自転車規制は時代に逆行してる！？

たとえば、「しまなみ海道」のようにブルーラインで自転車専用道路が確保されているなら、罰則化・規制強化もわからなくもない（スマホのながら自転車は危険すぎて取り締まれと思うし）。
自転車道が整備されていない段階での自転車規制強化はただの「増税」としか思えない。

ヘルメットの必要性（努力義務）も怪しい。なぜなら？いつも啓発で流れる映像は「人形」。「人形」は「人」のように受け身もしなければ庇うこともしない。それを大げさに見せてる（なんだかコロナ騒動に似てる）。（滝川クリステルさんが自転車で転んだ時のインタビューで「頭を庇って顔にけがをした」と証言してるのは使わない）・・かなり「恣意的」です。

また日本では片側に（両側に）歩道さえないような（あっても３０センチもあるかないか）道路も多い。自転車は否応なく右側を通行するしかない。
車の運転時に、左下から自転車来ても気づきにくい（自転車は左側通行）。しかし左前から来れば気づける（自転車は右側通行）。

昔車の飲酒運転で悲惨な事故があり厳罰化になり、自転車を使うようになり、車でしか行けないお店もなんとか助かっていた。飲酒運転抑制のための「飲酒時の自転車利用」だったはず。

エコ、SDGｓ、カーボンニュートラルと「という現代の視点からも逆行している政策誘導。
近くのコンビニ、スーパーまで自転車で行ってたが、ヘルメットやら右側通行やら言われるのなら「車」で。二酸化炭素出す。

側道、車道で子どもが轢かれたら政府や一部の専門家（コロナみたい）やＪＡＦは責任がとれるのだろうか？コロナと同じで無責任のままか？

俯瞰でみると、やはりこの自転車規制はただの「増税」にしか見えない。

騙されるな。

Bicycle regulations are going against the times! ?

For example, if bicycle lanes were established on the Blue Line like the Shimanami Kaido, it would be understandable that penalties and regulations would be tightened (I think cycling on a smartphone is too dangerous and should be cracked down). Tightening bicycle regulations at a time when bicycle lanes are not yet in place can be seen as nothing more than a ``tax increase.''

The necessity of wearing a helmet (obligation to make effort) is also questionable. because? The video that is always shown at the enlightenment event is a ``doll''. ``Dolls'' are neither passive nor protective like ``people''. They're exaggerating it (kind of similar to the coronavirus outbreak). (I don't use the testimony that Christel Takigawa gave in an interview when she fell off her bicycle, saying, ``I covered my head and injured my face.'') It's quite ``arbitrary.''

Also, in Japan, there are many roads that don't even have a sidewalk on one side (or both sides) (if there is one, it's only 30 centimeters wide). Bicycles have no choice but to pass on the right side. When driving a car, it is difficult to notice if a bicycle comes from the lower left (bicycles drive on the right). However, if you come from the front left, you will notice it (bicycles ride on the right).

A long time ago, there was a tragic accident caused by drunk driving, and the punishment was harsher, people started using bicycles, and some shops that could only be accessed by car were saved. It was supposed to be ``using a bicycle while drunk'' to discourage drunk driving.

Eco, SDGs, and carbon neutrality are policies that go against the grain even from a modern perspective.I used to ride my bicycle to the nearby convenience store and supermarket, but if I was told to wear a helmet or drive on the right, I'd rather drive. Emit carbon dioxide.

If a child is run over on a side road or driveway, can the government, some experts (like the coronavirus), and JAF take responsibility? Will we remain as irresponsible as we did with the coronavirus?

If you look at it from a bird's-eye view, this bicycle regulation looks like nothing more than a ``tax increase.''