5 ms·

No, it is not. But it is also not OK to prevent cyclists to kill themselves by car. I've witnessed an accident recently when the car in front of me hit a cyclis

by kika 13y ago

No, it is not. But it is also not OK to prevent cyclists to kill themselves by car. I've witnessed an accident recently when the car in front of me hit a cyclist. He was: a) riding at night without lights b) running red light c) against the traffic d) without a helmet I'd say this guy (Stanford student, which IMHO implies some intellect) could serve as an encyclopedic definition of our Bay Area cyclist. Cyclists who do not obey stop signs are vast majority, about 50% cyclists run red lights, etc, etc, etc. If you don't want to die, stop trying.

busterarm 13y ago
scratch off point d. Helmets don't really do anything to protect you unless you practically fall off your bike standing still. I've seen brains on the street from at least two low-speed bike accidents where the cyclist was wearing a helmet. Also, it's not that all cyclists are disobeying the law. Those are just the ones you choose to see. Drivers and pedestrians alike just aren't looking. I always obey traffic laws on my bike. Edit: All these anecdotes are great and all, but it's not like we're going to be reading stories from all the people with brain injuries or who died. Cycling lanes and infrastructure do significantly more to make riding safer than helmets and helmet laws do. http://www.bicycling.com/sites/default/files/uploads/BI-June-13-Helmet.pdf http://www.bicycling.com/sites/default/files/uploads/BI-June... http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/19036/feds-will-stop-hyping-effectiveness-of-bike-helmets/ http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/19036/feds-will-sto... http://bicyclesafe.com/helmets.html http://bicyclesafe.com/helmets.html
- kika 13y ago
  this guy got injured right where thickest part of the standard styrofoam helmet is. About half way above the eyebrow to the temple. He survived (but there was a lot of blood) but with the helmet he'd walked from the scene with a few scratches on his knees. I'm not saying "all". But I drive about 400 miles per week (long commute) and I can say that I've seen approximately 5 bicyclist last month which stopped at the stop sign. They really stand out of the crowd.
- CaveTech 13y ago
  This summer I was hit by a truck pulling a wide trailer. The truck overpassed me, but the driver neglected the fact that his trailer was about a foot wider than his truck. It smashed me from behind and laid me out on the pavement. I was lucky enough to not fall under the trailer, but still smashed hard onto the road and nearby sidewalk. My helmet, without a doubt, saved me from a serious head injury. I walked away with some extensive road rash and a minor concussion.
- brianobush 13y ago
  Helmets protect you. I slid down a street and my head bounced on the pavement - without a helmet I would have been much worse off. The road rash was enough. Another incident was a truck mirror that grazed my helmet. Nothing major, but in all, the helmet does its job.
  - adambard 13y ago
    > Another incident was a truck mirror that grazed my helmet. Of course, if you weren't wearing the helmet, the truck mirror may or may not have touched you at all.
    - busterarm 13y ago
      This. I saw a bus mirror actually catch a guy's helmet and pick him up off his bike by his head, hauling him down the street. Had he not been wearing a helmet, that never would have happened.
      - fallinghawks 13y ago
        I hope you aren't saying that seriously. If those vehicles caught bicyclists in the helmet, they were both just too close to the cyclists. What if the cyclist swerved an inch to avoid a rock in the road, or even simply turned his/her head to look at something? Yeah, whamo.
      - brianobush 13y ago
        Thus everyone should avoid helmets! They can kill. Seriously: Outliers do not describe a population.
    - brianobush 13y ago
      So you are fine with approx an inch clearance with passing vehicles? I don't think so.
- notjosh 13y ago
  I had an accident recently as a cyclist with a vehicle, and I thank my helmet a lot for my lack of injury. The vehicle was a van, and turned right across me going straight (which normally I'd see clearly and avoid, but the way they hesitated implied they'd seen me so I rolled through. Alas.) I'd wager I was going around 20mph/30kph as I hit the side panel. Hips/shoulders first, then I felt my head whiplash into it. Without a helmet, I'd expect at least a mild concussion. With a helmet, I was able to roll away relatively unscathed (minor cuts/bruises) after we exchanged details. Helmets can help at all/many speeds. They're not a perfect solution, but they're great sometimes. Don't discount them so bluntly :)
- 3825 13y ago
  > pedestrians alike just aren't looking You mentioned you obey the law so you probably don't do this. Even if the law does not prohibit riding on the sidewalk, you should never ride on the sidewalk. Just wanted to take this time to remind everyone that bicycles do not belong on the sidewalk.
  - fphhotchips 13y ago
