4 ms·

I'm a cyclist and I completely disagree with this. I've biked thousands and thousands of miles in SF, and I think probably 80 or 90% of cyclists are responsibl

by birken 12y ago

I'm a cyclist and I completely disagree with this. I've biked thousands and thousands of miles in SF, and I think probably 80 or 90% of cyclists are responsible and law abiding. There are maybe 10 or 20 percent who are bad, run red lights and do other crazy shit. They are not the majority. And if you want further proof, just read the list of bicycle fatalities in SF [1] and see who is at fault. Most of the time it is the vehicle. And guess what happens when a vehicle is ruled at fault and kills a cyclist? Nothing [2]: > Unfortunately, the lack of charges in this tragic case is par for the course in our justice system which continually fails to prosecute traffic cases as the crimes that they are. Four people were killed while biking in San Francisco last year, and no charges were filed against the drivers in any of these cases. The myth that all cyclists are irresponsible and reckless is untrue and needs to die. Most cyclists are drivers and thus can emphasize with drivers and understand and predict what they are doing. However, most drivers are not cyclists, and often think a cyclist is doing something wrong when they are not. Or maybe they only notice when cyclists are doing something bad and their selective memory is reinforced. The point is, most drivers are good and most cyclists are good. A little more empathy on both sides would go a long way towards improving the situation, and untrue claims like "90% of the time the cyclist is at fault" is not helping. 1: https://medium.com/improving-our-cities/a-list-of-people-killed-while-riding-a-bicycle-in-san-francisco-1456bbd017d9 https://medium.com/improving-our-cities/a-list-of-people-kil... 2: https://www.sfbike.org/news/statement-on-lack-of-charges-in-traffic-fatalities/ https://www.sfbike.org/news/statement-on-lack-of-charges-in-...

pandaman 12y ago
Maybe cyclists in SF are so special, but in LA I have yet to see a cyclist stopping at a stop sign. I walk to/from work about 2 miles each way and see about a dozen cyclists every day. Sure, cars some times do not stop at the sign either but I don't see this happening nearly as often as I see cyclists just happily cycling through stop without even an attempt to slow down. And I see much more cars than bikes.
- malka 12y ago
  They are the same in France. Never saw a single cyclist stop at a red light.
  - pandaman 12y ago
    I have seen some red light stops here. There are streets in LA that are physically impossible to cross at a red light.
- santaclaus 12y ago
  Safe bike culture varies wildly form city to city within the US. People in Portland are mad considerate (I've seen cyclists chide other cyclists for failing to use hand signals). NYC? I've seen bikers go the wrong way down Broadway in the UWS splitting lanes during rush hour.
  - pascalo 12y ago
    Do you think there is a correlation between lack of usable infrastructure (even in the past) and rule breaking? When I grew up in Germany, infrastructure was good and people obeyed traffic signs etc, when I lived in London it was every man for himself, as abiding by the rules was often more dangerous than not, and sometimes not even possible.
- maaaats 12y ago
  Of course you have seen a bicycle stop for a stop sign. No need to lie, it throws away all points you're trying to make. Besides, this is the typical confirmation-biased anecdotes that pollutes these discussions. Have you thought of why this is so common? A bicycle uses human power, stopping is a much bigger hassle than sitting lazily in a car. And a bicycle approaches a stop sign much slower than a car, this having a better overview before crossing.
  - c22 12y ago
    The bicyclist also enjoys a higher vantage point and less restrained view than the driver of a car. In some places the practice of rolling through stop signs on a bicycle is already being codified into law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop).
kelnos 12y ago
I'm a pedestrian in SF and disagree with this. I tend to walk anywhere between 4-8 miles per day, just as a matter of course, and I see dozens and dozens of cyclists. A significant number of them do not stop at red lights when traffic is light. A majority do not stop at stop signs. When it comes to stopping, cars are much more law-abiding (likely because the penalty is worse, not because of any desire to be safer). Many cyclists make unsafe turns; I've had a few close calls while walking. Many ride on the sidewalk. I even occasionally see a cyclist riding the wrong way on a one-way street (though most will move to the sidewalk instead of doing this, which is just as bad). And if you want further proof, just read the list of bicycle fatalities in SF and see who is at fault. Most of the time it is the vehicle. This point has nothing to do with whether or not the majority of cyclists are responsible and law-abiding. All it does is suggest that drivers are inattentive, and that the state is strongly biased toward drivers and wrongly backs them up when they kill someone. I wouldn't say that most cyclists are irresponsible (more that they tend to take risks, risks which may actually be reasonable and acceptable), and I certainly don't believe that most cyclists are at fault when there's a fatality involving a car (quite the opposite). But suggesting that most cyclists habitually follow the rules of the road... that's just absurd in my experience.
cperciva 12y ago
probably 90% of the time, the cyclist is at fault probably 80 or 90% of cyclists are responsible and law abiding. There are maybe 10 or 20 percent who are bad, run red lights and do other crazy shit Just to be clear, your statistics don't actually disagree with each other. It's entirely possible -- I'd even say likely -- that the 10 or 20 percent of cyclists who "do crazy shit" are involved in and responsible for 90% of bicycle-involved accidents.
- Arnt 12y ago
  No idea about SF, but where I live, cycle-related facilities are split into 20% that are clearly the cyclist's fault, another 20% that are clearly the driver's, and 60% that either involve a combination of errors or where the details are difficult to ascertain, particularly since one person involved is dead. If you assume that the 20% of fatal accidents that are purely the driver's fault are evenly distributed among cyclists, can you also assume that any 10-20% of cyclists are involved in 90% of accidents? Fatal accidents don't have to be like general accidents. But.

