3 ms·

>It is not driving, it's road traffic injuries, which includes biking. It's not from being hit by cyclists. >This is the list of the mandatory safety measures

by nguoi 7y ago

>It is not driving, it's road traffic injuries, which includes biking. It's not from being hit by cyclists. >This is the list of the mandatory safety measures in Europe for motor vehicles, it's 24 pages long Quite a lot of it isn't, read articles 6 and 7 and the lists of implementation dates. >Why are cyclist so afraid of protecting themselves? After having people maliciously aim their car at you for being in front of them, it's quite patronising to have them assume you're riding unsafely. People in other countries manage much better safety records through infrastructure and education. On the contrary, I don't think there's any safety clothing I can wear that will save me if a car crashes into me. This thread assumes that exists, yet assumes the same doesn't exist for anyone who dies in a car crash. Why don't you wear a helmet when in a car? Infrastructure doesn't improve where I am because the nasty, tribalist rhetoric swipes any safety issues under the rug by assuming cyclist fault. You've accused cyclists of being afraid of protecting themselves, thus categorising them in a tribe separate from your own. But I'm not separate from you: I'm a driver, too. Yet when I'm in a car with someone and they see a driver do something foolish, I never hear them call 'drivers' idiots, it's always about the singular person. The tribalism makes you think of the other party as less important. (And the foolish things happen multiple times a day - I can guarantee I'll see someone speed when I drive home tonight) Accusing me of being afraid of protecting just gives me the impression that you feel I have to earn the right for you to tolerate me in the road. An impression I get every time someone punish-passes me, or manoeuvres assuming a cyclist won't be in their path. And it's so tiring to be told it's my fault when I know how often I see people fail to obey the laws of the road at my expense.

walterstucco 7y ago
> It's not from being hit by cyclists. cars are just the most common vehicle. For example in Australia 19.1% of all the transport related hospitalisations are for bike incidents. It's the same percentage for car related accident. Now count the total amount of miles traveled and the total number of each mean of transport and do the math. > Quite a lot of it isn't, read articles 6 and 7 and the lists of implementation dates. That just proves that car safety is taken more seriously than bike safety. > After having people maliciously aim their car at you for being in front of them, it's quite patronising to have them assume you're riding unsafely This doesn't answer the question "Why are cyclist so afraid of protecting themselves?" though. > . People in other countries manage much better safety records through infrastructure and education What other countries? Can you provide names and numbers? > On the contrary, I don't think there's any safety clothing I can wear that will save me if a car crashes into me And you are wrong. For example in Australia only 2% of the transport related hospitalisations are for motorbikes accident. Because they usually wear protections. > You've accused cyclists of being afraid of protecting themselves I think it was a question, and you proved the poster right: why talking about protection for cyclists triggers this kind of emotionally charged responses? > The tribalism makes you think of the other party as less important. I don't even own a car, I live in a city where most of the transport do not happen using motor vehicles, bikers don't usually wear protection and don't make their kids wear protections. Why? What are they afraid of? It's a simple question. > Accusing me of being afraid of protecting just gives me the impression that you feel I have to earn the right for you to tolerate me in the road. That's always true, you have to tolerate and be tolerated. It's a shared infrastructure, it doesn't belong to anyone. > or manoeuvres assuming a cyclist won't be in their path If that's true, why don't you wear protections then? I don't understand.
pedanticlawyer 7y ago
> It's not from being hit by cyclists. It is included indeed. Being hit by cyclists is very common in places where bike density is high. For example: https://nypost.com/2019/08/31/nyc-bicyclists-are-killing-pedestrians-and-the-city-wont-stop-it/ https://nypost.com/2019/08/31/nyc-bicyclists-are-killing-ped... > After having people maliciously aim their car at you for being in front of them, it's quite patronising to hav On my motorbike I wear helmet and protections anyway, before having people maliciously aim at me (because you know, accidents can happen even without malice...). Why are you so afraid to protect yourself?

by nguoi 7y ago

walterstucco 7y ago

> It's not from being hit by cyclists. cars are just the most common vehicle. For example in Australia 19.1% of all the transport related hospitalisations are for bike incidents. It's the same percentage for car related accident. Now count the total amount of miles traveled and the total number of each mean of transport and do the math. > Quite a lot of it isn't, read articles 6 and 7 and the lists of implementation dates. That just proves that car safety is taken more seriously than bike safety. > After having people maliciously aim their car at you for being in front of them, it's quite patronising to have them assume you're riding unsafely This doesn't answer the question "Why are cyclist so afraid of protecting themselves?" though. > . People in other countries manage much better safety records through infrastructure and education What other countries? Can you provide names and numbers? > On the contrary, I don't think there's any safety clothing I can wear that will save me if a car crashes into me And you are wrong. For example in Australia only 2% of the transport related hospitalisations are for motorbikes accident. Because they usually wear protections. > You've accused cyclists of being afraid of protecting themselves I think it was a question, and you proved the poster right: why talking about protection for cyclists triggers this kind of emotionally charged responses? > The tribalism makes you think of the other party as less important. I don't even own a car, I live in a city where most of the transport do not happen using motor vehicles, bikers don't usually wear protection and don't make their kids wear protections. Why? What are they afraid of? It's a simple question. > Accusing me of being afraid of protecting just gives me the impression that you feel I have to earn the right for you to tolerate me in the road. That's always true, you have to tolerate and be tolerated. It's a shared infrastructure, it doesn't belong to anyone. > or manoeuvres assuming a cyclist won't be in their path If that's true, why don't you wear protections then? I don't understand.

pedanticlawyer 7y ago

> It's not from being hit by cyclists. It is included indeed. Being hit by cyclists is very common in places where bike density is high. For example: https://nypost.com/2019/08/31/nyc-bicyclists-are-killing-pedestrians-and-the-city-wont-stop-it/ https://nypost.com/2019/08/31/nyc-bicyclists-are-killing-ped... > After having people maliciously aim their car at you for being in front of them, it's quite patronising to hav On my motorbike I wear helmet and protections anyway, before having people maliciously aim at me (because you know, accidents can happen even without malice...). Why are you so afraid to protect yourself?