I think this is noteworthy since this opinion is coming from the paper’s full editorial board. Hopefully this will carry over into the content of their other cycling related reporting – such as car/bike “accidents”
Which brings to mind another question: What about the comments section below the story? It is interesting to see the idiocy that comes out any time there is a story on bicycles, but is it worth jumping into the commenting fray? I’ve avoided doing so lately, because I don’t think we will change the minds of the comment authors, but do we gain benefit by stating our position in response and sensibly countering the ramblings?
Maybe the PG will ask the question “was the motorist following the 4-foot rule” (actually, a law) instead of “was the cyclist wearing a helmet” (not a law) the next time a cyclist is injured or killed by a motorist.
I post because, well, who knows, maybe someone will listen. And thinking through the argument helps clarify things in my own head, sometimes.