18 ms·

Drivers and pedestrians break rules to save time, cyclists do it for safety

44 points by privong 6y ago

avalys 6y ago
Better title: “in informal survey, cyclists rationalize their lawbreaking by claiming it is for their own safety.” I’m sure all the cyclists I see running stop signs and red lights on their $2,000+ Tour de France cosplay setups have safety foremost on their minds.
- gpm 6y ago
  The vast majority of cyclists I see don't wear "tour de france cosplay setups" (recent personal experience from Toronto and the bay area). The vast majority I see also don't run red lights. I think you might have a sample biased towards those that you notice in negative ways.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - gruglife 6y ago
    The last time I’ve seen a cyclist stop at a red light was never
    - proactivesvcs 6y ago
      The last time I read the stats for the London, UK, the number of cyclists seen jumping red lights was in the single digits of all cyclists counted and motorists accounted for 95% of total red light infractions.
      - romanoderoma 6y ago
        I guess motorists account for 99% of them Now we should make a proportion with the total number of users I suspect cyclists jump red lights a lot more per capita But I can't say it for sure, not knowing the actual numbers
        proactivesvcs 6y ago
        Then multiply both by the potential harm of each vehicle and we can fully quantify which are the more dangerous.
        romanoderoma 6y ago
        First of all, bikes are notoriously more dangerous than cars. No matter how anyone puts it, bikes are inherently more dangerous, cars have safety features that are simply not present on bikes. Here is the study https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/648081/rrcgb2016-01.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... A picture is worth a thousand words > Basing numbers on per billion miles travelled takes the raw numbers and adjusts them for exposure https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-4a0f8be5f3583d076974c1db052eaefc https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-4a0f8be5f3583d076974c1... What is immediately evident is that the less protections you have around you and the more you can go fast (if you can, you will), the more fatality rate is high. The idea that if we could only move by bike there would be less accident is a false one There would be less accidents for sure, because only a tiny fraction of the actual driver's population would go by bike. But they would probably start falling from horses or have carriage accidents
        cultus 6y ago
        Bikes are safe. Cars are unsafe because they often kill other road users. You have them confused.
        romanoderoma 6y ago
        > Bikes are safe. Cars are unsafe because they often kill other road users. You have them confused. knifes kill people too but I'm sure you use them Guns kill people too, but they love them in the US, they love them so much that they put them in the hands of kids and let them go the school to shoot other kids Cars are not unsafe, people driving them are. It's the same people that ride bikes. You have them confused. As Conan's father said: "No one in this world can you trust. Not men, not women, not beasts." BTW If you like to live, don't ride a bike. -- "More cycling fatalities than deaths in cars" https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2018/04/25/more-cycling-fatalities-than-deaths-in-cars/ https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2018/04/25/more-cycling-f... -- Crash Statistics - who was at fault? https://s3.amazonaws.com/ClubExpressClubFiles/86708/graphics/Bike_Crash_Chart.jpg https://s3.amazonaws.com/ClubExpressClubFiles/86708/graphics... -- Fatality rate (UK) https://fullfact.org/media/uploads/DfT_chart.png https://fullfact.org/media/uploads/DfT_chart.png
    - jcranmer 6y ago
      As someone who daily commuted by bicycle, the last time I didn't stop at a red light was never. I've definitely seen more cars fail to stop at red lights than bicycles, too.
    - lostlogin 6y ago
      They carry on when the light is red? I have seen plenty take off early and do it myself to avoid having the traffic pile up behind me, but going through a light that has just turned red would seem to invite catastrophe.
      - maffydub 6y ago
        I'm neither a driver nor a cyclist - just a pedestrian - but my impression is that, at least in my part of London, cyclists carry on through red lights much more frequently than cars. Obviously, purely anecdotal.
        evgen 6y ago
        Same. Depending on the intersection and traffic there are places in zone 1 where the traffic signals seem to be considered completely optional for cyclists. I have also found myself needing to use a death stare to get some cyclists to stop at a zebra crossing as well; this happens far more frequently with cyclists than I ever needed to for cars or HGVs.
- cymbeline 6y ago
  Yes, let's mock the cyclists for their bicycles and not those folks driving $30,000+ condo-sized pollution machines (and the leading cause of death for people under 30) so they can save 20 minutes on their commute and go to Costco once a month.
- CarelessExpert 6y ago
  > on their $2,000+ Tour de France cosplay setups "Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. " Edit: BTW, as a road cyclist, my very first reaction was the same as yours: Since this was a survey it's tough to tease out the real reasons from the rationalizations. Speaking for myself, I'll freely admit that my reasons for violating road rules (which, for me, is limited to rolling through stop signs at empty intersections) are more about energy savings and speed rather than safety. But you can deliver that criticism without being cruelly mocking and dismissive of an activity you happen not to value.
  - avalys 6y ago
    You’re right, that was a bit harsh I guess, but I’m just mirroring the attitude I perceive from the cycling community. I recently bought a road bike myself and found the entire sport obnoxiously pretentious, including the guy at the bike shop, who sneered at me because I didn’t know what a “fondo” was.
    - CarelessExpert 6y ago
      > I recently bought a road bike myself and found the entire sport obnoxiously pretentious, including the guy at the bike shop, who sneered at me because I didn’t know what a “fondo” was. And that sucks, I'm sorry you had such a bad experience. While I've met many lovely people in the cycling community, I've also run across similar attitudes, myself, from time to time. That's probably because the cycling community reflects people, and people are usually great and sometimes not so much. But ask yourself: is it good for you, personally, to return that sneering with sneering of your own? Does that make you feel better about yourself or the people around you? What do you gain by stereotyping a huge community based on the poor behaviour of a few individuals? My suggestion: Assuming you haven't been scared away from the hobby, leave an honest review of that bike shop owner (who legitimately sounds like an ass and isn't someone I'd want representing the cycling community), and then find a better shop. And if you want to join a cycling club, find one that aligns with your values and beliefs. Cycling clubs are just like people in that they're not all the same.
