> But I don't think pushing the burden onto the cyclist is the fix either. We should be reducing the requirement for constant human vigilance because humans su

> But I don't think pushing the burden onto the cyclist is the fix either. We should be reducing the requirement for constant human vigilance because humans suck at being vigilant. I don't see it as a burden. I see it as a duty to keep myself safe. Even if a law is passed, people make mistakes, people are drunk or high, people are old and have slow reaction times, and some people are just klutzes. Most importantly, they are always going to be more vigilant because there is no omnipresent danger guiding their behavior. The threat of any ticket is not severe enough to equate with possible brain damage. It would be great if everyone were more conscientious. Even then, I would still be as vigilant. At the end of the day, you're still a 200lb vehicle moving probably around 20 mph with weak brakes (when compared to a car) and no real evasive ability riding amongst a herd of 2-ton armored vehicles. In California at least, bikes don't have to stay in the bike lane. They can use regular lanes as they see fit. If the car lane is empty as I'm riding past parked cars, I will simply change to that lane. If not, I slow down. And I accept that that isn't likely to change because I live in Los Angeles