3 ms·
Right, that's why the word "could" is in there. All of the crimes I mentioned have an element of either intent or fault attached to them. Coming close to some
by pmiller2 6y ago
Right, that's why the word "could" is in there. All of the crimes I mentioned have an element of either intent or fault attached to them. Coming close to someone, even at speed, without intending to do any harm is not "attempted murder" or assault in any form. This is fortunate, because to pass a cyclist, one often is forced to come within a few feet of them to accomplish the maneuver.
- jessaustin 6y ago... to pass a cyclist, one often is forced to come within a few feet of them to accomplish the maneuver. Somehow I'm reading "within a few feet" as "six inches". IME bicycles are much narrower than automobiles. If it's safe to pass an automobile, it's safe to pass a cyclist while leaving at least eight feet. If it's not safe to pass, don't pass.
- taeric 6y agoCyclist get pushed by the air more than cars. Give a bit of extra room.
- adrianN 6y agoCyclists are also much more likely to swerve because a bee hit their eye or their chain slipped.
- pmiller2 6y agoSounds like you're a little biased when you're reading "within a few feet" as "six inches."
- jessaustin 6y agoI'm biased by experience. Why did you write "within"? Three feet is an acceptable distance to allow if you're traveling less than 40mph. Less than three feet is not. This seems beside the point? Above you seemed to imply it is inherently challenging to pass a cyclist. That is only the case if one attempts to pass in inappropriate situations. Cyclists have at least as much right to the road as motorists have.