7 ms·

Indeed. But if a car does it someone may die. Even a fast cyclist needs a lot of bad luck to run over and kill someone. Finding a fair way to count these thing

by Arnt 8y ago

Indeed. But if a car does it someone may die. Even a fast cyclist needs a lot of bad luck to run over and kill someone. Finding a fair way to count these things is really difficult.

foldr 8y ago
Sure, but cyclists can't use that as an excuse for bad behavior. I mean, if I punch someone, it's unlikely to kill them, but that doesn't mean I can just take a swing at someone whenever I feel like it.
- quicklime 8y ago
  Sure, it's in no way a valid excuse. But one act is much more dangerous than the other - a cyclist running a red light and a driver doing it are not morally equivalent, and it's slightly offensive to cyclists to claim that it is.
  - Tomte 8y ago
    Of course it is just as dangerous. We‘re not talking about a cyclist killing a car driver, we‘re talking about a cyclist getting killed. That can easily happen with a cyclist running a red light. I find it strange that cyclists love to discuss things as if bad outcomes to themselves didn‘t matter as long as they are the ones responsible. That‘s no way to sensibly talk about traffic safety.
    - pbhjpbhj 8y ago
      At some UK junctions a cyclist riding through red will make virtually no difference to anyone; in the same way as motorist on some sections of motorway (ie freeway), in good conditions, driving over the speed limit will make virtually no difference. A car jumping the light leaves no room for another car; a cyclist doing it leaves more than enough room. Yes, if they're busting through a pedestrian crossing with pedestrians on, or going on to a narrow junction, etc.. then you're in to dangers similar to "not indicating" (something that puts me in danger as a pedestrian every day). A cyclist hitting a car, it's extraordinarily unlikely to kill anyone including themselves. The contrary is not so. That's why cyclists don't worry as much about the possibility of hurting others on the roads. Of course interactions with pedestrians are bad all round, but much worse physically for cyclists than for vehicle drivers. There are imbalances, ignoring them doesn't make anyone safer.
      - Tomte 8y ago
        Are you really claiming that a car running a red light with speed v1 and crashing into a cyclist with speed v2 is more dangerous than a cyclist running a red light with speed v2 and crashing into a car with speed v1? That‘s ludicrous. The situations are perfectly symmetrical.
    - dasil003 8y ago
      There’s a difference between reckless driving/cycling and running a red light. There are in fact many ways to safely or unsafely do so for both types of vehicles. This needs to be acknowledged first, because there are situations where it’s actually safer (getting out of the way of aggro drivers just as the light turns) or necessary (lights only triggered by sensor that doesn’t pick up a bike).
      - Tomte 8y ago
        Sure, but who wouldn‘t acknowledge that? Nobody is talking about these edge cases.
    - Fishkins 8y ago
      The research I've read recently indicates (responsibly) running red lights and stop signs decreases a cyclist's chance of getting hit. When stopped, a cyclist is less visible and mobile. Vehicles can be less likely to see them, and they're less able to maneuver out of dangerous situations. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-bike-study-getting-around-20161211-column.html http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-bike-st... (I've seen other sources, but this is the first one I found first just now)
      - Tomte 8y ago
        That's only a discussion on the probability of a crash. I'm talking about the effect, given a crash has occured. Because people in this thread claim that it's virtually impossible for a cyclist to get killed when crashing into a car. Only a car crashing into a cyclist could possibly kill the latter. And that's nonsense.
DmenshunlAnlsis 8y ago
A cyclist can cause a swerve and crash, or just be the one killed. You can argue in the latter case that the cyclist is the only one hurt, but fault aside, most people will be devestated if they kill someone else.
chopin 8y ago
But you can hit hard enough for lifelong suffering easily. There is no excuse for reckless driving even with a bike.
- Arnt 8y ago
  I upvoted this because I probably should've said it myself. I said in another comment that I think it's really difficult to find a fair way to count. I meant that. I didn't mean "it's difficult to count such that I look like an angel and make that counting mode look fair".
- Steltek 8y ago
  But in this discussion, we're readily avoiding the daily mayhem and death that cars actually perpetrate. A new perspective is seriously in order. Which is most prevalent and presents the greatest risk in an urban environment? Should bikes yield to pedestrians? Yes, absolutely. Is that equivalent to drivers speeding, swerving, texting, road-raging, etc? Not in the slightest.
Tomte 8y ago
I‘m really tired of this apology. Yes, chances are slim you‘re killing a pedestrian. Chances are very real you severely hurt and injure him. Ask the pedestrian how much fun that is. Those casual dismissals are evil, IMO. Add to that the attitude that I just read again on Twitter unrelatedly, that pedestrians shouldn‘t blame bicyclists endangering them on pedestrian lanes, because it‘s ultimately the cars‘ fault. Bicyclists most vocal about traffic issues often don‘t care about weaker participants in traffic when they are not the weaker ones.
- aidos 8y ago
  There are different types of running red lights (and the dangers are country dependent). I myself frequently pull away at the lights while still red a second before they go green. I do it to get out ahead of the traffic for my own safety and to get clear of the traffic so I’m not in the way. This is in London, where all pedestrians are crossing at the same time and there are no cars moving. The main danger in it is drivers becoming angry (totally irrationally) and reckless.
gadders 8y ago
This chap ran over and killed a woman: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/sep/18/cyclist-charlie-alliston-jailed-for-18-months-over-death-of-pedestrian https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/sep/18/cyclist...
- Steltek 8y ago
  You're proving his point. It's so rare that it makes national news (or international, when you're an idiot with no brakes). Cars kill dozens of people in the US a day. Bikes kill far less than one person a year.

