Aw c'mon Tom, this is tempest-in-a-teapot stuff.

'Same Roads, Same Rules' is a broad slogan -- it's to remind cyclists that we have the same rights as other vehicles, and are also responsible for following traffic laws. But there are some practical differences, such as bicycles having the right to pass traffic on the right.  So it's perfectly legal to cycle to the front of a traffic line, to the right of cars, assuming there's room and it's safe to do so.  Practically speaking, there's no real need to wear flourescent clothing cycling in broad daylight.

As for traffic lights and one-way streets: When you run a red or stop sign, or ride on a sidewalk, you are breaking the law. You may think the coast is clear -- but on a bike, you can never afford to be wrong, ever, about these sorts of things.  As for one-way streets, as you note in your example -- it's just a block! You can walk the bike that distance, that's a very minor inconvenience.

As for weather conditions -- that's an individual call. I usually cycle 10 months of the year, and sporadically the remaining months (whenever roads are clear of snow and ice). You wouldn't ride a motorcycle in certain conditions, either...

So ride a bike whenever it's convenient and enjoyable for you. If you don't feel comfortable or safe riding a bicycle in Boston, there's always a combination of public transportation, taxis, walking and/or (gasp) driving. I'd prefer the bicycle route any day it's available over the alternatives.

"ever greater as are the burdens imposed on bicyclists: always use a helmet; wear bright, fluorescent clothing; get special training; strictly enforce rules of the road."  How onerous. Funny to see an eco-liberal squirm when faced with government regs which directly affect them. but Tom, they are for your own good and everyone's safety. Really cyclists deck themseleves out as if they were on the US Tour de` France Team wearing bright clothing won't kill you and save some money on expensive outfits spend it on a good helmet and save everyone expensive head trauma medical care. Quit whinning. Sraw man arguments Tom take responsibility for responsible safe biking not what you want.

Tom Keane points out the many pluses and minuses of bike riding in Boston.  While I agree with most of what he has to say, his remarks are not entirely consistent with my own experience.  As a regular rider and primary care physician, I know first-hand the value of biking rather than driving.  Using a bike to get around in Boston is fast, convenient, cheap and environmentally nearly perfect.  If I can't walk or take the T easily to most places around the city, I will use my bike the majority of the time (unless of course it's snowing or raining).  Having more spots to securely lock our bikes would be a nice touch.  While the city has added many, in the downtown area, along Commonwealth Ave and most of streets in the South End and North End have few bike racks and where they exist, very limited spaces.

Contrary to his comments on helmets, the use of these is a simple and relatively inexpensive way to protect your most important asset from most minor but potentially catastrophic falls. I agree the evidence shows they will not help in a collision with a 4000 pound automobile or 10,000 pound truck. I agree that brightly colored clothing is a silly requirement, but he failed to mention the use of lights.  I live on Beacon Street and see hundreds of riders every day with a significant percentage who chose not to use lights.  That is just dumb.  No way around it.  Visibility is important, whether on a busy thoroughfare or quiet side road. One would think, if we are trying to push biking in the City of Boston, we could get one of our many institutions of higher education to design a cheap, high-powered front and rear light assembly that the city could make available and require.

I agree that asking bicyclists to obey the rules of the road for cars is like asking a pedestrian standing at the corner of Arlington and Boylston to wait for the light to change during rush hour when the traffic is not moving for blocks.  Bicycles are not cars. We share more in common with pedestrians than automobiles.  We have better maneuverability, faster acceleration and stopping, and jeapordize nobody when we cross intersections against the light when there is nobody there.

Most important, Tom fails to point to the rider's responsibility while biking.  When I see bikers sailing through a busy intersection against the light as if it was their entitlement, I become infuriated. When I can catch up with them, I let them know that they are not only putting themselves in jeapordy, but ruining bicyclists relationship with drivers for everybody.  And when I hear of somebody being struck down by a bus or getting hit on a major thoroughfare in the middle of the night, I wonder about common sense.  

The rules we should all follow for safety's sake include:

1. Assume that every driver cannot see you and doesn't expect you.  

2. Always make eye contact with drivers

3. Never, never, never pass a moving bus or truck on the right

4. If you're going to go against a light, be 110% certain that the coast is clear and be prepared to find out suddenly you are wrong and have an escape plan.

5. Remember, pedestrians have first priority, always.

Boston is indeed a great city for bicycling.  In my experience, when accidents occur it is often just as much the rider's fault as the drivers.  Let's encourage safe riding, but remember that safety doesn't necessarily mean more rules and regulations.  Like in all things, a lot of safety is using your head and acting with common sense.

 Bicyclists need to ride single file - in my suburban community they ride in pairs on curvy  narrow roads - it just makes the drivers mad and dangerous for the driver  and the bicyclist. I  also ride a bike - but given the injuries and deaths in our area - I've mostly gone back to my mountain bike.

