Pedal Pushers

I want to ride my bi-cee-cle
I want to ride my bike
I want to ride my bi-CEE-cle
I want to ride it where I l-i-i-i-ke

Every morning, I head to work half asleep. Every morning, I exit the freeway with the same dozy look on my face as every other middleclass American working a 9 to 5. And every morning, at the end of the exit, I laugh myself awake.

The cause? A sign. My favorite road sign ever. It sits at the end of a bike path running parallel to the off-ramp. The fact that it is at the end of the bike path tells me it is meant for the cyclists that plague our Washington roads.

There are no words on the sign, but the meaning is quite clear. There is a car in a lane; there is a bike in a lane running parallel and to the right of the car. There is an arrow in front of the car, indicating the driver intends to turn right. There is a splat in front of the cyclist indicating that, if the cyclist should be so foolish as to think he owns the road, he will become part of it. With dead certainty.

This sign is intended for cyclists like the one I passed this morning. On a two-lane highway with a designated bike lane, this yahoo was riding his bike in the car lane with no hands. Well, technically, he had hands; they just weren't anywhere on the bike. One was hanging casually by his side helping him look cool; the other was holding his cell phone to his ear. But he was decked out in a chartreuse jacket and helmet, so he will look pretty when he is photographed as a splat by the emergency personnel who are called to the scene of the accident.

Now, I know there are responsible cyclists out there - my daughters are such. Respect the road, respect those big heavy metal conveyances on it, and all is well. But, just because we have a helmet law does not mean you are a protected species. In fact, I am ambivalent about the helmet law - it seems to have taken some of the weight off the cyclist to be conservative in their actions while en route.

Exposure makes us aware of our vulnerability, and results in our taking safety to a higher level. The helmet law seems to make people feel they are less susceptible to injury and so they take chances. They also look really dumb.

I grew up on dirt bikes (as in motorcycles). And we wore protective helmets, jackets, boots, kidney belts and gloves. And we weren't even on the road. We were riding up steep hills, yes, and flying at top speed across dry lakes; but we were not contending with lumbering delivery trucks and zippy little beemers. But I would not dream of going out on the dry lake without all that protective gear.

See? I ride the fence.

In the end, though, even with all that gear, we still got hurt. I weighed all of 90 pounds during those years - I could handle the Suzuki 90 and Kawasaki 125. And while I could take a moderate hill on my dad's Suzuki 250, I did lay it over and sported a gigantic goose egg on the back of my leg for 6 months. Not all that attractive...

And my brother, fully garbed, took a spill on a flat dirt road two years ago and now has a really cool metal pin in his hip. So clearly even protective gear is inadequate without a good healthy dose of common sense and a pinch of good luck to go along with it.

Cyclists don't even have the benefit of a slight pull on the throttle to zip away from potential danger. Their bike frames weigh a few pounds, and their helmets only cover part of their head! And they want to challenge the Humvee3 to the road? I'm thinking that new titanium bike frame will look glorious flying 50 feet through the air.

Queen has their own idea of what one should wear when riding a bicycle. In this scenario, it is the spectators in the stands who need the protective gear.