3 ms·
A lot of comments point out situations with car drivers not being considerate of cyclists. Not to defend car drivers, but you could interchange car drivers with
by numlock86 6y ago
A lot of comments point out situations with car drivers not being considerate of cyclists. Not to defend car drivers, but you could interchange car drivers with cyclists and cyclists with pedestrians and you would end up with people giving the same anecdotes. You see cyclists speeding through "walk only" areas just as you see cars ignoring bike lanes or giving space to cyclists in general. You'll see just as much people on the phone or even texting while riding a bike, too. Et cetera.
You might argue a bike hitting a pedestrian probably won't be as lethal as two tonnes of SUV hitting a cyclist, but that's a lame justification curled in the deepest realms of double standards. There's plenty of examples when cyclists didn't care enough about cars because the car is supposed to act as the cyclist is apparently clearly in a disadvantage. Same with pedestrians and cyclists, again.
Again, not to defend or blame anyone. I am driving my car maybe two times per month and I am mostly on bike, foot or public transport. But from my experience you just have assholes with egocentric justifications and reasoning on all sides.
- matsemann 6y agoBut what is your point? Your whole post is meaningless, it's just useless centrism with fluffy words about "both sides" in order to exonerate drivers.
- numlock86 6y agoThe point is that comments (in regard to the article) are littered with anecdotes about cyclists getting in danger because of cars. It's a one-sided view. There's problems on both sides equally. Conflicts of this kind are waved off as "the driver was an asshole", which might be correct in single cases, but misses the whole point of the actual problem completely.
- matsemann 6y ago> There's problems on both sides equally. No, it's not. A driver is driving something lethal that kills thousands each year. Don't try to pretend a cyclist being remotely close to a driver when it comes to severity of the actions. It's not a "one-sided view", it's the truth that drivers are far more dangerous than cyclists. If 99 scientists says something and one quack says something else, the truth isn't somewhere in the middle, you know. > but misses the whole point of the actual problem completely True, that cyclists need better infrastructure and similar stuff. What also misses the point is to start devil's advocating that "cyclists are just as bad".
- hytdstd 6y agoAssholes in a car are more dangerous than assholes on a bike, simple as.
- adrianN 6y agoMost cyclist activists that I know advocate for separate infrastructure for bicycles precisely because being on the pavement is unsafe for pedestrians (and annoying for cyclists) and being on the road is unsafe for cyclists (and annoying for cars).
- pharmakom 6y agoThe number of pedestrians harmed by people riding bikes is minuscule. They would be reduced further if there were safe cycle infrastructure so that people weren’t so scared that they ride on the pavement. Pedestrians and people on bikes are both victims of our car dominated culture. Consider that more pedestrians are killed by motorists mounting sidewalks each year than are killed by cyclists.