5 ms·
I also have this complaint. Where I live there are miles and miles of closed-access bike trails. The state spent loads of money turning old railbeds into trai
by lp0_on_fire 5y ago
I also have this complaint. Where I live there are miles and miles of closed-access bike trails. The state spent loads of money turning old railbeds into trails specifically for pedestrians and bicycles.
But those aren't good enough for the exercise man. He has to ride on the winding, hilly, full-of-blindspots roads where cars routinely are doing 45+. More than once I've nearly gone into the ditch because exercise man was in the middle of the road over the crest of a hill. (I separate people who are commuting on their bikes from the ones that are clearing doing it for recreation).
I'm all for biking - it's great for your body and the environment but I question those that choose to co-mingle with cars when there are other options. In a collision between 250 pounds of bike + human vs a ton of plastic and steel...the ton of plastic and steel is going to win pretty much every time.
- kyleee 5y agosounds like you were driving quite unsafely when you nearly went into the ditch, i'd slow down on such roads
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- lp0_on_fire 5y agoSounds like you don't often drive outside the a city. I live in a county with a _significant_ Amish population and am well accustomed to non-motorized vehicles on the road. The difference between the Amish and most cyclists is that they recognized that they're vulnerable on their horse and buggy, follow the rules of the road, and they generally stick to the side roads whenever they can for obvious reasons. I'm continuously amazed that HN, a site full of smart people, can't seem to wrap its head around the fact that riding a bicycle on a road with a bunch of vehicles is _inherently_ more dangerous for the cyclist than it is for the driver. Should drivers pay attention more? absolutely. If I had a magic wand to wave that would instantly add separate lanes for cyclists I would but the fact is that America's streets are mixed use. It's all well and good that the driver of the car is "responsible for not hitting you" but what's that matter if you get killed or paralyzed because your hubris demands that you be able to share a shoulder-less road with tractor trailers?
- kyleee 5y ago"I'm continuously amazed that HN, a site full of smart people, can't seem to wrap its head around the fact that riding a bicycle on a road with a bunch of vehicles is _inherently_ more dangerous for the cyclist than it is for the driver." can you find me one person who actually thinks this? or did you just make this up. i am personally in the reality camp and find cycling in traffic to be quite a bit more dangerous than being piloting a car
- lp0_on_fire 5y ago> i am personally in the reality camp and find cycling in traffic to be quite a bit more dangerous than being piloting a car That is literally what I said but you just had to get the snark in, didn't you?
- kyleee 5y agook ignore that comment, but tell me who believes cycling in traffic isn't more dangerous than driving a car since you've indicated that HN (the monolith) seems to think that
- edmcnulty101 5y agoThey're not having a problem because of the speed...they're having a problem because the excercise man in front of them is blocking traffic.
- edmcnulty101 5y agoYou must live in Colorado? Or someplace like it. Excercise man rides on roads that are already dangerous for cars: roads with no shoulder, windy, high elevation, icy, huge drops on either side. Excercise man makes that situation much more dangerous. I'm rarely upset when I see an excercise man was inured in the newspaper.