    I disagree. Bicycles belong on sidewalks far more than they belong on roads. That said, perhaps it's situational. My city has large amounts of arterial roads with heavy car traffic and sparse pedestrians. The speed limit on those roads is about 60 kph (about 40 mph), and I much prefer to stay off them as a cyclist. It would be much safer if I was allowed to cycle on the sidewalk in those areas, as there's little to no foot traffic. In the city itself, different matter. There's much more foot traffic, but the speed limit is lower, so perhaps it's best there to be on the road.
    - 3825 13y ago
      One of the first things my driving instructor taught me is that you have to assert your right. A measly bicycle has as much right to be on the road as a Cadillac Escalade. At the risk of preaching to the choir, a bicycle should take up a full lane on the road unless there is a special bicycle lane. I am not saying go crazy and ride your bicycles on freeways. This is more about city streets. That being said, I truly believe the way to have fewer cars striking cyclists is to have more cyclists assert themselves on the road.
      - busterarm 13y ago
        Cycling on highways I'm pretty sure is illegal everywhere, thankfully. I'm also an advocate of taking up a full lane, but the laws in many places (like New York) actually require you to ride to the right/shoulder where feasible. Unfortunately that's not really clearly defined, so even though you have a legal right to a full lane, cops will still give you a ticket. Having narrowly avoided being doored a few times, I won't ride anywhere within a foot's range of a completely open car door.
- skierscott 13y ago
  Current helmets protect against impact injuries (eg, the pavement hitting your head). Yes, when the speed/energy is high, helmets won't do much. But when the speed is moderate, helmets help a lot. Then, there's also wearing the helmet properly, something many bicyclists fail to do. The helmets today are only tested with straight on impacts: they're tested by dropping them straight down on the crown of the helmet. But that doesn't happen in the real world. You're moving, meaning you're hit at an angle, meaning that there's a potential for a diffuse axonal injury[1]: the rotational component of the injury. MIPS[2] has helmets that help protect against that. Is wearing a helmet safer than not wearing a helmet? Without a doubt. [1]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffuse_axonal_injury https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffuse_axonal_injury [2]:http://mipshelmet.com/home http://mipshelmet.com/home
- pjungwir 13y ago
  I saw a bicyclist flip over a car door. He just had a baseball cap on, but it was torn to shreds. I'm glad that wasn't his forehead on the asphalt.
- SkyMarshal 13y ago
  Wearing a helmet is always better than not wearing one. You never know what kind of accident you might be in. Sure there are some a helmet may not protect you from, but there are plenty where a helmet will. It's a stupid, pointless risk not to take such an easy precaution to reduce your odds of permanent brain injury. Case in point, a few years I was on the home stretch of a 50 mile weekend bikeride, less than a mile from home. I was tired, dehydrated, and fuzzy-brained, but still alert enough to be paying close attention to the traffic around me. I was riding ~10-15mph in the far left lane of one-way 4-lane primary thoroughfare (35mph speed limit). 4-way intersection ahead, figured I'd cross the intersection and ride up onto the very wide sidewalk on the far side so I could get out of traffic, slow to a crawl, relax, and take it easy the rest of the way home. As I came up to the intersection I angled slightly toward the sidewalk ramp on the other side, then turned my head around to the right to watch the traffic coming up behind me to make sure no car was going to make a left turn at the intersection and either turn into me or cut me off. All clear with cars, no left turners, but when I looked ahead again I saw I'd miss-judged my path and was going to miss the on-ramp by about 5ft and hit the nearly 1ft-high curb instead. Going too fast to correct course and hit the ramp, or to slam on the breaks and stop, only thing I could do was try jump the bike, or at least the front wheel, over the curb. Too tired, botched the maneuver, not quite high enough, front wheel hit the curb about halfway up and went from around 10-12mph to 0 in a millisecond. Of course me and the rest of the bike kept going, me slingshotting over the handlebars (bike shoes clipped in so angular momentum at work here) and then piledriven head first into the concrete sidewalk. My head landed first with a loud crack, then my body landed on my head, then the bike on top of my body. I might have been out for a few seconds, not sure, but the first thing I remember was thinking, "ok don't move a muscle, just lay perfectly till, you might have just broken your back and even the slightest movement could cause a tear in your spinal cord." Slowly, gradually, tentatively I started testing that individual fingers and toes worked, then hands and feet, then arms and legs, and finally body and neck. Everything was ok, but I was still lying there not daring to try to get up. Next thought was, "ok, that loud crack was my head hitting the concrete, I probably have a concussion. gotta be careful, don't black out." Reached up to my head, started feeling around. Helmet broken in places, totalled as designed, but still