A recent feature in the New York Times highlighted some new gadgets that were created in response to “[bicycle] riders’ demands for a greater sense of comfort and safety on the road.” Unfortunately, however, the Times’ tradition of misunderstanding bicycles as a legit mode of transportation continues:

Who needs bike lanes at all? The Xfire Bike Lane light is equipped with two high-visibility red lasers that project two three-foot lines onto the road, creating an ad hoc bike lane. The lighted lane is visible to motorists up to a mile away, according to the manufacturer.

Who needs bike lanes? If you want to make a street “safe and welcoming to cyclists, the addition of bike lanes is essential.” Dedicating a lane for people on bikes doesn’t just provide a space for cyclists though — it also sends a message to other road users asserting that bicycles belong on the street, and that they’re part of the transportation network. Can the Xfire Bike Lane light do that?

That’s just one example included in the article. The piece lists a few other products, none of which could do for the safety of people on bikes what infrastructure and policies like cycle tracks and strict liability laws can do. But if anything is to be gleaned from this piece, it’s that people should be too scared to ride a bike in an urban environment without newfangled safety gear like the Loud Bicycle Horn and the Hövding inflatable airbag helmet (yes, seriously).

We know that cyclists often have no choice but to use roads that are less than ideal for cycling, and we’re certainly not against taking precautions that help mitigate crashes on those roads. But these gadgets should be considered a supplement to safe cycling infrastructure — not a replacement.