- throwaway9191a 6y ago
  While yours is a better title, your comment also helps me rationalize my behavior on a bike. Many people have irrational hate towards bikes, and those people operate much heavier equipment. They do so while staring at their cell phones. This is certainly a problem where all sides need to pay more attention, and not hate on each other. And just because; my "tour de france cosplay" gives me a butt-pad for comfort, nice pockets on the back of my shirt to carry things, and dries really quick in the rain. I suppose if I spent $20,000 on a rolling sofa that would be better?
charonn0 6y ago
> They used snowball sampling—meaning that respondents recruited other participants—for an online survey Which is about as scientific as my personal anecdote of being run over by a cyclist.
- cuddlybacon 6y ago
  Or my anecdotes of when cyclists swerve into me when I take my right of way at a crosswalk.
- cscurmudgeon 6y ago
  It has a cool name, so you know it is more scientific.
geocrasher 6y ago
I used to bicycle commute to work, 11mi round trip. I broke rules, but not glaringly. The worst of the rule breakers are the wrong-way cyclists: The ones who think that riding on the wrong side of the road is safer because they can see cars coming. They are wrong. Riding on the wrong side, and on sidewalks, puts you in places cars would never expect you to be, and so they're even more oblivious. If you're going to break rules, break the right ones and understand the impact fully.
- emerged 6y ago
  It's especially dangerous when you're cycling on the right side of the road and come across cyclist going the wrong way. Had this happen to me recently on a 55mph highway with no shoulder. The other cyclists didn't even take it upon themselves to move, they just headed right toward me.
  - gpm 6y ago
    Only of a 50 km/h (not mile) road, but I had another cyclist do this in the dark, weaving in and out of park cars, wearing dark clothing, without lights, in an area with minimal street lights, do this to me. It was one of the closest calls I've had. I'm pretty sure I would have run into him head on if I hadn't had a bright front light.
- amateurdev 6y ago
  I generally ride on on trails, but to save time to drive to trails, I've started riding on roads since about 4 months. Behavior of some riders surprises me, they'll switch between pavement and road whenever they wish to. Just yesterday, someone jumped from the pavement onto the road a few metres ahead and the car in front of my was caught by surprise. Then there's people who will zoom past stop signs without considering there might be other vehicles and ignore them completely. I get what you're saying. I always try to stay on the road, stop at stop signs, just ride as if I were a car. I've never had a close-call and always try to make my movement obvious.
PragmaticPulp 6y ago
Answers were self-reported from online surveys: > Marshall, Piatkowski, and Johnson asked bicyclists as well as drivers and pedestrians to analyze the factors associated with such behaviors. They used snowball sampling—meaning that respondents recruited other participants—for an online survey that presented hypothetical cycling scenarios along with multiple-choice questions about what the respondent would choose to do in each scenario. Survey takers, numbering nearly 18,000, were able to explain their rationales. As both a cyclist and a driver, I aim for maximum predictability whenever I'm on the road. None of my movements should ever surprise drivers or other cyclists (who are paying attention). Candidly, about 3/4 of my cyclist friends are intent on following the rules of the road. The other 1/4 are convinced that rules only exist for cars. I've seen too many close calls from people making illegal moves under the mistaken belief that it was safer to run a stop sign, or make a quick lane change without signaling, or otherwise behave as if they could out-maneuver the cars around them. As a driver, my only close calls with cyclists have been when they skipped stop signs or assumed that the cars would yield to them at 4-way stops. A cyclist even T-boned my wife's car while she was driving the speed limit down a residential street because the cyclist assumed they could maneuver around her. Cycling is dangerous. Don't make it more dangerous by adding unpredictability to the mix.
- MiroF 6y ago
  > Cycling is dangerous. Don't make it more dangerous by adding unpredictability to the mix. I agree, but at the same time I think the laws should be changed so that stop signs become yield signs for cyclists (so called Stop as Yield laws). Then it would be predictable and the laws would be designed in a way that makes sense for cycling. This is effectively what I already do and most cyclists I know do as well. I would be lying if I said that I never skipped stop signs. The general difference between reckless/unsafe cyclists and others is less the skipping stop signs versus the when to skip. For instance, I would never skip if there was already a car at another stop sign.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- MereInterest 6y ago
  > Cycling is dangerous. Don't make it more dangerous by adding unpredictability to the mix. This framing makes a lot of assumptions about city/road design that are not universal. I'd say that cycling is inherently an incredibly safe activity. Driving is a dangerous activity to those inside the car, and even more so to those outside the car.
sandworm101 6y ago
>> for cyclists the most common reason is personal safety, followed by saving energy, saving time, and increasing one’s visibility. Ok... that is a very strange sentence. Time and energy (ie speed) are basically interchangeable (ie rolling through stop signs). So too are "safety" and "visibility" intrinsically related. Being seen by cars is like 90% of bicycle safety. The real question is whether lawbreaking for (time+energy) is greater than for (safety+visibility). The article doesn't give us that data.
- OliverJones 6y ago