attached, strapped on, conformed to my head. Still lying on the sidewalk with bike on top of me, afraid of further injury, and feeling around my head checking for injury. No blood, no pain anywhere. Disbelief. Check again, thoroughly. Still no blood, no pain. More disbelief. Can I really have just had a crash that bad, where my head alone absorbed the entire impact of my 200lb self and ~20lb bike, without any injury besides skinned hands and some bruises? Mindbogglingly, yes that was exactly what happened. That helmet absorbed the whole damn thing, and I walked away without either a concussion or any kind of neck or spinal injury, just some scrapes and bruises. So yeah, just wear a helmet. Even if you have 10 accidents where a helmet is irrelevant and just 1 where it is, it will have been worth it. If my anecdotal evidence doesn't impress you, then think of it terms of Expected Payoff E(X). Wearing a helmet costs nothing of consequence, yet the benefits could range from 0 (you're never in a crash your entire life and never need it, or you're in a crash where a helmet makes absolutely no difference) to everything (you're in a crash that would cause permanent brain damage or death without a helmet protection). You can see how the averages work out. Humans are very poor by default at evaluating risks that have low odds of occurring, but very high consequences if they do occur. Bike crashes are exactly this kind of risk, so don't be a typical human here - don't blow these types of risks off, discount them, or ignore them. Be smart, mitigate or neutralize them.
dmm 13y ago
I see cars run stop signs and red lights all the time. I see cars speed everywhere, including neighborhoods with poor visibility http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-group_favoritism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-group_favoritism
- CamperBob2 13y ago
  I think I was... what? 4? 5? ... when my parents explained that your reasoning is invalid.
- kika 13y ago
  I see them too. I also see them got ticketed heavily and some even lost the privilege to drive. But I can't say that vast majority of cars run stop signs. Your link is not relevant, sorry.
  - dmm 13y ago
    You're not a cyclist so you judge them differently than you judge cars. Cyclists do get ticketed, even when they are commiting crimes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhWCFi3JIcU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhWCFi3JIcU
    - kika 13y ago
      I do not bike to work, right, it's 50 miles one way. But I ride the bike for recreational purposes.
    - jackmaney 13y ago
      Holy crap, that is the first time I have ever heard of a bicyclist being pulled over and ticketed. Good on the cop that issued that citation!
      - collyw 13y ago
        Here in Barcelona I have heard of more cyclists get ticket than car owners (probably I know a lot more people that ride bikes admittedly). For listening to music while biking amongst other things. I guess they are an easy target for police.
casual_slacker 13y ago
When you say "running stop signs", do you mean a rolling slow-down/speed up if they're the first at the intersection? I do that all the time, not sure if it's legal but it's a pain to stop fully. With cars around I always stop, especially in SF I'd be insane not to.
- socillion 13y ago
  Rolling stops on bicycle are only legal in one state - Idaho.
- tsotha 13y ago
  A rolling stop is illegal in CA.
- kika 13y ago
  some of them just speed through the intersection if they consider it safe, I've heard screeching tires a few times, which means they misjudged. Stopping at every stop sign is a financial pain for a motorist, because MPG drops considerably. So what? Stop sign is a stop sign, it means "stop". The solution to this is not ignoring signs because it's a "pain" but to replace stop signs with roundabouts, like in Europe.
  - adambard 13y ago
    Relevant to this discussion: Roundabouts do cyclists no favors whatsoever. This article cites a number of others on the subject: http://www.cascade.org/2010/11/circular-logic/ http://www.cascade.org/2010/11/circular-logic/
    - kika 13y ago
      I'm not thinking about special favors for cyclists, roundabouts allow everyone not to stop if there's no cross traffic.
hristov 13y ago
Cyclists running red lights are a big problem in LA. I am very much in favor of cycling, but you have to follow the laws. I know it is a pain in the ass to stop at every stoplight when you have to use your own muscles to accelerate, but you have to do it.
- busterarm 13y ago
  Cycling laws are the biggest problem in LA. Depending on where you are in LA, you're either can ride on the sidewalk or you can't. There's no consistency. I'm not in favor of ANYONE riding on the sidewalk, but cops in LA in areas where you can ride on the sidewalk like to be dicks and give cyclists bogus tickets for riding in the street. http://ladotbikeblog.wordpress.com/2010/08/04/la-county-sidewalk-riding-part1/ http://ladotbikeblog.wordpress.com/2010/08/04/la-county-side...
chockablock 13y ago
