Furthermore Mr Maggs’ own position, as quoted above, is that “motorcycle riders are both more visible and better protected than cyclists”. They are also heavier and faster, which gives them something of an advantage over bicycles in the general traffic flow.

I’m prepared to accept the relative risk factor that Euan quoted (and I’d like to know its source), however I’m not talking about the general case here, I’m referring to the specific case of motorcycles in bike lanes. Where does the greater risk lie: to motorcyclists if they stay in the general traffic flow or to cyclists if motorbikes are allowed into bike lanes? I argue that the greater risk lies with the latter, so I stand by my position.

I really don’t understand Euan’s final remark about facing the same dangers but “at a much greater speed”. Surely that supports my point that motorcycles don’t belong in the bike lane? However I heartily endorse the view that motorcyclists and cyclists share many of the same hazards on the road.

Per 100,000 kms and per 100,000 hours of exposure motorcyclists are four times more likely to suffer a fatality than cyclists.

Motorcyclists largely face the same haszards that cyclists do except that they do so at a much greater speed. The critical factor in braking distance is more reaction time than braking ability; a hazardous situation for a cyclist at 20km/h is doubly hazardous for a motorcyclist.

Some might HATE this idea, but I love it! Allow MOTOR BIKES, scooters, mopeds, HARLEYS, to use BIKE PATHS! Can you imagine the community meetings for funding that new bike path. The usual green types and a bike gang asking for a bike path. LOL! It’s better than unions working with greens! Bike lanes need the support. I am ALL FOR IT!