If you ask me who I value the most, I will answer that people. People who can understand that the world does not consist of we and youonly from us. People who understand that most quarrels are not a zero-sum game at all and my profit does not always mean your loss. Those who understand that making concessions and finding a golden means often generates more profit than winning one side. Those who know that 86% internet discussions are made up of people who are not concerned about the subject and are simply trolls or gimbasias. And those who can discuss without insults with meaningful arguments. How many such are on the internet? Several.

The world presented on this blog does not consist of us cyclists and their car-makers. Almost everyone I drive with has a car. Categorizing and stereotypes is one of the biggest problems of the modern world. I'm making a car myself with 30,000 just to get to the store and with a bike for the holidays. It's not that cars are bad for bicycles and bicycles for cars. It's a human being who is broken. Cars are just as bad for other cars, as are bicycles for other bikes, and pedestrians for everyone. Understanding this is the first step to success. This is not a war of means of locomotion - it's a war between people. As in any other topic. Politics is a perfect example of this. Everyone wants to get a whole cake.

 - Your old slept with Hitler!
 - Yeah? And yours with two Hitlers! * unwashed!

From time to time I see a discussion on the Internet, under which I write a long comment, and then I delete it, because it does not make sense. Then I write it again and delete it again. As in this picture: I can not go to sleep because someone on the internet is wrong. I'm browsing the substantive input of other people, closing the computer and going to go. Sometimes even run - it's the end of the internet for today. Because this can not be read, arguments badly wrong, some alternative logic and inference, and ultimately it all boils down to mutual insults and statements and they beat you blacks. So in an infinite, because a stupid argument asks for an error ... another stupid argument. Could anyone ever convince someone on the internet that he is wrong? Have you ever seen a statement Well, you're right. I doubt it.

Journalist, inborn evil

It does not come out of nowhere. Hejt sells. The media presents each conflict in such a way as to divide people even more. On the Internet, the most traffic generates mainly mutual insults. One comment with the name is better than 3 likes under the cat. One share post with indignation is better than 7 likes with a funny dog. Because it will generate traffic. The most clickable posts are not those that show information, but that are extremely emotional about information. As with refugees, politics, taxes, social services, or finally bicycles on the streets. And the less information and the simpler the message - the better. Long texts deter people, I know something about it;)

It is hard to not improve someone when he writes absolute stupidity. I sometimes catch myself, fortunately I close the browser before clicking send. I can not sleep when I know that someone on the internet is wrong. Nobody can.

I try to avoid the topic of the age-old street conflict on this blog, because it is going nowhere. First of all: I feel sorry for my life to change the world. Secondly: why write on the road blog appeals to people who do not ride bicycles? But it happened, I'm coming back from vacation, I'm going to Fejsa, and there one of a thousand cycling profiles has a photo of 5k shares. As if that was not enough, it was additionally sponsored. It could only mean one thing - I missed an argument.

Ignorantia iuris nocet.

Because, well, there was a shock - people got tickets for unlawful driving! An uncomfortable but up-to-date law. A group of outraged people arose and an avalanche flew. Classic internet Shitstormthat does not lead to anything. Seeing the arguments of both this fanpage and many familiar faces, I felt sorry.

I would like to cut myself off, but I can not. Hejt causes hate, aggression - aggression, and all of this is reflected in me. A man who rides a bicycle. Post instead of presenting the problem, presented the effect of the problem in the worst possible way. Here are us, people above all others, we will not ride the paths, because the paths are uncomfortable. We - mountain bikers, we have expensive bikes, professional costumes, light overweight - we can do more. We can break the law, because moving in accordance with the rules is uncomfortable.

This image is being built. It helps me the same as Critical Mass on Friday evening whose main goal is to upset drivers. It's as if the homeless man is punching you in the face every morning to pay attention to the fact that he is hungry. Bicycle paths are generally poor, but this is changing. I know their arrangement in the city, I use them to go to work or a cinema holand, and those that are bad, I try to avoid. The problem is that bad weather is almost all but the ones on the streets. That is why the highway serves me to drive away from the city and to leave it as smoothly as possible.