Quite unfair. When I commuted by bike in SF for a couple years, I wore hi-vis clothing, front and rear lights even when it wasn't dark yet (especially at dusk!), and stuck to designated bike routes with calmer traffic when possible. And every day I saw hundreds of other cyclists just like me who didn't have a death wish. The (small-y) yahoos who ride dangerously certainly stand out more, but it's depressing to have folks like you throw up their hands and say, effectively: Too bad there's nothing we can do to make cycling safer, since too many cyclists just "want to die".
- kika 13y ago
  I don't see such classy combination at once often, it's just a sum of everything I see. But running lights and stops is very-very common here.
- 001sky 13y ago
  SF has problems with people running lights and stop signs because of the hills. I think its dis-ingenuous to deny this. It may be different in soma/mission, where the topography is completely different. But in the financial district (lots of 1 ways, no left turns, hills, tourists, etc) and around market street...the whole industry of bike messengers (ie, 30 years of history) is predicated on them not following traffic rules. Actually, that might be a little strong. But you get my point. They make money because they are faster...and the way to be faster than traffic is not not go with the flow.
  - chockablock 13y ago
    >I think its dis-ingenuous to deny this I didn't mention stop signs or red lights in my comment. I just pointed out that there's a large population of conscientious, safety-minded cyclists out there who get ignored in these types of discussions. Your invocation of law-breaking bike messengers in the second half of your comment is in fact a perfect recapitulation of the tendency I was referring to!
    - 001sky 13y ago
      Previous commenter was giving an example of 'suicidal' riding. The fact that others ride in a responsible manner does not serve as a counter-factual. That's all I was saying. That, and I believe that there are reasons other than "irrational crazy" why people ride the way they do. Can you do a trakcstand on the side of a steep hill? How about ingress/egree from a clippless pedal? That stuff is hard and slow, so people take "shortcuts" around norms of doing things (eg, run stop signs, go up one-way streets, etc) that are more rational to them than "giving up the bike". Either because they need the money or just like the fitness/lifestyle/image etc. Its not even that you need to :"look down" on these guys...just you can't have a policy discussion and pretend they don't exist. =D
rcthompson 13y ago
No one is suggesting that the driver should be held accountable by default for a collision with a cyclist. But it would be nice if society even entertained the possibility that a driver could be at fault.
crbnw00ts 13y ago
Bike safety starts with the rider. One of the scariest experiences I ever had while driving a car was nearly hitting a cyclist as I was pulling out of a parking lot. He was riding at night with no lights or reflectors visible. Oh, and he was wearing 100% dark clothing too. This was in an area with very little street lighting. He was basically invisible to me until he got extremely close. Fortunately I saw him in time and stopped, but to this day it still makes my heart race a little bit to think about it. Before anyone jumps on me for not seeing it from the cyclist's perspective, I spent several years commuting by bicycle, frequently going home after dark. During that time, I made damn sure I had enough lights and reflectors for car drivers to see me. I was never under the impression that basic safety was anyone's responsibility but my own. That of course doesn't mean that there aren't car drivers out there who are careless around cyclists, but cyclists themselves have to take the first steps, such as making sure you are visible to everyone around you, (including avoiding getting into other people's blind spots), and above all maintaing awareness and caution at all times. I realize I probably sound like a school teacher, but they say these sorts of things for a reason. A cyclist with cavalier, reckless, or lackadaisical attitude towards safety is an accident waiting to happen.
bowlofpetunias 13y ago
You ever seen Amsterdam traffic? Lots of cyclists ignore red lights etc, etc, etc, and yet for some odd reason that's not considered an excuse for just running them over with your car. I totally get the American argument in favor of the right to bear arms, but at least that's based on the assumption of responsible gun ownership. When it comes to cars however, any sense of responsibility seems to go out of the window. Cars and bicycles aren't equals, a car is a heavy piece of machinery that can kill a grown man in an instant. The driver of a car has a much, much greater responsibility to the safety of those around them.
- kika 13y ago
  I've worked in Ams for few months, about 15 years ago. And I've seen car-bike accidents there too. Not sure what do you mean by "excuse". Cars and bikes are not equal, that's right, as well as small sedans and large pickup trucks are not equal, motorcycles and cars are not equal, semis and pickups are not equal, etc, etc, etc. So what? There're rules of the road, California Vehicle Code in my case, and everyone using a public road should obey one, period. Having a car driver more responsible for safety of those around him doesn't mean that bicyclist can cut in front of this driver while running a red light against the traffic and consider himself to have a right of way just because he's a weakest player on the road.

