, and that therefore, under section 187 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), the prosecution does not necessarily have to serve a brief. Undeterred, the Magistrate informed the police prosecutor that the prosecution would have difficulties if a brief was not served."

"So on Monday 28th September 2009 I am to appear again in the local court to defend my criminal action of riding a bicycle without a helmet. I am going to argue that my criminal act of riding my bicycle without a helmet was a question of necessity and therefore:

- I should be excused if I can show that it was done in order to avoid consequences of risk of severe brain injury and/or death which could not otherwise be avoided, and which, if they had followed, would have inflicted upon me 'inevitable and irreparable evil'.

- The act of me riding my bicycle without a helmet was no more than was reasonably necessary for the purpose, and that the 'evil inflicted' by the crime of not wearing a helmet was 'not disproportionate to the evil avoided by consequences' of risk of severe brain injury (R v Davidson [1969] VR 667).

Alternatively, I am going to argue that my criminal act of riding my bicycle without a helmet was a question of self-defence and therefore:

- I was entitled to take evasive steps which I believed were reasonably proportional to the threat of the risk of wearing a bicycle helmet (R v Viro (1978) CLR)

Plus I would like to raise the fact that by prosecuting cycling, which is beneficial to health, sedentary lifestyles have been encouraged which in turn have led to worse health outcomes and greater costs for the community. Undoubtedly, Australia has the worst public cycling participation rate in the world, and instead, has ignorantly embraced the greatest health risk of them all - inactivity. I truly believe that my beliefs are reasonably held as I perceive them and that my conduct was and is a question of my survival. Therefore I shall conclude that it was and is necessary for me to cycle and to cycle without a helmet in order to prevent severe brain injury and / or death.

It really is Sue versus Goliath and the odds for success in the court case may be slim but at the end of the day this is a woman with a bicycle fighting for her right to ride. Which is the very same battle that cyclists have been fighting for over 120 years.

Placing focus on the folly of helmet laws and the scientific data that has showed that bicycle helmets can be dangerous and lead to brain injury is a bonus in a country where the press is reluctant to tackle the issue of helmet laws.

The recent study by Professor Piet de Jong that shows that Australia's helmet laws cost the country $519 million AUD each year have caused a stir around the world. The big numbers and the failed helmet laws serve a good purpose in the discussion of how promotion and legislation of helmets is destructive to cycling and public health.

But one woman with a bicycle in one local court room fighting for her right to ride as she sees fit is, for me, an inspiration to cyclists everywhere. And Copenhagenize.com wishes her the best of luck.

For more Australian angles:
- www.cycle-helmets.com - Website that explores the Australian helmet laws, with focus on Western Australia.
- The British CTC has information on helmet laws here.


From Yehuda Moon.

A Walking Helmet is a Good Helmet

At long last logic prevails. A new campaign has hit the streets of Denmark, thanks to the visionaries at The Danish Road Safety Council [Rådet for Større Færdselssikkerhed] and Trygfonden [an insurance company].

Intense promotion of walking helmets for pedestrians has begun. This logic has been sorely missed. These two organisations have happily promoted bike helmets but pedestrians suffer just as many head injuries, if not more.

This Danish campaign poster reads:

"A walking helmet is a good helmet"
"Traffic safety isn't just for cyclists. The pedestrians of Denmark actually have a higher risk of head injury. The Danish Road Safety Council recommends walking helmets for pedestrians and other good folk in high risk groups."

The slogan is catchy in Danish since it kind of rhymes. All in all it's a brilliant project. Let's save some lives.

The new walking helmets will be available in the Danish Cyclists Union's [Dansk cyklist forbund] shop. Although, as the Danish Cyclists' Union, the Road Safety Council and Trygfonden have been quick to point out:

"A bike helmet is a fine substitute for walking helmets, so there's no need to take it off when you get off your bike. Keep it on throughout the day for maximum safety."

Indeed, they have a point when they add: "We have almost one million daily cyclists in Denmark but we have 5.3 million pedestrians. It's a group that daily navigates the danger zone and we wish to make them aware of their potentially lethal actions."

Trygfonden, a fund run by a Danish insurance company, is proud to be involved. As they state on their website:

We Support Projects Based on Knowledge
All the projects we support are based on documented knowledge in the specific areas that the project is aimed at. This knowledge can be documented in, for example, analysis, scientific research and statistics.

And with regards to pedestrian head injuries, the statistics and science are clear cut. Well done, Trygfonden. I sincerly hope that they keep this momentum and start the promotion of motorist helmets, too. Their logo could be proudly be emblazoned on this fine product.

But for now, these pedestrian helmets are an excellent start. Logical, scientific and much needed. Just look at all these godless heathens who spite the safety gods in Copenhagen.

Now we just need to defeat this crazy anti-car intiative.