In the immortal words of Howard the Duck, "Waaaugh!" I had several e-mail exchanges with an editor at the WSJ and sent a coherent letter to the editor and included links to the DoT's website explaining the rules, and the Bike Federation of Wisconsin's summary of the statutes.
Yet the WSJ insists on quoting a State Patrol officer who really doesn't have a grip on the question or the answer. During my initial complaints about the first time the question was published, the WSJ excuse was that the highway patrol gave the answer, so it must be the correct answer. Which, of course it wasn't. Now we at least have technically a more correct answer, but it fails to see the big picture; instead it continues to force down the reader's throats an editorial slant that favors motorized use of the roads over all else. Waaaaugh! --- M & J <.com> wrote: > The State Journal took another attempt at answering the question > "I > had always been told that cyclists have to be single file on > roads. > Has that changed?" This time, they lead with the headline > "Bicyclists must be single file if slower than traffic". What's > up > with that? > > They do at least have some accuracy in this article, but finish > with > the statement "On a 55 mph highway, two bicyclists may ride > abreast > until they are approached from the rear by a (faster) vehicle > moving > at the normal and reasonable speed of traffic." I wish someone > could > tell me where this is written in the state statutes. > > Here is a link to the full article: > http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/ > local/wonder/safesound/index.php?ntid=98994&ntpid=1 > > -m - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - George J. Perkins 442 Toepfer Drive Madison, WI 53711 Phone: 608-442-5558 EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Peace Corps: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gherkinsforperkins BikeAid 2002: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gherkins4perkins _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