  For what it's worth, it's metabolically costly to completely stop and then start moving again on a bike. And it also costs some maneuverability. Let me explain. Above a certain speed, both bicycles and motorcycles are more maneuverable, and more predictable, than they are when going more slowly. Above that speed threshold they're counter-steered. That is, when I want to turn right I apply very slight left-turning pressure to the front wheel. That makes the bike bank to the right and smoothly enter the turn. At lower speeds I turn the wheel in the direction I want to go. This counter-steering thing is only a factor in two-wheeled vehicles: vehicles with more wheels can't bank, of course. I've been a cyclist for decades, but I didn't understand counter-steering until I took motorcycle driver training. Motorcycle instructors drill it into us because it's a vital part of swerving to avoid obstructions when going at motorized speeds. As a cyclist in traffic I find I'm particularly vulnerable in the transition between direct-steer and counter-steer speeds. So, trying to keep my speed above the threshold both saves my energy and keeps me at maneuvering speed. I do this by slowing down when approaching a red light, with the hope it will change to green before I arrive. I also try to stop a few meters back from a red light so I have space to get up to maneuvering speed before entering an intersection without having to stand and stomp my pedals.
  - narwally 6y ago
    I do the same thing. intersections are the most dangerous place you can be on two wheels, so having speed when you go through them means you're in them for a shorter period of time and you have more maneuverability and control of your bike.
benrbray 6y ago
Cyclists break rules because the rules were not written with us in mind. The tired straw man argument against cyclists has them saying "treat me like a car!" one minute and "treat me like a pedestrian!" the next. But really, I just want to be treated like a cyclist. There are three major classes of transportation, not just two [@]. Here are some road rules that I regularly break for my own safety: > In most places, it illegal to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk. However, most roads near me have no bike lanes. My city (Atlanta) has a notorious problem with highway traffic spilling out into the city, and as a result drivers are viciously impatient and I've had too many close calls while riding my bike on major roads. I ride on the sidewalk when there is no other safe option. > In some places, it is illegal for a bicycle to pass a red light, even when it's all clear. However, when I'm riding on the road, there is usually a pack of impatient drivers waiting behind me. If don't accelerate quickly enough, they will honk at me and/or pass me within inches. Usually, I can put a safe distance between myself and the cars behind me if I start moving a little before the light turns green. > Regarding sidewalk riding again: My city has too many one-way streets. This is fine for cars, who travel a longer distance on average than I do. But for short bike trips, not being able to use the sidewalk would increase trip time by 3-4x. This is a problem solved by separated bike lanes. Not to mention the fact that we rarely hold drivers accountable for their rule-breaking. As a bicyclist, my mistakes can are only lethal to myself. A driver's mistakes kill other people. Here's also a list of dangerous traffic behavior that SHOULD be illegal but ISN'T, because the law is written for the convenience of drivers, not the safety of pedestrians and cyclists: > Right-turn-on-red should be illegal anywhere there is a pedestrian signal. When turning on red, drivers are looking to the left for oncoming traffic, and rarely look for pedestrians to the right until it is too late. When the pedestrian light is on, there should be ZERO chance of being hit by a law-abiding car! > Left turns should have a dedicated lane and signal. Left-turn-on-green puts drivers in direct conflict with pedestrians, for the same reasons as right-turn-on-red. > Speeding is too pervasive, and speed limits should be strictly enforced. Failing to use a turn signal should also be ticketed more often. I would support camera enforcement if I didn't think it would leak into public spaces beyond just roads. > Freight trucks and other vehicles pulling a trailer too often swerve outside their lane. This is extremely dangerous and should be punished. [@] Really, their are four modes of ground transportation, but Americans don't believe in trains.
mulmen 6y ago
I ride bicycles and motorcyles and frequently break the letter of the law for my own safety. Two wheeled transportation just simply is not considered or understood by transit authorities, at least not in my city. I will never stop behind a car. That just is not going to happen. I don't want to be the meat on a texting driver stopped car sandwich. This means some amount of lane filtering/splitting. I will ride my bike on a sidewalk to avoid traffic, even if there is a "bike lane" if I don't feel that lane is safe, such as when it is on a major route with lots of traffic. I will not give you room to pass if there are parked cars on the side of the road. I'm not going to get doored so you can get to your destination 30 seconds faster. When you're on two wheels all cars are trying to kill you. No other threat model makes sense. This says nothing of the lack of knowledge on the part of drivers as to what motorcycles and bicycles are actually entitled to do and their willingness to be vigilantes to enforce their perception of the law, even when it endangers my life.
- soperj 6y ago
  >When you're on two wheels all cars are trying to kill you. No other threat model makes sense. I realize this is a low value comment, but this is absolutely true. Whether through negligence or not, they display over and over again that it's true.
  - romanoderoma 6y ago
    If it was true, there would be no biker left alive
  - mumblemumble 6y ago
    I don't know that it is that drivers are actively trying to kill me. I think it's that there's some phenomenon, yet to be documented by science, that causes people to become more solipsistic when they are operating a motor vehicle. The net result being, they don't recognize a clear moral difference between cyclists, pedestrians, and orange construction barrels, and see their most noteworthy difference as being the fact that some move faster than others.
    - 6y ago
meitham 6y ago
I lost count of the times I was nearly hit by cyclists in London who think traffic lights don't apply to them!
- InitialLastName 6y ago
  Similarly, I've lost count of the number of times I've been nearly hit by cars in [everywhere] who think stop signs and crosswalk rules don't apply to them.
- cultus 6y ago
  If it weren't for cars, traffic wouldn't need to be so tightly controlled because the stakes would be so much lower. While I don't condone running red lights, driver rage at cyclists running red lights or pedestrians jay-walking (a term invented by the auto industry) would be far better directed at drivers who don't take the task of operating a multi-thousand pound machine at high velocities seriously.
- belorn 6y ago