by kika 13y ago

busterarm 13y ago

scratch off point d. Helmets don't really do anything to protect you unless you practically fall off your bike standing still. I've seen brains on the street from at least two low-speed bike accidents where the cyclist was wearing a helmet. Also, it's not that all cyclists are disobeying the law. Those are just the ones you choose to see. Drivers and pedestrians alike just aren't looking. I always obey traffic laws on my bike. Edit: All these anecdotes are great and all, but it's not like we're going to be reading stories from all the people with brain injuries or who died. Cycling lanes and infrastructure do significantly more to make riding safer than helmets and helmet laws do. http://www.bicycling.com/sites/default/files/uploads/BI-June-13-Helmet.pdf http://www.bicycling.com/sites/default/files/uploads/BI-June... http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/19036/feds-will-stop-hyping-effectiveness-of-bike-helmets/ http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/19036/feds-will-sto... http://bicyclesafe.com/helmets.html http://bicyclesafe.com/helmets.html

kika 13y ago
this guy got injured right where thickest part of the standard styrofoam helmet is. About half way above the eyebrow to the temple. He survived (but there was a lot of blood) but with the helmet he'd walked from the scene with a few scratches on his knees. I'm not saying "all". But I drive about 400 miles per week (long commute) and I can say that I've seen approximately 5 bicyclist last month which stopped at the stop sign. They really stand out of the crowd.
CaveTech 13y ago
This summer I was hit by a truck pulling a wide trailer. The truck overpassed me, but the driver neglected the fact that his trailer was about a foot wider than his truck. It smashed me from behind and laid me out on the pavement. I was lucky enough to not fall under the trailer, but still smashed hard onto the road and nearby sidewalk. My helmet, without a doubt, saved me from a serious head injury. I walked away with some extensive road rash and a minor concussion.
brianobush 13y ago
Helmets protect you. I slid down a street and my head bounced on the pavement - without a helmet I would have been much worse off. The road rash was enough. Another incident was a truck mirror that grazed my helmet. Nothing major, but in all, the helmet does its job.
- adambard 13y ago
  > Another incident was a truck mirror that grazed my helmet. Of course, if you weren't wearing the helmet, the truck mirror may or may not have touched you at all.
  - busterarm 13y ago
    This. I saw a bus mirror actually catch a guy's helmet and pick him up off his bike by his head, hauling him down the street. Had he not been wearing a helmet, that never would have happened.
    - fallinghawks 13y ago
      I hope you aren't saying that seriously. If those vehicles caught bicyclists in the helmet, they were both just too close to the cyclists. What if the cyclist swerved an inch to avoid a rock in the road, or even simply turned his/her head to look at something? Yeah, whamo.
    - brianobush 13y ago
      Thus everyone should avoid helmets! They can kill. Seriously: Outliers do not describe a population.
  - brianobush 13y ago
    So you are fine with approx an inch clearance with passing vehicles? I don't think so.
notjosh 13y ago
I had an accident recently as a cyclist with a vehicle, and I thank my helmet a lot for my lack of injury. The vehicle was a van, and turned right across me going straight (which normally I'd see clearly and avoid, but the way they hesitated implied they'd seen me so I rolled through. Alas.) I'd wager I was going around 20mph/30kph as I hit the side panel. Hips/shoulders first, then I felt my head whiplash into it. Without a helmet, I'd expect at least a mild concussion. With a helmet, I was able to roll away relatively unscathed (minor cuts/bruises) after we exchanged details. Helmets can help at all/many speeds. They're not a perfect solution, but they're great sometimes. Don't discount them so bluntly :)
3825 13y ago
> pedestrians alike just aren't looking You mentioned you obey the law so you probably don't do this. Even if the law does not prohibit riding on the sidewalk, you should never ride on the sidewalk. Just wanted to take this time to remind everyone that bicycles do not belong on the sidewalk.
- fphhotchips 13y ago
  I disagree. Bicycles belong on sidewalks far more than they belong on roads. That said, perhaps it's situational. My city has large amounts of arterial roads with heavy car traffic and sparse pedestrians. The speed limit on those roads is about 60 kph (about 40 mph), and I much prefer to stay off them as a cyclist. It would be much safer if I was allowed to cycle on the sidewalk in those areas, as there's little to no foot traffic. In the city itself, different matter. There's much more foot traffic, but the speed limit is lower, so perhaps it's best there to be on the road.
  - 3825 13y ago
    One of the first things my driving instructor taught me is that you have to assert your right. A measly bicycle has as much right to be on the road as a Cadillac Escalade. At the risk of preaching to the choir, a bicycle should take up a full lane on the road unless there is a special bicycle lane. I am not saying go crazy and ride your bicycles on freeways. This is more about city streets. That being said, I truly believe the way to have fewer cars striking cyclists is to have more cyclists assert themselves on the road.
    - busterarm 13y ago