by birken 12y ago

pandaman 12y ago

Maybe cyclists in SF are so special, but in LA I have yet to see a cyclist stopping at a stop sign. I walk to/from work about 2 miles each way and see about a dozen cyclists every day. Sure, cars some times do not stop at the sign either but I don't see this happening nearly as often as I see cyclists just happily cycling through stop without even an attempt to slow down. And I see much more cars than bikes.

malka 12y ago
They are the same in France. Never saw a single cyclist stop at a red light.
- pandaman 12y ago
  I have seen some red light stops here. There are streets in LA that are physically impossible to cross at a red light.
santaclaus 12y ago
Safe bike culture varies wildly form city to city within the US. People in Portland are mad considerate (I've seen cyclists chide other cyclists for failing to use hand signals). NYC? I've seen bikers go the wrong way down Broadway in the UWS splitting lanes during rush hour.
- pascalo 12y ago
  Do you think there is a correlation between lack of usable infrastructure (even in the past) and rule breaking? When I grew up in Germany, infrastructure was good and people obeyed traffic signs etc, when I lived in London it was every man for himself, as abiding by the rules was often more dangerous than not, and sometimes not even possible.
maaaats 12y ago
Of course you have seen a bicycle stop for a stop sign. No need to lie, it throws away all points you're trying to make. Besides, this is the typical confirmation-biased anecdotes that pollutes these discussions. Have you thought of why this is so common? A bicycle uses human power, stopping is a much bigger hassle than sitting lazily in a car. And a bicycle approaches a stop sign much slower than a car, this having a better overview before crossing.
- c22 12y ago
  The bicyclist also enjoys a higher vantage point and less restrained view than the driver of a car. In some places the practice of rolling through stop signs on a bicycle is already being codified into law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop).

kelnos 12y ago

I'm a pedestrian in SF and disagree with this. I tend to walk anywhere between 4-8 miles per day, just as a matter of course, and I see dozens and dozens of cyclists. A significant number of them do not stop at red lights when traffic is light. A majority do not stop at stop signs. When it comes to stopping, cars are much more law-abiding (likely because the penalty is worse, not because of any desire to be safer). Many cyclists make unsafe turns; I've had a few close calls while walking. Many ride on the sidewalk. I even occasionally see a cyclist riding the wrong way on a one-way street (though most will move to the sidewalk instead of doing this, which is just as bad). And if you want further proof, just read the list of bicycle fatalities in SF and see who is at fault. Most of the time it is the vehicle. This point has nothing to do with whether or not the majority of cyclists are responsible and law-abiding. All it does is suggest that drivers are inattentive, and that the state is strongly biased toward drivers and wrongly backs them up when they kill someone. I wouldn't say that most cyclists are irresponsible (more that they tend to take risks, risks which may actually be reasonable and acceptable), and I certainly don't believe that most cyclists are at fault when there's a fatality involving a car (quite the opposite). But suggesting that most cyclists habitually follow the rules of the road... that's just absurd in my experience.

cperciva 12y ago

probably 90% of the time, the cyclist is at fault probably 80 or 90% of cyclists are responsible and law abiding. There are maybe 10 or 20 percent who are bad, run red lights and do other crazy shit Just to be clear, your statistics don't actually disagree with each other. It's entirely possible -- I'd even say likely -- that the 10 or 20 percent of cyclists who "do crazy shit" are involved in and responsible for 90% of bicycle-involved accidents.

Arnt 12y ago
No idea about SF, but where I live, cycle-related facilities are split into 20% that are clearly the cyclist's fault, another 20% that are clearly the driver's, and 60% that either involve a combination of errors or where the details are difficult to ascertain, particularly since one person involved is dead. If you assume that the 20% of fatal accidents that are purely the driver's fault are evenly distributed among cyclists, can you also assume that any 10-20% of cyclists are involved in 90% of accidents? Fatal accidents don't have to be like general accidents. But.