  I think the word "nearly hit" is the key. I have personally lost count of the times I have seen strollers with babies on heavy trafficked bike roads, and 3-5 years old on training cycles. I have however yet to hear a single accident where a cyclist have hit one of those extremely vulnerable individuals being hit, which if it happened would likely result in the child being killed.
WarOnPrivacy 6y ago
First bicycle lesson for kids here is to ride on the sidewalk. The other options just invite broken bones and head trauma.
- InitialLastName 6y ago
  In many places, the other options are the only legal ones. In NYC, any bicyclist over 12 years old or with wheels over 26" is required to ride in the street.
  - RhysU 6y ago
    Except for the food delivery dudes riding battery powered bicycles on the sidewalk. Those guys get a pass.
  - WarOnPrivacy 6y ago
    >In NYC, any bicyclist over 12 years old or with wheels over 26" is required to ride in the street. Here, that's a good way to die. We can say that because bicyclists are regularly run down. Pedestrians too. It's the natural outcome when you densely pack retirees with drive thru pharmacies/liquor stores.
mindslight 6y ago
As a former cyclist, the headline is 100% bullshit. I generally broke laws for the sake of efficiency. Having said that, there is a huge distinction between breaking overbearing laws designed for cars, and going against the common norms of the road. Treating red lights and stop signs as yields is fine. Ignoring the existence of intersections and forcing drivers to yield to you is being an asshole on a good day, and deadly on a bad one. The things I did do for safety (eg riding out far enough to not get doored, taking a lane to turn or avoid obstacles) generally weren't illegal. Although I could see this being different in a place with different laws that weren't worded in terms of safety.
raffraffraff 6y ago
I cycle a lot, and I don't drive. And yes, I sometimes break rules for my safety. For example, I refuse to use stupidly designed cycle lanes that: * Mount the foot path and then return to the road. * Force me to use pedestrian crossings at roundabouts. * Railroad me onto the side of the road when I actually want to make a turn (ie: force me to dismount and use a pedestrian crossing instead of using the correct lane for that turn) * Vanish abruptly But a lot of cyclists I see (in my city anyway) are just inconsiderate assholes who have no road etiquette. They run red lights, ignore one way systems, cycle on pedestrian paths, or (the very worst) cycle the wrong way on cycle paths. And don't get me started on lycra clad (always male) cyclists who 'come at you' side-by-side on a cycle path that fits exactly two cyclists. I'm not sure if they expect you to slide into another dimension, but a loud, sharp c-word generally jolts them out of their idiocy.
- mcfunk 6y ago
  'I'm not sure if they expect you to slide into another dimension, but a loud, sharp c-word generally jolts them out of their idiocy.' Thanks for the entirely accurate and entertaining read. There are definitely many c-words among us, and I assume you don't mean 'commuters' -- most of those of us are just trying to get along without getting squashed, and that often means using infrastructure in ways other than the intended, because it was never intended for our safety.
heikkilevanto 6y ago
Depends a lot where you are from. Here in Copenhagen, biking is a fairly safe and well respected way of transport. Pity it does not seem to be so in many other places.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
throw7 6y ago
Around me, there are a couple of intersections which have detectors to change the signal light, so if there's no car around you're not getting a green light. Things are getting better I guess... in NY, "complete streets" was signed in 2011. I consider that pretty recent though. Even post 2011, there were projects near me that were already underway and getting completed that completely ignored cycling. -.-
- throwaway9191a 6y ago
  Virginia(US) has a law regarding this as well. "B. ... if the driver or rider (i) comes to a full and complete stop at the intersection for two complete cycles of the traffic light or for two minutes, whichever is shorter, ..." https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title46.2/chapter8/section46.2-833/ https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title46.2/chapter8/secti... Which makes a lot of sense. I've been in this situation in my car as well. The light just doesn't change.
gwbas1c 6y ago
I thought the article would list out some of the rules that cyclists break. I'm sure 100% of people break some rule at some point, so saying 100% of the participants admitted to breaking some rule, is like saying 100% of people fart in public. But, anyway, for the 18 months or so that I biked to work, I tried to follow the rules. Yes, I rolled through some stop signs. (Don't we all, no matter what kind of vehicle we're piloting?) The much slower speed on a bike makes it easier to look at all incoming lanes before you enter the intersection. But, I've had close calls in a car with cyclists. I've had close calls on a bike with cars. I once went over my handlebars when some doofus bolted across the street on a bike without looking. People are bad at following the rules of the road. It doesn't matter if it's a car or a bicycle.
mgarfias 6y ago
clearly the authors never went to portland to deal with the idiot bicyclists there.
sleepysysadmin 6y ago
>Additionally, they are often motivated by concerns for their own safety, because they feel like an afterthought in a transportation system dominated by cars. Because bike lanes were an afterthought. Cycling is very unsafe. Originally bikes were expected to ride on sidewalks. The problem arose was that sidewalks were unsafe. Pedestrians would just walk into the way of the cyclists and the cyclists would be hurt. So politicians looking to raise tax revenues started making it difficult to ride a bike. Helmets are required, bans from sidewalks, 20km/h speed limits of bike lanes/paths. Many reflectors on the bike. Bell or horn on the bike needed. This is all to harass cyclists. Now that bikes are on roads, now you have cars just driving into the way of cyclsts and hurting them; possibly even killing them. Why are cyclists always being hurt by everyone else?
- MereInterest 6y ago
  > Originally bikes were expected to ride on sidewalks. Depends a bit by what you mean by "originally". In the early 1900s, bikes traveled in the street. Pedestrians traveled in the street. Everybody was in the street. The idea that the streets are the sole province of the car, and that pedestrians/bikers may cross the street only where it does not inconvenience the car, is the result of marketing to avoid cars being liable for pedestrian injury/death. So, same story of cars being overly prominent, but stepping back another 50 years.

