4 ms·

> I assure you almost all car drivers get annoyed by slow-moving[1] obstacles in their path, whether car, camel or bike. > > Why on earth would you think that s

> I assure you almost all car drivers get annoyed by slow-moving[1] obstacles in their path, whether car, camel or bike. > > Why on earth would you think that someone would not get annoyed? Oh I’m so sorry. Clearly driver annoyance is far more important than avoiding cycle and pedestrian, death and injury. Please go right ahead, intimidate and mow those slow moving obstacles. Prehaps driver should take some time to realise that cyclist don’t like holding up traffic either, they don’t do it for finishes, they do it because the lack to cycle infrastructure means they have no other options. Don’t want bike slowing down car traffic, build dedicated infrastructure for them so they don’t have to share the same space as cars. Everybody wins, cyclists don’t need to worry about being hit by cars, car don’t have to get stuck behind bikes.

lelanthran 4y ago
> Oh I’m so sorry. Clearly driver annoyance is far more important than avoiding cycle and pedestrian, death and injury. Please go right ahead, intimidate and mow those slow moving obstacles. That wasn't the point I made. People get annoyed by obstacles; it's a people reaction, not a car-driver reaction. Are you seriously saying that cyclists won't be annoyed if they were forced to share their route with much slower moving obstacles?
- avianlyric 4y ago
  How does annoyance justify not allowing cyclist to use the road safely? > Are you seriously saying that cyclists won't be annoyed if they were forced to share their route with much slower moving obstacles? I'm sure they would. But it's much harder to kill a person with a bike during a road rage incident, than it is to kill a person with a car. That's the fundamental difference here, cyclist annoyance has never led to pedestrian death, can you honestly say the same is true of car drivers?
  - lelanthran 4y ago
    > How does annoyance justify not allowing cyclist to use the road safely? I'm not justifying "not allowing cyclist to use the road safely", I'm pointing out that people don't like obstacles. It's not specific to cyclists like you make it seem, and not specific to car drivers like you make it seem. It's unreasonable to expect that people not be people.

lelanthran 4y ago

> Oh I’m so sorry. Clearly driver annoyance is far more important than avoiding cycle and pedestrian, death and injury. Please go right ahead, intimidate and mow those slow moving obstacles. That wasn't the point I made. People get annoyed by obstacles; it's a people reaction, not a car-driver reaction. Are you seriously saying that cyclists won't be annoyed if they were forced to share their route with much slower moving obstacles?

avianlyric 4y ago
How does annoyance justify not allowing cyclist to use the road safely? > Are you seriously saying that cyclists won't be annoyed if they were forced to share their route with much slower moving obstacles? I'm sure they would. But it's much harder to kill a person with a bike during a road rage incident, than it is to kill a person with a car. That's the fundamental difference here, cyclist annoyance has never led to pedestrian death, can you honestly say the same is true of car drivers?
- lelanthran 4y ago
  > How does annoyance justify not allowing cyclist to use the road safely? I'm not justifying "not allowing cyclist to use the road safely", I'm pointing out that people don't like obstacles. It's not specific to cyclists like you make it seem, and not specific to car drivers like you make it seem. It's unreasonable to expect that people not be people.