Necessitas frangit legem

The biggest problem of paths, apart from obviously stupid solutions from a bygone era, are currently cyclists themselves. Children who often have problems with keeping a straight line, a lady who writes an SMS, a guest who goes too fast, a guy who just decided to turn back or who thought he would make it. None of them has OC. They build an image of a statistical cyclist. Just like a guy who almost did not hit you with a car or overtook him with a reserve of 3 centimeters, he builds a picture of a statistical driver and makes us hate all of their population.

Dura lex, sed lex.

The highway is not for driving around the city. Do you want to go fast? Leave the city. Do you want to do a workout? Leave the city or go on a simulator. Paragliders have no pretensions that they can not take a hang glider from under the house. If you can not accept the rules - take the queue. Can the red light be avoided if it falls just half way through the interval?

It does not matter that others also break the law. Of course, it annoys me that people drive 500km / h around the city and no one does anything about it, and I get a ticket for cycling 5km / h by belts, but what's the other option? Agree to cross the belts? I can already see gimbus coming from the momentum under the wheels (of course without OC). What if you could enter the recipe that you can, but you have to stop before the green? Surely we will not find out soon.

Although it does not matter, because you can not drive on the sidewalks anyway. Because agreeing to this, taking into account the absolute priority of pedestrians would of course be too risky. After all, a cyclist riding 13km / h on the Dutch is more similar to a 50km / h vehicle than a pedestrian going 6km / h.

Pointing out other errors in the discussion does not give anything, because you can switch to infinity forever. The old proverb says: you want to change the world, start with yourself.

We will all die

When I drive a car, other cars often try to kill me. As I walk along the sidewalk, a bicycle gimbaza on small bikes tries to kill me. Everyone is trying to kill me constantly. Often out of foolishness, sometimes out of ignorance, fatigue, or anything else, excuses have a lot, and I have the last life and without kontiniusów.

During daily commute to work, I die on a bicycle at least four times a week. Always at the same intersection - at the Świętokrzyski Bridge (bicycle path on all 4 sides of the intersection). By "I'm gonna" I mean the fact that if I was going for a certainty, prescribed and did not slow down before passing (passing) to a speed close to 0, I would be hit by a car. Sometimes a nice ~ 40-year-old lady who does not expect me there, sometimes a laborer who, with momentum, falls into the right hand, sometimes just a visitor who has to make it in front of me because he has a green arrow. I am a bit worried that I can die by some dumb - I can not predict any situation.

Optima est legum interpres consuetudo.

I have come to such a paradox that I am returning home with a Dutch pavement instead of a street, because it is safer in the world. Besides, I know that with my speed I would make a stop to the horizon - I choose a lesser evil. I could of course have deep respect, but I try to be socially friendly. It would be beautiful if others were also. I do not buy OC for myself. This is a guarantee that if in the moment of weakness I lose my balance and break someone's mirror, instead of effectively escaping from the scene of an accident, I will stop, apologize, exchange papers and everyone will be happy. Like civilized people.

Nemo prudens punit, quia peccatum est, sed ne peccetur.

This year I got a ticket for driving on lanes with a speed of ~ 4km / h, last for a wide ride of about 3 meters, an empty pavement next to a 3-strip street by a city bike. Such a law. It's such a police action for a month during the year, thanks to which the police make me safer - apparently. I break this law with premeditation. The mandate is 2-4 taxis to work, so it pays off. Was I angry at the policemen? Of course, but I break the law deliberately. Sooner or later someone has to do something about it because:

Salus populi suprema lex esto.

A man on a bike is a better person than a man in a car. At least looking from the city level. Let's dismiss this mistaken belief that cycling is health. Riding a bike around the city has little to do with this, especially when looking at the recent winters and air quality. The reasons are different and there are a lot of them. Both for me (time, convenience, savings) and for everyone around me.

