3 ms·

>As a pedestrian in NYC I feel far more endangered by bikes than I do by automobiles. This is why legislating by "feelings" is a bad idea. Automobiles are a fa

>As a pedestrian in NYC I feel far more endangered by bikes than I do by automobiles. This is why legislating by "feelings" is a bad idea. Automobiles are a far larger and more lethal risk.

yellowapple 3y ago
And that risk is mitigated by traffic rules, separation of pedestrian v. vehicular traffic, etc. That goes out the window when you have a category of vehicles that routinely ignores those mitigations.
- bazeblackwood 3y ago
  Even with those mitigations, they're still more deadly.
jodrellblank 3y ago
That isn't why it's a bad idea at all; people don't walk and instead drive because walking "feels" unsafe. Legislate changes to make walking "feel" safer and people will walk instead of drive, and then will be safer because the changes will be things like separated walkways from cars, more guarded pedestrian crossings, road design which slows traffic, and more people walking will mean fewer cars on the road.
- whimsicalism 3y ago
  But bikers are not a large reason people aren't pedestrians. I agree that a certain level of abstraction 'feel' is important, but we shouldn't legislate by 'feel' about how people 'feel' about bikes, that is one level of 'feel' too many.
  - tristor 3y ago
    > But bikers are not a large reason people aren't pedestrians. They are a significant piece of the reason in NYC, although car-centric road design is a larger piece. You and several other commenters continue to ignore people pointing out seriously problems that are localized in NYC by quoting stats that are for the entire country.
7speter 3y ago
I don’t see too many cars mounting sidewalks as I do bikes and scooters do (daily occurrence, not to mention 220+ pound guys who ride around on cheap underpowered scooters in the street), but yeah anecdotal data.
verve_rat 3y ago
Safety is not the only consideration. If we don't consider comfort then people might stop walking because it is an unpleasant experience.
ufmace 3y ago
This is the exact opposite of what the article is saying. When somebody is deciding whether to walk or drive to their destination, they don't pull up a scientific journal and consult the latest studies, they think about whether it feels safe and dignified. If you ignore the perceived threat of cyclists whizzing every which way while ignoring all traffic laws, you'll find fewer people choosing to walk and have no idea why.
nullc 3y ago
> Automobiles are a far larger and more lethal risk. even when normalized by passenger miles? In general cars are quite lethal in aggregate but not once normalized for usage-- we drive an awful lot.

>As a pedestrian in NYC I feel far more endangered by bikes than I do by automobiles. This is why legislating by "feelings" is a bad idea. Automobiles are a far larger and more lethal risk.

yellowapple 3y ago

And that risk is mitigated by traffic rules, separation of pedestrian v. vehicular traffic, etc. That goes out the window when you have a category of vehicles that routinely ignores those mitigations.

bazeblackwood 3y ago
Even with those mitigations, they're still more deadly.

jodrellblank 3y ago

That isn't why it's a bad idea at all; people don't walk and instead drive because walking "feels" unsafe. Legislate changes to make walking "feel" safer and people will walk instead of drive, and then will be safer because the changes will be things like separated walkways from cars, more guarded pedestrian crossings, road design which slows traffic, and more people walking will mean fewer cars on the road.

whimsicalism 3y ago
But bikers are not a large reason people aren't pedestrians. I agree that a certain level of abstraction 'feel' is important, but we shouldn't legislate by 'feel' about how people 'feel' about bikes, that is one level of 'feel' too many.
- tristor 3y ago
  > But bikers are not a large reason people aren't pedestrians. They are a significant piece of the reason in NYC, although car-centric road design is a larger piece. You and several other commenters continue to ignore people pointing out seriously problems that are localized in NYC by quoting stats that are for the entire country.

7speter 3y ago

I don’t see too many cars mounting sidewalks as I do bikes and scooters do (daily occurrence, not to mention 220+ pound guys who ride around on cheap underpowered scooters in the street), but yeah anecdotal data.

verve_rat 3y ago

Safety is not the only consideration. If we don't consider comfort then people might stop walking because it is an unpleasant experience.

ufmace 3y ago

This is the exact opposite of what the article is saying. When somebody is deciding whether to walk or drive to their destination, they don't pull up a scientific journal and consult the latest studies, they think about whether it feels safe and dignified. If you ignore the perceived threat of cyclists whizzing every which way while ignoring all traffic laws, you'll find fewer people choosing to walk and have no idea why.

nullc 3y ago

> Automobiles are a far larger and more lethal risk. even when normalized by passenger miles? In general cars are quite lethal in aggregate but not once normalized for usage-- we drive an awful lot.