      Cycling on highways I'm pretty sure is illegal everywhere, thankfully. I'm also an advocate of taking up a full lane, but the laws in many places (like New York) actually require you to ride to the right/shoulder where feasible. Unfortunately that's not really clearly defined, so even though you have a legal right to a full lane, cops will still give you a ticket. Having narrowly avoided being doored a few times, I won't ride anywhere within a foot's range of a completely open car door.
skierscott 13y ago
Current helmets protect against impact injuries (eg, the pavement hitting your head). Yes, when the speed/energy is high, helmets won't do much. But when the speed is moderate, helmets help a lot. Then, there's also wearing the helmet properly, something many bicyclists fail to do. The helmets today are only tested with straight on impacts: they're tested by dropping them straight down on the crown of the helmet. But that doesn't happen in the real world. You're moving, meaning you're hit at an angle, meaning that there's a potential for a diffuse axonal injury[1]: the rotational component of the injury. MIPS[2] has helmets that help protect against that. Is wearing a helmet safer than not wearing a helmet? Without a doubt. [1]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffuse_axonal_injury https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffuse_axonal_injury [2]:http://mipshelmet.com/home http://mipshelmet.com/home
pjungwir 13y ago
I saw a bicyclist flip over a car door. He just had a baseball cap on, but it was torn to shreds. I'm glad that wasn't his forehead on the asphalt.
SkyMarshal 13y ago
Wearing a helmet is always better than not wearing one. You never know what kind of accident you might be in. Sure there are some a helmet may not protect you from, but there are plenty where a helmet will. It's a stupid, pointless risk not to take such an easy precaution to reduce your odds of permanent brain injury. Case in point, a few years I was on the home stretch of a 50 mile weekend bikeride, less than a mile from home. I was tired, dehydrated, and fuzzy-brained, but still alert enough to be paying close attention to the traffic around me. I was riding ~10-15mph in the far left lane of one-way 4-lane primary thoroughfare (35mph speed limit). 4-way intersection ahead, figured I'd cross the intersection and ride up onto the very wide sidewalk on the far side so I could get out of traffic, slow to a crawl, relax, and take it easy the rest of the way home. As I came up to the intersection I angled slightly toward the sidewalk ramp on the other side, then turned my head around to the right to watch the traffic coming up behind me to make sure no car was going to make a left turn at the intersection and either turn into me or cut me off. All clear with cars, no left turners, but when I looked ahead again I saw I'd miss-judged my path and was going to miss the on-ramp by about 5ft and hit the nearly 1ft-high curb instead. Going too fast to correct course and hit the ramp, or to slam on the breaks and stop, only thing I could do was try jump the bike, or at least the front wheel, over the curb. Too tired, botched the maneuver, not quite high enough, front wheel hit the curb about halfway up and went from around 10-12mph to 0 in a millisecond. Of course me and the rest of the bike kept going, me slingshotting over the handlebars (bike shoes clipped in so angular momentum at work here) and then piledriven head first into the concrete sidewalk. My head landed first with a loud crack, then my body landed on my head, then the bike on top of my body. I might have been out for a few seconds, not sure, but the first thing I remember was thinking, "ok don't move a muscle, just lay perfectly till, you might have just broken your back and even the slightest movement could cause a tear in your spinal cord." Slowly, gradually, tentatively I started testing that individual fingers and toes worked, then hands and feet, then arms and legs, and finally body and neck. Everything was ok, but I was still lying there not daring to try to get up. Next thought was, "ok, that loud crack was my head hitting the concrete, I probably have a concussion. gotta be careful, don't black out." Reached up to my head, started feeling around. Helmet broken in places, totalled as designed, but still attached, strapped on, conformed to my head. Still lying on the sidewalk with bike on top of me, afraid of further injury, and feeling around my head checking for injury. No blood, no pain anywhere. Disbelief. Check again, thoroughly. Still no blood, no pain. More disbelief. Can I really have just had a crash that bad, where my head alone absorbed the entire impact of my 200lb self and ~20lb bike, without any injury besides skinned hands and some bruises? Mindbogglingly, yes that was exactly what happened. That helmet absorbed the whole damn thing, and I walked away without either a concussion or any kind of neck or spinal injury, just some scrapes and bruises. So yeah, just wear a helmet. Even if you have 10 accidents where a helmet is irrelevant and just 1 where it is, it will have been worth it. If my anecdotal evidence doesn't impress you, then think of it terms of Expected Payoff E(X). Wearing a helmet costs nothing of consequence, yet the benefits could range from 0 (you're never in a crash your entire life and never need it, or you're in a crash where a helmet makes absolutely no difference) to everything (you're in a crash that would cause permanent brain damage or death without a helmet protection). You can see how the averages work out. Humans are very poor by default at evaluating risks that have low odds of occurring, but very high consequences if they do occur. Bike crashes are exactly this kind of risk, so don't be a typical human here - don't blow these types of risks off, discount them, or ignore them. Be smart, mitigate or neutralize them.

