The argument made that i responded to was "while cyclists aren't killing drivers, because it's not physically possible" This seems really simple: Cyclist decid

The argument made that i responded to was "while cyclists aren't killing drivers, because it's not physically possible" This seems really simple: Cyclist decides to swerve across lanes without signaling, causing a car to need to break and swerve into a concrete barrier (or get hit by a truck, or whatever), and die. Cyclist is at fault for not signaling (among other things). He caused driver to die. I don't see why the cyclist would die in this scenario, assuming the car was successful in avoiding them prior to driver's death.