44 points by privong 6y ago

Better title: “in informal survey, cyclists rationalize their lawbreaking by claiming it is for their own safety.” I’m sure all the cyclists I see running stop signs and red lights on their $2,000+ Tour de France cosplay setups have safety foremost on their minds.

gpm 6y ago
The vast majority of cyclists I see don't wear "tour de france cosplay setups" (recent personal experience from Toronto and the bay area). The vast majority I see also don't run red lights. I think you might have a sample biased towards those that you notice in negative ways.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- gruglife 6y ago
  The last time I’ve seen a cyclist stop at a red light was never
  - proactivesvcs 6y ago
    The last time I read the stats for the London, UK, the number of cyclists seen jumping red lights was in the single digits of all cyclists counted and motorists accounted for 95% of total red light infractions.
    - romanoderoma 6y ago
      I guess motorists account for 99% of them Now we should make a proportion with the total number of users I suspect cyclists jump red lights a lot more per capita But I can't say it for sure, not knowing the actual numbers
      - proactivesvcs 6y ago
        Then multiply both by the potential harm of each vehicle and we can fully quantify which are the more dangerous.
        romanoderoma 6y ago
        First of all, bikes are notoriously more dangerous than cars. No matter how anyone puts it, bikes are inherently more dangerous, cars have safety features that are simply not present on bikes. Here is the study https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/648081/rrcgb2016-01.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... A picture is worth a thousand words > Basing numbers on per billion miles travelled takes the raw numbers and adjusts them for exposure https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-4a0f8be5f3583d076974c1db052eaefc https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-4a0f8be5f3583d076974c1... What is immediately evident is that the less protections you have around you and the more you can go fast (if you can, you will), the more fatality rate is high. The idea that if we could only move by bike there would be less accident is a false one There would be less accidents for sure, because only a tiny fraction of the actual driver's population would go by bike. But they would probably start falling from horses or have carriage accidents
        cultus 6y ago
        Bikes are safe. Cars are unsafe because they often kill other road users. You have them confused.
        romanoderoma 6y ago
        > Bikes are safe. Cars are unsafe because they often kill other road users. You have them confused. knifes kill people too but I'm sure you use them Guns kill people too, but they love them in the US, they love them so much that they put them in the hands of kids and let them go the school to shoot other kids Cars are not unsafe, people driving them are. It's the same people that ride bikes. You have them confused. As Conan's father said: "No one in this world can you trust. Not men, not women, not beasts." BTW If you like to live, don't ride a bike. -- "More cycling fatalities than deaths in cars" https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2018/04/25/more-cycling-fatalities-than-deaths-in-cars/ https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2018/04/25/more-cycling-f... -- Crash Statistics - who was at fault? https://s3.amazonaws.com/ClubExpressClubFiles/86708/graphics/Bike_Crash_Chart.jpg https://s3.amazonaws.com/ClubExpressClubFiles/86708/graphics... -- Fatality rate (UK) https://fullfact.org/media/uploads/DfT_chart.png https://fullfact.org/media/uploads/DfT_chart.png
  - jcranmer 6y ago
    As someone who daily commuted by bicycle, the last time I didn't stop at a red light was never. I've definitely seen more cars fail to stop at red lights than bicycles, too.
  - lostlogin 6y ago
    They carry on when the light is red? I have seen plenty take off early and do it myself to avoid having the traffic pile up behind me, but going through a light that has just turned red would seem to invite catastrophe.
    - maffydub 6y ago
      I'm neither a driver nor a cyclist - just a pedestrian - but my impression is that, at least in my part of London, cyclists carry on through red lights much more frequently than cars. Obviously, purely anecdotal.
      - evgen 6y ago
        Same. Depending on the intersection and traffic there are places in zone 1 where the traffic signals seem to be considered completely optional for cyclists. I have also found myself needing to use a death stare to get some cyclists to stop at a zebra crossing as well; this happens far more frequently with cyclists than I ever needed to for cars or HGVs.
cymbeline 6y ago
Yes, let's mock the cyclists for their bicycles and not those folks driving $30,000+ condo-sized pollution machines (and the leading cause of death for people under 30) so they can save 20 minutes on their commute and go to Costco once a month.
CarelessExpert 6y ago
> on their $2,000+ Tour de France cosplay setups "Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. " Edit: BTW, as a road cyclist, my very first reaction was the same as yours: Since this was a survey it's tough to tease out the real reasons from the rationalizations. Speaking for myself, I'll freely admit that my reasons for violating road rules (which, for me, is limited to rolling through stop signs at empty intersections) are more about energy savings and speed rather than safety. But you can deliver that criticism without being cruelly mocking and dismissive of an activity you happen not to value.
- avalys 6y ago
  You’re right, that was a bit harsh I guess, but I’m just mirroring the attitude I perceive from the cycling community. I recently bought a road bike myself and found the entire sport obnoxiously pretentious, including the guy at the bike shop, who sneered at me because I didn’t know what a “fondo” was.
  - CarelessExpert 6y ago
    > I recently bought a road bike myself and found the entire sport obnoxiously pretentious, including the guy at the bike shop, who sneered at me because I didn’t know what a “fondo” was. And that sucks, I'm sorry you had such a bad experience. While I've met many lovely people in the cycling community, I've also run across similar attitudes, myself, from time to time. That's probably because the cycling community reflects people, and people are usually great and sometimes not so much. But ask yourself: is it good for you, personally, to return that sneering with sneering of your own? Does that make you feel better about yourself or the people around you? What do you gain by stereotyping a huge community based on the poor behaviour of a few individuals? My suggestion: Assuming you haven't been scared away from the hobby, leave an honest review of that bike shop owner (who legitimately sounds like an ass and isn't someone I'd want representing the cycling community), and then find a better shop. And if you want to join a cycling club, find one that aligns with your values and beliefs. Cycling clubs are just like people in that they're not all the same.
throwaway9191a 6y ago
While yours is a better title, your comment also helps me rationalize my behavior on a bike. Many people have irrational hate towards bikes, and those people operate much heavier equipment. They do so while staring at their cell phones. This is certainly a problem where all sides need to pay more attention, and not hate on each other. And just because; my "tour de france cosplay" gives me a butt-pad for comfort, nice pockets on the back of my shirt to carry things, and dries really quick in the rain. I suppose if I spent $20,000 on a rolling sofa that would be better?