dmm 13y ago

I see cars run stop signs and red lights all the time. I see cars speed everywhere, including neighborhoods with poor visibility http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-group_favoritism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-group_favoritism

CamperBob2 13y ago
I think I was... what? 4? 5? ... when my parents explained that your reasoning is invalid.
kika 13y ago
I see them too. I also see them got ticketed heavily and some even lost the privilege to drive. But I can't say that vast majority of cars run stop signs. Your link is not relevant, sorry.
- dmm 13y ago
  You're not a cyclist so you judge them differently than you judge cars. Cyclists do get ticketed, even when they are commiting crimes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhWCFi3JIcU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhWCFi3JIcU
  - kika 13y ago
    I do not bike to work, right, it's 50 miles one way. But I ride the bike for recreational purposes.
  - jackmaney 13y ago
    Holy crap, that is the first time I have ever heard of a bicyclist being pulled over and ticketed. Good on the cop that issued that citation!
    - collyw 13y ago
      Here in Barcelona I have heard of more cyclists get ticket than car owners (probably I know a lot more people that ride bikes admittedly). For listening to music while biking amongst other things. I guess they are an easy target for police.

casual_slacker 13y ago

When you say "running stop signs", do you mean a rolling slow-down/speed up if they're the first at the intersection? I do that all the time, not sure if it's legal but it's a pain to stop fully. With cars around I always stop, especially in SF I'd be insane not to.

socillion 13y ago
Rolling stops on bicycle are only legal in one state - Idaho.
tsotha 13y ago
A rolling stop is illegal in CA.
kika 13y ago
some of them just speed through the intersection if they consider it safe, I've heard screeching tires a few times, which means they misjudged. Stopping at every stop sign is a financial pain for a motorist, because MPG drops considerably. So what? Stop sign is a stop sign, it means "stop". The solution to this is not ignoring signs because it's a "pain" but to replace stop signs with roundabouts, like in Europe.
- adambard 13y ago
  Relevant to this discussion: Roundabouts do cyclists no favors whatsoever. This article cites a number of others on the subject: http://www.cascade.org/2010/11/circular-logic/ http://www.cascade.org/2010/11/circular-logic/
  - kika 13y ago
    I'm not thinking about special favors for cyclists, roundabouts allow everyone not to stop if there's no cross traffic.

hristov 13y ago

Cyclists running red lights are a big problem in LA. I am very much in favor of cycling, but you have to follow the laws. I know it is a pain in the ass to stop at every stoplight when you have to use your own muscles to accelerate, but you have to do it.

busterarm 13y ago
Cycling laws are the biggest problem in LA. Depending on where you are in LA, you're either can ride on the sidewalk or you can't. There's no consistency. I'm not in favor of ANYONE riding on the sidewalk, but cops in LA in areas where you can ride on the sidewalk like to be dicks and give cyclists bogus tickets for riding in the street. http://ladotbikeblog.wordpress.com/2010/08/04/la-county-sidewalk-riding-part1/ http://ladotbikeblog.wordpress.com/2010/08/04/la-county-side...

