4 ms·

> I hate them on the road because it's so easy to hit a biker with your car. Is it that easy if you actually follow the 3 feet rule (often law)? http://www.ncs

> I hate them on the road because it's so easy to hit a biker with your car. Is it that easy if you actually follow the 3 feet rule (often law)? http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/safely-passing-bicyclists.aspx http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/safely-passing-b... > In terms of safety, I strongly think that while car stays the main type of vehicle, bikers/cyclists should have its own road. Not a lane, but a dedicated road. I think most cyclists would love to live in this fantasy world, but it's not the reality we live in. > these two vehicles are meant for different purposes What purpose is each vehicle meant for? Who is deciding what their purpose is?

andreygrehov 9y ago
> Is it that easy if you actually follow the 3 feet rule (often law)? That's not about the 3 feet rule. It's about the relativeness of the number of bikes to the number of cars on the road. Yes, there are rules and requirements and al that, but then there is a psychological factor that is usually ruled out. Let's be realistic, check out this random image of New York [1]. Let's count, how many cars and bikers are there. 30+ cars and 1 bike. How many car drivers do you think expect to see the cyclist there? I mean, yes, they all know that cyclists/bikers are there, they exist, they are somewhere around, but the main focus is still on cars. That's what I was trying to say. Take delivery guys as an example. There are a lot of them and they are riding bikes as crazy. Only in GTA you can see a car driver driving as a delivery bike rider. Sometimes I think they are immortal. > I think most cyclists would love to live in this fantasy world, but it's not the reality we live in. Agreed. > What purpose is each vehicle meant for? Who is deciding what their purpose is? That's a provocative question and I'm not to argue here. Obviously, there is a substantial difference between a car and a bike. If I need to take my 2 year old kid to an emergency room and it's 2am in the morning, I'm not going to take a bike and put whole family on top of my head. This is just a simple example to illustrate what I meant. [1] http://cdn.pcwallart.com/images/new-york-city-busy-streets-wallpaper-3.jpg http://cdn.pcwallart.com/images/new-york-city-busy-streets-w...

andreygrehov 9y ago

> Is it that easy if you actually follow the 3 feet rule (often law)? That's not about the 3 feet rule. It's about the relativeness of the number of bikes to the number of cars on the road. Yes, there are rules and requirements and al that, but then there is a psychological factor that is usually ruled out. Let's be realistic, check out this random image of New York [1]. Let's count, how many cars and bikers are there. 30+ cars and 1 bike. How many car drivers do you think expect to see the cyclist there? I mean, yes, they all know that cyclists/bikers are there, they exist, they are somewhere around, but the main focus is still on cars. That's what I was trying to say. Take delivery guys as an example. There are a lot of them and they are riding bikes as crazy. Only in GTA you can see a car driver driving as a delivery bike rider. Sometimes I think they are immortal. > I think most cyclists would love to live in this fantasy world, but it's not the reality we live in. Agreed. > What purpose is each vehicle meant for? Who is deciding what their purpose is? That's a provocative question and I'm not to argue here. Obviously, there is a substantial difference between a car and a bike. If I need to take my 2 year old kid to an emergency room and it's 2am in the morning, I'm not going to take a bike and put whole family on top of my head. This is just a simple example to illustrate what I meant. [1] http://cdn.pcwallart.com/images/new-york-city-busy-streets-wallpaper-3.jpg http://cdn.pcwallart.com/images/new-york-city-busy-streets-w...