charonn0 6y ago

> They used snowball sampling—meaning that respondents recruited other participants—for an online survey Which is about as scientific as my personal anecdote of being run over by a cyclist.

cuddlybacon 6y ago
Or my anecdotes of when cyclists swerve into me when I take my right of way at a crosswalk.
cscurmudgeon 6y ago
It has a cool name, so you know it is more scientific.

geocrasher 6y ago

I used to bicycle commute to work, 11mi round trip. I broke rules, but not glaringly. The worst of the rule breakers are the wrong-way cyclists: The ones who think that riding on the wrong side of the road is safer because they can see cars coming. They are wrong. Riding on the wrong side, and on sidewalks, puts you in places cars would never expect you to be, and so they're even more oblivious. If you're going to break rules, break the right ones and understand the impact fully.

emerged 6y ago
It's especially dangerous when you're cycling on the right side of the road and come across cyclist going the wrong way. Had this happen to me recently on a 55mph highway with no shoulder. The other cyclists didn't even take it upon themselves to move, they just headed right toward me.
- gpm 6y ago
  Only of a 50 km/h (not mile) road, but I had another cyclist do this in the dark, weaving in and out of park cars, wearing dark clothing, without lights, in an area with minimal street lights, do this to me. It was one of the closest calls I've had. I'm pretty sure I would have run into him head on if I hadn't had a bright front light.
amateurdev 6y ago
I generally ride on on trails, but to save time to drive to trails, I've started riding on roads since about 4 months. Behavior of some riders surprises me, they'll switch between pavement and road whenever they wish to. Just yesterday, someone jumped from the pavement onto the road a few metres ahead and the car in front of my was caught by surprise. Then there's people who will zoom past stop signs without considering there might be other vehicles and ignore them completely. I get what you're saying. I always try to stay on the road, stop at stop signs, just ride as if I were a car. I've never had a close-call and always try to make my movement obvious.

PragmaticPulp 6y ago

Answers were self-reported from online surveys: > Marshall, Piatkowski, and Johnson asked bicyclists as well as drivers and pedestrians to analyze the factors associated with such behaviors. They used snowball sampling—meaning that respondents recruited other participants—for an online survey that presented hypothetical cycling scenarios along with multiple-choice questions about what the respondent would choose to do in each scenario. Survey takers, numbering nearly 18,000, were able to explain their rationales. As both a cyclist and a driver, I aim for maximum predictability whenever I'm on the road. None of my movements should ever surprise drivers or other cyclists (who are paying attention). Candidly, about 3/4 of my cyclist friends are intent on following the rules of the road. The other 1/4 are convinced that rules only exist for cars. I've seen too many close calls from people making illegal moves under the mistaken belief that it was safer to run a stop sign, or make a quick lane change without signaling, or otherwise behave as if they could out-maneuver the cars around them. As a driver, my only close calls with cyclists have been when they skipped stop signs or assumed that the cars would yield to them at 4-way stops. A cyclist even T-boned my wife's car while she was driving the speed limit down a residential street because the cyclist assumed they could maneuver around her. Cycling is dangerous. Don't make it more dangerous by adding unpredictability to the mix.

MiroF 6y ago
> Cycling is dangerous. Don't make it more dangerous by adding unpredictability to the mix. I agree, but at the same time I think the laws should be changed so that stop signs become yield signs for cyclists (so called Stop as Yield laws). Then it would be predictable and the laws would be designed in a way that makes sense for cycling. This is effectively what I already do and most cyclists I know do as well. I would be lying if I said that I never skipped stop signs. The general difference between reckless/unsafe cyclists and others is less the skipping stop signs versus the when to skip. For instance, I would never skip if there was already a car at another stop sign.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
MereInterest 6y ago
> Cycling is dangerous. Don't make it more dangerous by adding unpredictability to the mix. This framing makes a lot of assumptions about city/road design that are not universal. I'd say that cycling is inherently an incredibly safe activity. Driving is a dangerous activity to those inside the car, and even more so to those outside the car.

sandworm101 6y ago

>> for cyclists the most common reason is personal safety, followed by saving energy, saving time, and increasing one’s visibility. Ok... that is a very strange sentence. Time and energy (ie speed) are basically interchangeable (ie rolling through stop signs). So too are "safety" and "visibility" intrinsically related. Being seen by cars is like 90% of bicycle safety. The real question is whether lawbreaking for (time+energy) is greater than for (safety+visibility). The article doesn't give us that data.