chockablock 13y ago

Quite unfair. When I commuted by bike in SF for a couple years, I wore hi-vis clothing, front and rear lights even when it wasn't dark yet (especially at dusk!), and stuck to designated bike routes with calmer traffic when possible. And every day I saw hundreds of other cyclists just like me who didn't have a death wish. The (small-y) yahoos who ride dangerously certainly stand out more, but it's depressing to have folks like you throw up their hands and say, effectively: Too bad there's nothing we can do to make cycling safer, since too many cyclists just "want to die".

kika 13y ago
I don't see such classy combination at once often, it's just a sum of everything I see. But running lights and stops is very-very common here.
001sky 13y ago
SF has problems with people running lights and stop signs because of the hills. I think its dis-ingenuous to deny this. It may be different in soma/mission, where the topography is completely different. But in the financial district (lots of 1 ways, no left turns, hills, tourists, etc) and around market street...the whole industry of bike messengers (ie, 30 years of history) is predicated on them not following traffic rules. Actually, that might be a little strong. But you get my point. They make money because they are faster...and the way to be faster than traffic is not not go with the flow.
- chockablock 13y ago
  >I think its dis-ingenuous to deny this I didn't mention stop signs or red lights in my comment. I just pointed out that there's a large population of conscientious, safety-minded cyclists out there who get ignored in these types of discussions. Your invocation of law-breaking bike messengers in the second half of your comment is in fact a perfect recapitulation of the tendency I was referring to!
  - 001sky 13y ago
    Previous commenter was giving an example of 'suicidal' riding. The fact that others ride in a responsible manner does not serve as a counter-factual. That's all I was saying. That, and I believe that there are reasons other than "irrational crazy" why people ride the way they do. Can you do a trakcstand on the side of a steep hill? How about ingress/egree from a clippless pedal? That stuff is hard and slow, so people take "shortcuts" around norms of doing things (eg, run stop signs, go up one-way streets, etc) that are more rational to them than "giving up the bike". Either because they need the money or just like the fitness/lifestyle/image etc. Its not even that you need to :"look down" on these guys...just you can't have a policy discussion and pretend they don't exist. =D

rcthompson 13y ago

No one is suggesting that the driver should be held accountable by default for a collision with a cyclist. But it would be nice if society even entertained the possibility that a driver could be at fault.

crbnw00ts 13y ago

Bike safety starts with the rider. One of the scariest experiences I ever had while driving a car was nearly hitting a cyclist as I was pulling out of a parking lot. He was riding at night with no lights or reflectors visible. Oh, and he was wearing 100% dark clothing too. This was in an area with very little street lighting. He was basically invisible to me until he got extremely close. Fortunately I saw him in time and stopped, but to this day it still makes my heart race a little bit to think about it. Before anyone jumps on me for not seeing it from the cyclist's perspective, I spent several years commuting by bicycle, frequently going home after dark. During that time, I made damn sure I had enough lights and reflectors for car drivers to see me. I was never under the impression that basic safety was anyone's responsibility but my own. That of course doesn't mean that there aren't car drivers out there who are careless around cyclists, but cyclists themselves have to take the first steps, such as making sure you are visible to everyone around you, (including avoiding getting into other people's blind spots), and above all maintaing awareness and caution at all times. I realize I probably sound like a school teacher, but they say these sorts of things for a reason. A cyclist with cavalier, reckless, or lackadaisical attitude towards safety is an accident waiting to happen.

bowlofpetunias 13y ago

You ever seen Amsterdam traffic? Lots of cyclists ignore red lights etc, etc, etc, and yet for some odd reason that's not considered an excuse for just running them over with your car. I totally get the American argument in favor of the right to bear arms, but at least that's based on the assumption of responsible gun ownership. When it comes to cars however, any sense of responsibility seems to go out of the window. Cars and bicycles aren't equals, a car is a heavy piece of machinery that can kill a grown man in an instant. The driver of a car has a much, much greater responsibility to the safety of those around them.

kika 13y ago
I've worked in Ams for few months, about 15 years ago. And I've seen car-bike accidents there too. Not sure what do you mean by "excuse". Cars and bikes are not equal, that's right, as well as small sedans and large pickup trucks are not equal, motorcycles and cars are not equal, semis and pickups are not equal, etc, etc, etc. So what? There're rules of the road, California Vehicle Code in my case, and everyone using a public road should obey one, period. Having a car driver more responsible for safety of those around him doesn't mean that bicyclist can cut in front of this driver while running a red light against the traffic and consider himself to have a right of way just because he's a weakest player on the road.