Comments on: De Soto Reaffirms 83rd Street Bicycle Ban

By: Ryan

Ryan — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 19:12:14 +0000

I actually found this section on the 4th of July morning and found a nice (and I’m sure totally legal) firworks stand. Had I known of the ban and avoided that road, I would have missed the stand and not spent any money there later that day. DeSoto seems to be stuck in the dark ages economically.

By: Jao

Jao — Mon, 05 Jul 2010 00:17:33 +0000

Anyone interested in purchasing bumper stickers that read: Bicyclists boycotting De Soto merchants.

By: Karl

Karl — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 03:27:31 +0000

Is it time for someone to organize a Critical Mass: De Soto?

By: Randy

Randy — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 03:27:21 +0000

A letter to the editor in the De Soto newspaper from a local citizen (Missed Opportunity): “De Soto needs to be thinking about its image, and what a positive “welcoming image” could bring it. Bike riders are healthy, good-natured people who could bring economic opportunity to De Soto. Bike riders don’t zoom by as fast as cars do. They actually take time to enjoy their surroundings. Don’t let 83rd Street be a missed opportunity.”

By: Randy

Randy — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:50:32 +0000

A bicycle is not a motor vehicle, nor, as I understand it, is it even classified as a “vehicle” (see 8-1485).

I don’t know the wording of De Soto’s statute, but it seems to me that their sign, at least, makes very little sense…

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:10:05 +0000

If a bicycle is considered a motor vehicle by the State of Kansas and obliged to follow the rules and regulations of the State, then how does this type of law stand? Seems to me that if it is proven that the roads in Desoto are no narrower, hillier, or twistier, than say, Lenexa, Shawnee, Gardner, Olathe, Mission Hills then is there really a legal standing for this type of thing? Seems to me one could claim its prejudice, or something like that.