OliverJones 6y ago
For what it's worth, it's metabolically costly to completely stop and then start moving again on a bike. And it also costs some maneuverability. Let me explain. Above a certain speed, both bicycles and motorcycles are more maneuverable, and more predictable, than they are when going more slowly. Above that speed threshold they're counter-steered. That is, when I want to turn right I apply very slight left-turning pressure to the front wheel. That makes the bike bank to the right and smoothly enter the turn. At lower speeds I turn the wheel in the direction I want to go. This counter-steering thing is only a factor in two-wheeled vehicles: vehicles with more wheels can't bank, of course. I've been a cyclist for decades, but I didn't understand counter-steering until I took motorcycle driver training. Motorcycle instructors drill it into us because it's a vital part of swerving to avoid obstructions when going at motorized speeds. As a cyclist in traffic I find I'm particularly vulnerable in the transition between direct-steer and counter-steer speeds. So, trying to keep my speed above the threshold both saves my energy and keeps me at maneuvering speed. I do this by slowing down when approaching a red light, with the hope it will change to green before I arrive. I also try to stop a few meters back from a red light so I have space to get up to maneuvering speed before entering an intersection without having to stand and stomp my pedals.
- narwally 6y ago
  I do the same thing. intersections are the most dangerous place you can be on two wheels, so having speed when you go through them means you're in them for a shorter period of time and you have more maneuverability and control of your bike.

benrbray 6y ago

Cyclists break rules because the rules were not written with us in mind. The tired straw man argument against cyclists has them saying "treat me like a car!" one minute and "treat me like a pedestrian!" the next. But really, I just want to be treated like a cyclist. There are three major classes of transportation, not just two [@]. Here are some road rules that I regularly break for my own safety: > In most places, it illegal to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk. However, most roads near me have no bike lanes. My city (Atlanta) has a notorious problem with highway traffic spilling out into the city, and as a result drivers are viciously impatient and I've had too many close calls while riding my bike on major roads. I ride on the sidewalk when there is no other safe option. > In some places, it is illegal for a bicycle to pass a red light, even when it's all clear. However, when I'm riding on the road, there is usually a pack of impatient drivers waiting behind me. If don't accelerate quickly enough, they will honk at me and/or pass me within inches. Usually, I can put a safe distance between myself and the cars behind me if I start moving a little before the light turns green. > Regarding sidewalk riding again: My city has too many one-way streets. This is fine for cars, who travel a longer distance on average than I do. But for short bike trips, not being able to use the sidewalk would increase trip time by 3-4x. This is a problem solved by separated bike lanes. Not to mention the fact that we rarely hold drivers accountable for their rule-breaking. As a bicyclist, my mistakes can are only lethal to myself. A driver's mistakes kill other people. Here's also a list of dangerous traffic behavior that SHOULD be illegal but ISN'T, because the law is written for the convenience of drivers, not the safety of pedestrians and cyclists: > Right-turn-on-red should be illegal anywhere there is a pedestrian signal. When turning on red, drivers are looking to the left for oncoming traffic, and rarely look for pedestrians to the right until it is too late. When the pedestrian light is on, there should be ZERO chance of being hit by a law-abiding car! > Left turns should have a dedicated lane and signal. Left-turn-on-green puts drivers in direct conflict with pedestrians, for the same reasons as right-turn-on-red. > Speeding is too pervasive, and speed limits should be strictly enforced. Failing to use a turn signal should also be ticketed more often. I would support camera enforcement if I didn't think it would leak into public spaces beyond just roads. > Freight trucks and other vehicles pulling a trailer too often swerve outside their lane. This is extremely dangerous and should be punished. [@] Really, their are four modes of ground transportation, but Americans don't believe in trains.

mulmen 6y ago

I ride bicycles and motorcyles and frequently break the letter of the law for my own safety. Two wheeled transportation just simply is not considered or understood by transit authorities, at least not in my city. I will never stop behind a car. That just is not going to happen. I don't want to be the meat on a texting driver stopped car sandwich. This means some amount of lane filtering/splitting. I will ride my bike on a sidewalk to avoid traffic, even if there is a "bike lane" if I don't feel that lane is safe, such as when it is on a major route with lots of traffic. I will not give you room to pass if there are parked cars on the side of the road. I'm not going to get doored so you can get to your destination 30 seconds faster. When you're on two wheels all cars are trying to kill you. No other threat model makes sense. This says nothing of the lack of knowledge on the part of drivers as to what motorcycles and bicycles are actually entitled to do and their willingness to be vigilantes to enforce their perception of the law, even when it endangers my life.

soperj 6y ago
>When you're on two wheels all cars are trying to kill you. No other threat model makes sense. I realize this is a low value comment, but this is absolutely true. Whether through negligence or not, they display over and over again that it's true.
- romanoderoma 6y ago
  If it was true, there would be no biker left alive
- mumblemumble 6y ago
  I don't know that it is that drivers are actively trying to kill me. I think it's that there's some phenomenon, yet to be documented by science, that causes people to become more solipsistic when they are operating a motor vehicle. The net result being, they don't recognize a clear moral difference between cyclists, pedestrians, and orange construction barrels, and see their most noteworthy difference as being the fact that some move faster than others.
  - 6y ago

meitham 6y ago

I lost count of the times I was nearly hit by cyclists in London who think traffic lights don't apply to them!

InitialLastName 6y ago
Similarly, I've lost count of the number of times I've been nearly hit by cars in [everywhere] who think stop signs and crosswalk rules don't apply to them.
cultus 6y ago
If it weren't for cars, traffic wouldn't need to be so tightly controlled because the stakes would be so much lower. While I don't condone running red lights, driver rage at cyclists running red lights or pedestrians jay-walking (a term invented by the auto industry) would be far better directed at drivers who don't take the task of operating a multi-thousand pound machine at high velocities seriously.
belorn 6y ago
I think the word "nearly hit" is the key. I have personally lost count of the times I have seen strollers with babies on heavy trafficked bike roads, and 3-5 years old on training cycles. I have however yet to hear a single accident where a cyclist have hit one of those extremely vulnerable individuals being hit, which if it happened would likely result in the child being killed.

