Devil's advocate: The same could be said for a baby buggy. Filthy things, taking up all that space. Noisy too! And those inconsiderate people with their luggage trying to get the airport. And don't get me started on old people with their zimmer frames.
Me speaking: So where do you draw the line? On your personal preferences or where the outcome achieves the goal? ie. getting more people to stop using their cars. Bicycles are already allowed on most suburban London trains, but are sometimes limited during rush hour. It's a win-win for everyone without having an outright ban.
(I apologise for weird response, but couldn't find a better way to get my point across.)
> Devil's advocate: The same could be said for a baby buggy.
I don't disagree with you, but I can be more sympathetic to the need for a baby buggy over that of a bike, because there aren't baby buggy parkings, and it's a lot harder to move your baby back and forth than it is to park a bike. The same goes for your semi-absurd comparison with zimmer frames -- obviously senior citizens have a place in public transportation and they need to be catered to. It's not the same thing as the convenience of not having to park your bike and walking.
> Bicycles are already allowed on most suburban London trains, but are sometimes limited during rush hour. It's a win-win for everyone without having an outright ban.
I already explicitly said "If we are talking about metro transportation, and not intercity trains and such" -- meaning I also recognize the need to transport bikes on "suburban trains", but for inter-city transportation with sufficient bike parking I don't see the need to cater for bikes on trains seeing the negative downsides they bring.
Also, baby buggies are already prohibited in many metro systems, and I have never advocated them to be anything else. There are better ways to transport your baby around, such as an on-body baby carrier.
In my city’s bus system baby buggies and bicycles have 0 priority. If you live in a city you really should have a collapsible one. But if you do bring one aboard a packed bus the most will get is a scorned look. Basically, no one wants to be the one to kick a parent and child off the bus.
Bicyclists on the other hand have no excuse and get no compassion. If the bike rack is full you wait for the next bus.
Me speaking: So where do you draw the line? On your personal preferences or where the outcome achieves the goal? ie. getting more people to stop using their cars. Bicycles are already allowed on most suburban London trains, but are sometimes limited during rush hour. It's a win-win for everyone without having an outright ban.
(I apologise for weird response, but couldn't find a better way to get my point across.)