Xtracycle Bike Cargo Kits, Parts and AccessoriesBionX: Electrify Your BikeCommuter Bike Store Breezer Uptown InfinityMiiR Bottles one4oneElectric Bike ReportBike Tech Shop - The Experts on Cycling with CircuitryBanjo Brothers Affordable Cycling GearOrtlieb Bike Bags & PanniersPlanet Bike: Better bike products for a better worldRideKick Electric Powered Bike TrailerCygoLite Bike Lights: Engineered to ShineChrome Bike Backpacks and Messenger Bags

Oregon’s Greenlick Bill: No Kids Under Six on Bikes or Trailers (Roundup)

by Stacey Moses

In Portland, the most bicycle friendly city in the country a bill was introduced that would prohibit Oregon cyclists from carrying children under the age of six on a bicycle or in a bicycle trailer.

HB 2228, or the Greenlick bill has been met with an incredible amount of backlash in its hometown and around the country.  While HB 2228 is still miles away from becoming approved legislation, it has become an important topic of discussion.  Here is what people are saying around the blogosphere:

  • Jonathan Maus of BikePortland.org spoke with Representative Mitch Greenlick and asked him about the controversial study that led to the development of this bill.  Greenlick indicates that his goal is to protect children. But Maus and many of his readers take issue with Greenlick’s ‘propose first, study later’ approach to law making.  Read more (including an incredible number of thought-provoking comments) at BikePortland.org.
Family Ride Bicycle Cycle Trailer

Image: Traveling with Baby

  • Mia Birk, an accomplished advocate and author of the book, “Joyride,” addressed Greenlick directly.  “I appreciate that your intentions were good, but the facts do not support this bill. Please withdraw it.”  Statements do not get much more direct than that, but the letter in its entirety is worth a read to obtain a better understanding of how Greenlick’s interpretation of the study is incorrect.
  • Bicycle Retailer and Industry News, one of the leading sources for industry-related information, allowed the dust to settle before publishing a post on January 19 that asserts that HB 2228 is unlikely to pass as it is currently written.  Product and marketing manager Garrett Barnum of Burley Designs, a leading producer of bicycle child trailers based in Oregon, is open to more research regarding the safety of child trailers but was never approached by Greenlick prior to revealing this proposed bill.  Barnum said, “if that’s a result of this discussion, a study around child safety and trailers and bikes, that’s great. We are excited about the discussion around safety because that’s the strength of our products over lower-cost trailers sold at big-box stores.”
  • Eugene Cyclist responded with pointed snark, “As long as we are busy banning things,” he writes,  “I don’t see why we should allow any potential hazard to remain in our lives.” He goes on to suggest, with photographic evidence, other cycling dangers equally worthy of prohibition including: riding at night, riding in rain, sanctimonious placards, and carrying surface-to-air missiles on a bike.
Bike Trailer Train

Image: Bike Trailer Blog

Although HB 2228 is still on the table in Oregon, this proposed piece of legislature has demonstrated how communities can come together and speak peacefully but forcefully to defend an issue of importance.  There have been hundreds and hundreds of comments posted, and influential people are using facts to defend their statements.

 
Burley nomad 269

5 Responses to “Oregon’s Greenlick Bill: No Kids Under Six on Bikes or Trailers (Roundup)”

  1. atom says:

    We need to add to this bill to also ban children from being transported in cars as cars do get into accidents that sometimes result in death. I’m just thinking of the safety of the child. They should only be transported by the State in school buses which do not have seat belts.

  2. ForBikeTrailering says:

    Should this become law, peaceful non-compliance will be a MUST.

  3. Cullen says:

    This is similar to the helmet law that was proposed in Portland. Does anybody know more about this?

    If helmet law decreases the number of cyclists, this particular law should be reconsidered.

    If not, I’m totally fine with it.

  4. CHRIS says:

    Cullen wrote: “If helmet law decreases the number of cyclists, this particular law should be reconsidered.”

    Helmet law will only decrease the number cyclists who have no business riding their bicycles. I live in Portland and ride my bike everywhere, daily and often. IMObservation, most of those who ride without a helmet, are also often the ones to ride on the sidewalks (it is not illegal in Portland) for miles on end; ride wrong way on a one way street; run the red light; flaunt most traffic laws, cause road rage. I no longer defend them. I refer to them as “organ donors/Oregon donors.” Cycling is not a fashion statement or a trend. It shouldn’t be confused with “grunge” or as a mean to stick it to the “man”. They are a minority in Portland and I’ll say good riddance. We need people to take cyclists and cycling seriously. It is difficult to lobby for more bike lanes when the actions of few cyclists mobilizes most of the opposition to cycling.

  5. Stacey Moses says:

    I think that comparing helmet laws and “no child under 6″ proposals confuses the issue. Statistics show that helmets increase the safety of cyclists, but statistics do not confirm that children are safer strapped into the back of an automobile rather than riding on a bicycle. Maybe instead of talking about new things to ban (especially practices that encourage healthy, sustainable lifestyles), we should talk about ways to make cycling and walking safer for people of all ages.

Leave a Reply