Tom- I had to red this twice to conclude that (unlike Kevin Cullen's column about debate moderators), there was no irony in this piece about bike safety. Should we apply the same attitude toward traffic laws to autos, e.g., why not run a red light at 5AM when there isn't much traffic, why not go down a one-way street the wrong way? Yes, the more bikes on the road, the safer it will be for all. But it is pointless to talk about an increase in auto-bike crashes without considering that there are more bikes on the road compared to past years: the crash rate (as opposed to the number of crashes) may actually be going down. (Twice the number of bikes, other things equal, would probably result in twice the number of crashes, but the crash rate is the same.) So we really need to see both numbers. Is anyone collecting that data? A Globe reporter should get on this question. This kind of column is not helpful.

Yesterday, crossing the westbound lane of Comm Ave with the traffic light in my favor, I was very nearly taken out by four cyclists who were going at a breakneck [my neck] pace [±40 mph], using the cars waiting at the light sort of like slalom poles, completely ignoring both the traffic signal and any speed laws. [But gosh oh gee they were all wearing helmets. Yippee.] I wasn't looking for bicycles, wasn't expecting them, naively thought that the rules of the road would protect me. I'm 76. If I — or, for that matter, anyone of any age — had been hit by one of these guys I/we would've been in very serious trouble. So I'm sorry, Tom, but I have absolutely no sympathy whatsoever with bicyclists. 

Mr. Keane, while you do point out that bicycles will always need to coexist with cars in Boston, you are wrong on all three points, apparel, obeying regulations and getting training. \n If you think Hi-viz clothing and lights do not work, why do you think police officers use them while directing traffic even during the day? While bicycle helmets do not protect the face, they do reduce serious injuries and deaths by protecting the brain. One does not need to dress in bright spandex to be visible. A simple jacket over one's regular clothing will do. Unless you insist on sporting the "big hair" styles worn by our mothers and grandmothers in the 50s and 60s, a comb is a simple and effective solution to any problem caused by a helmet. Remember, the brain in a person's head is much more important than the hair on it. \n Obeying traffic regulations is not silly; it helps everyone on the road know what to expect others are going to do. As some of the other comments have pointed out, many bicyclists simply view traffic regulations as something that only applies to cars and tend to overlook the fact that there are many other users of the roadway, i.e.: pedestrians. Saying that certain vehicle types have certain privileges actually makes it more dangerous for bicyclists. Should mopeds and/ or motorcycles have some or all of the privileges that you suggest should be given to bicyclists? \n While it might be impractical to require training to be able to ride a bicycle in the city, it does make sense. Even though it was a long time ago, I remember one of the most important parts of my bicycle training in the 60s, automobile training in the 70s, and the motorcycle training in the 80s was how to coexist with other types of vehicles on the road. This training consisted of two parts maintaining visibility and understanding what to expect other vehicles are going to do. For example, it is better for a bicyclist to avoid being doored or clipped by a turning vehicle by wearing bright clothing and understanding a vehicle’s blind spots than it is to assess blame after such an accident.

Here in Cambridge, cyclists ride on the sidewalks; go through red lights; ride in pairs; ride in the wrong direction on narrow one-way streets; frequently are wearing I-Pads; disregard pedestrian cross-walks, and many ride like they are chasing Lance Armstrong.

I agree with Worldy102 below. This is kind of a silly column about not much of anything. Yes, there have, sadly, been way too many bike fatalities this year, but I am not sure that you say anything useful about them. Don't like riding in the winter? Take the T. Don't want to ride around the block? Walk your bike the one block on the sidewalk. Don't want to get in an accident? Follow the many useful tips that people have been kind enough to share. Don't like red lights? Can't help you there. If we want to ride on the streets as a vehicle, then we have to follow the rules. There is a huge range of cheats that we all seem to resort to. One is to allow yourself to proceed with the ped signal as well as on the sutomotive green light. But on that point, rules is rules. So you have dredged a column's worth of words out of three recent horrible accidents, but haven't paid any attention to the poor souls, may they rest on peace, who lost their lives, or advanced any idea useful idea. It makes me wonder what the point of this piece was. Plus, one final quibble: on what possible basis could you make the fact-uninhibited assertion that we are going in the wrong direction? Right now the biggest problem we have for cycling in Boston is the small but very visible contingent of jerks on bikes who are causing all of this trouble that the people below are talking about. Followed by the small contingent of angry people in cars who hold a dangerous grudge against cyclists. I commend to you your colleague Ty Burr's recent and excellent column on riding in Boston. Be safe, everyone.

If Tom Keane is really serious abut making Boston a safer city for bikers, then he should do some research.  Of the 451 bike-related incidents, how many were the fault of a driver and how many the fault of the biker? How many were just unavoidable accidents? He needs to put together some statistical evidence. Further, the rule of the road, if not the law, is NEVER try to pass a vehicle on the right if they are signalling a right turn. I'm willing to bet that the majority of incidents involving right turns, the biker was at fault.  If he doesn't want to wear a helmet and bright clothing, he has no right to complain if he suffers injuries as a result. If he sees traffic laws, rules of the road and basic common sense as a "burden" on bikers, then he should just take the bus.

Tom - stop being lazy....

stop at the red lights, stop riding the wrong way down one streets

you are not above the law my friend.

more cyclists is one good for cycling if they obey the rules