by Arnt 8y ago

Indeed. But if a car does it someone may die. Even a fast cyclist needs a lot of bad luck to run over and kill someone. Finding a fair way to count these things is really difficult.

foldr 8y ago

Sure, but cyclists can't use that as an excuse for bad behavior. I mean, if I punch someone, it's unlikely to kill them, but that doesn't mean I can just take a swing at someone whenever I feel like it.

quicklime 8y ago
Sure, it's in no way a valid excuse. But one act is much more dangerous than the other - a cyclist running a red light and a driver doing it are not morally equivalent, and it's slightly offensive to cyclists to claim that it is.
- Tomte 8y ago
  Of course it is just as dangerous. We‘re not talking about a cyclist killing a car driver, we‘re talking about a cyclist getting killed. That can easily happen with a cyclist running a red light. I find it strange that cyclists love to discuss things as if bad outcomes to themselves didn‘t matter as long as they are the ones responsible. That‘s no way to sensibly talk about traffic safety.
  - pbhjpbhj 8y ago
    At some UK junctions a cyclist riding through red will make virtually no difference to anyone; in the same way as motorist on some sections of motorway (ie freeway), in good conditions, driving over the speed limit will make virtually no difference. A car jumping the light leaves no room for another car; a cyclist doing it leaves more than enough room. Yes, if they're busting through a pedestrian crossing with pedestrians on, or going on to a narrow junction, etc.. then you're in to dangers similar to "not indicating" (something that puts me in danger as a pedestrian every day). A cyclist hitting a car, it's extraordinarily unlikely to kill anyone including themselves. The contrary is not so. That's why cyclists don't worry as much about the possibility of hurting others on the roads. Of course interactions with pedestrians are bad all round, but much worse physically for cyclists than for vehicle drivers. There are imbalances, ignoring them doesn't make anyone safer.
    - Tomte 8y ago
      Are you really claiming that a car running a red light with speed v1 and crashing into a cyclist with speed v2 is more dangerous than a cyclist running a red light with speed v2 and crashing into a car with speed v1? That‘s ludicrous. The situations are perfectly symmetrical.
  - dasil003 8y ago
    There’s a difference between reckless driving/cycling and running a red light. There are in fact many ways to safely or unsafely do so for both types of vehicles. This needs to be acknowledged first, because there are situations where it’s actually safer (getting out of the way of aggro drivers just as the light turns) or necessary (lights only triggered by sensor that doesn’t pick up a bike).
    - Tomte 8y ago
      Sure, but who wouldn‘t acknowledge that? Nobody is talking about these edge cases.
  - Fishkins 8y ago
    The research I've read recently indicates (responsibly) running red lights and stop signs decreases a cyclist's chance of getting hit. When stopped, a cyclist is less visible and mobile. Vehicles can be less likely to see them, and they're less able to maneuver out of dangerous situations. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-bike-study-getting-around-20161211-column.html http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-bike-st... (I've seen other sources, but this is the first one I found first just now)
    - Tomte 8y ago
      That's only a discussion on the probability of a crash. I'm talking about the effect, given a crash has occured. Because people in this thread claim that it's virtually impossible for a cyclist to get killed when crashing into a car. Only a car crashing into a cyclist could possibly kill the latter. And that's nonsense.

DmenshunlAnlsis 8y ago

A cyclist can cause a swerve and crash, or just be the one killed. You can argue in the latter case that the cyclist is the only one hurt, but fault aside, most people will be devestated if they kill someone else.

chopin 8y ago

But you can hit hard enough for lifelong suffering easily. There is no excuse for reckless driving even with a bike.

Arnt 8y ago
I upvoted this because I probably should've said it myself. I said in another comment that I think it's really difficult to find a fair way to count. I meant that. I didn't mean "it's difficult to count such that I look like an angel and make that counting mode look fair".
Steltek 8y ago
But in this discussion, we're readily avoiding the daily mayhem and death that cars actually perpetrate. A new perspective is seriously in order. Which is most prevalent and presents the greatest risk in an urban environment? Should bikes yield to pedestrians? Yes, absolutely. Is that equivalent to drivers speeding, swerving, texting, road-raging, etc? Not in the slightest.

Tomte 8y ago

I‘m really tired of this apology. Yes, chances are slim you‘re killing a pedestrian. Chances are very real you severely hurt and injure him. Ask the pedestrian how much fun that is. Those casual dismissals are evil, IMO. Add to that the attitude that I just read again on Twitter unrelatedly, that pedestrians shouldn‘t blame bicyclists endangering them on pedestrian lanes, because it‘s ultimately the cars‘ fault. Bicyclists most vocal about traffic issues often don‘t care about weaker participants in traffic when they are not the weaker ones.

aidos 8y ago
There are different types of running red lights (and the dangers are country dependent). I myself frequently pull away at the lights while still red a second before they go green. I do it to get out ahead of the traffic for my own safety and to get clear of the traffic so I’m not in the way. This is in London, where all pedestrians are crossing at the same time and there are no cars moving. The main danger in it is drivers becoming angry (totally irrationally) and reckless.

gadders 8y ago

This chap ran over and killed a woman: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/sep/18/cyclist-charlie-alliston-jailed-for-18-months-over-death-of-pedestrian https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/sep/18/cyclist...

Steltek 8y ago
You're proving his point. It's so rare that it makes national news (or international, when you're an idiot with no brakes). Cars kill dozens of people in the US a day. Bikes kill far less than one person a year.