WarOnPrivacy 6y ago

First bicycle lesson for kids here is to ride on the sidewalk. The other options just invite broken bones and head trauma.

InitialLastName 6y ago
In many places, the other options are the only legal ones. In NYC, any bicyclist over 12 years old or with wheels over 26" is required to ride in the street.
- RhysU 6y ago
  Except for the food delivery dudes riding battery powered bicycles on the sidewalk. Those guys get a pass.
- WarOnPrivacy 6y ago
  >In NYC, any bicyclist over 12 years old or with wheels over 26" is required to ride in the street. Here, that's a good way to die. We can say that because bicyclists are regularly run down. Pedestrians too. It's the natural outcome when you densely pack retirees with drive thru pharmacies/liquor stores.

mindslight 6y ago

As a former cyclist, the headline is 100% bullshit. I generally broke laws for the sake of efficiency. Having said that, there is a huge distinction between breaking overbearing laws designed for cars, and going against the common norms of the road. Treating red lights and stop signs as yields is fine. Ignoring the existence of intersections and forcing drivers to yield to you is being an asshole on a good day, and deadly on a bad one. The things I did do for safety (eg riding out far enough to not get doored, taking a lane to turn or avoid obstacles) generally weren't illegal. Although I could see this being different in a place with different laws that weren't worded in terms of safety.

raffraffraff 6y ago

I cycle a lot, and I don't drive. And yes, I sometimes break rules for my safety. For example, I refuse to use stupidly designed cycle lanes that: * Mount the foot path and then return to the road. * Force me to use pedestrian crossings at roundabouts. * Railroad me onto the side of the road when I actually want to make a turn (ie: force me to dismount and use a pedestrian crossing instead of using the correct lane for that turn) * Vanish abruptly But a lot of cyclists I see (in my city anyway) are just inconsiderate assholes who have no road etiquette. They run red lights, ignore one way systems, cycle on pedestrian paths, or (the very worst) cycle the wrong way on cycle paths. And don't get me started on lycra clad (always male) cyclists who 'come at you' side-by-side on a cycle path that fits exactly two cyclists. I'm not sure if they expect you to slide into another dimension, but a loud, sharp c-word generally jolts them out of their idiocy.

mcfunk 6y ago
'I'm not sure if they expect you to slide into another dimension, but a loud, sharp c-word generally jolts them out of their idiocy.' Thanks for the entirely accurate and entertaining read. There are definitely many c-words among us, and I assume you don't mean 'commuters' -- most of those of us are just trying to get along without getting squashed, and that often means using infrastructure in ways other than the intended, because it was never intended for our safety.

heikkilevanto 6y ago

Depends a lot where you are from. Here in Copenhagen, biking is a fairly safe and well respected way of transport. Pity it does not seem to be so in many other places.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

throw7 6y ago

Around me, there are a couple of intersections which have detectors to change the signal light, so if there's no car around you're not getting a green light. Things are getting better I guess... in NY, "complete streets" was signed in 2011. I consider that pretty recent though. Even post 2011, there were projects near me that were already underway and getting completed that completely ignored cycling. -.-

throwaway9191a 6y ago
Virginia(US) has a law regarding this as well. "B. ... if the driver or rider (i) comes to a full and complete stop at the intersection for two complete cycles of the traffic light or for two minutes, whichever is shorter, ..." https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title46.2/chapter8/section46.2-833/ https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title46.2/chapter8/secti... Which makes a lot of sense. I've been in this situation in my car as well. The light just doesn't change.

gwbas1c 6y ago

I thought the article would list out some of the rules that cyclists break. I'm sure 100% of people break some rule at some point, so saying 100% of the participants admitted to breaking some rule, is like saying 100% of people fart in public. But, anyway, for the 18 months or so that I biked to work, I tried to follow the rules. Yes, I rolled through some stop signs. (Don't we all, no matter what kind of vehicle we're piloting?) The much slower speed on a bike makes it easier to look at all incoming lanes before you enter the intersection. But, I've had close calls in a car with cyclists. I've had close calls on a bike with cars. I once went over my handlebars when some doofus bolted across the street on a bike without looking. People are bad at following the rules of the road. It doesn't matter if it's a car or a bicycle.

mgarfias 6y ago

clearly the authors never went to portland to deal with the idiot bicyclists there.

sleepysysadmin 6y ago

>Additionally, they are often motivated by concerns for their own safety, because they feel like an afterthought in a transportation system dominated by cars. Because bike lanes were an afterthought. Cycling is very unsafe. Originally bikes were expected to ride on sidewalks. The problem arose was that sidewalks were unsafe. Pedestrians would just walk into the way of the cyclists and the cyclists would be hurt. So politicians looking to raise tax revenues started making it difficult to ride a bike. Helmets are required, bans from sidewalks, 20km/h speed limits of bike lanes/paths. Many reflectors on the bike. Bell or horn on the bike needed. This is all to harass cyclists. Now that bikes are on roads, now you have cars just driving into the way of cyclsts and hurting them; possibly even killing them. Why are cyclists always being hurt by everyone else?

MereInterest 6y ago
> Originally bikes were expected to ride on sidewalks. Depends a bit by what you mean by "originally". In the early 1900s, bikes traveled in the street. Pedestrians traveled in the street. Everybody was in the street. The idea that the streets are the sole province of the car, and that pedestrians/bikers may cross the street only where it does not inconvenience the car, is the result of marketing to avoid cars being liable for pedestrian injury/death. So, same story of cars being overly prominent, but stepping back another 50 years.