Cars are evil. Do you know when the city is the nicest? When there is no car traffic. It's quiet, taking a selfik with a nice building, old and dirty lumber do not take up 30% of the image, but it's a road blog - I do not need to make anyone aware of why cycling is better. Everywhere where there are no cars, it's better.

Therefore, the cyclist should always be in a privileged position. (period of hatred)

Biker cyclist

And it is not that a cyclist is an inferior sort of man than a man. It's just a different person and you have to understand it. Between 16 and 16.20 I am a cyclist. I enjoy every bike path I travel, and my wide tires are generally everything that goes on. At 16.45 I become a cyclist. I drive everywhere along the streets, avoid trails with paths, overtake cars. Sometimes I break the rules because it's safer. Bicycle paths are a pathology - a free American crazy gimbus mixed up with madmen writing just a text message, listening to music, taking photos, parents with children who can not maintain an even course, people who thought that a given bend can pass faster ... And with all respect, but people are extremely irresponsible. It does not matter if we talk about bikes or cars. It's not cyclists, nor car drivers are pathology, people are.

And here comes the problem. Because we are - people with civil liability insurance, who can travel both at a speed of 7km / h and 45km / h, with the technique of driving, which allows to overcome alpine bends faster than cars and they are: 17-year-old youth who went out to ride city ​​because I was quoting a classic: likes to zapier. We are perceived by society as one group. Just like a kind man in the car and a sales representative.

Contemporary society sets the rules so that everyone is equal and the law applies to everyone in the same way. This makes it unimportant whether we are a rally driver with a R2 license in a car packed with security technologies, or the first time we get behind the wheel, and our car was new in times when the steam engines began to disappear from the streets - we have the same speed limits. Senselessness? Maybe. You have to accept it the same as with the fact that the road bike is the same bike in the light of the law as the city. We can not require making exceptions.

Hominem causa omne iusitionalum sit.

There is no ideal exit - someone will always be dissatisfied. Bicycles should be privileged, that's for sure, but we must also make concessions. The ideal solution here is the creation of bicycle paths that are mandatory and optional. There are places that are particularly popular among walkers and tourists - boulevards, pavements near monuments, etc., where it is assumed to drive slowly. If only the street nearby allows it, let's put on faster bikes. Those who go to training or those who are just in a hurry to work. Because you know - the fact that someone drives a bicycle to work does not mean that he can not afford to get there by car. The visitor presents himself completely differently on the street, when we think that he can be our business partner, boss, president, etc. Why? I do not know.

Audiatur et altera pars

And most importantly: no one has ever done anything about insults and aggression on the Internet. Just like the arguments that bicycle paths are uncomfortable, that the road is impossible, and that if others break the law, then I can. Leaving stupid comments alone is the best solution. Remember, therefore, that speaking on the Internet from a cycling point of view, your comment is usually seen as a comment of the whole group. At that time, you represent both highways, squares, Dutch and urban. Every change of law will affect them (us) all. I hope that this entry will remind you about it.

Remember also that the fact that almost all your friends can agree with your idea may be due to the fact that people surround themselves with people with similar views. That's why we wonder how it is that the X party wins the election, since the NONE does not vote for it. If I ask my friends if they are behind setting a 3-meter bike path on every street, they will probably applaud this idea. Mainly because some 80% of my friends from fejsbuka are keen riders. This causes the closure of other views and isolation - detachment from reality. Hence the mentioned MY and WY mentioned at the beginning.

Necessitas frangit legem.

In the meantime, I will break my law again today - I will ride a city bike along the sidewalk. And probably in the evening too. Avoid using an empty street with a bicycle path that will be full of unlit madmen. The same ones who are building up a bad reputation for our riders.

... and yes, I am a hypocrite. As a man taking part in cycling races, whose legal status is highly controversial, I should not say anything about it. However, I have added the maxims in Latin, so it may sound a bit credible.