Live data from Hacker News

Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

citylab.com

471–480 of 485 posts

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a white man in a mid-size SUV leaned out his window and said loudly to me, "I hope you get hit!" My usual retort to this, as the cyclist: "I hope you find true Love!"

I cycle with a helmet cam, and I typically inform the driver that they are being recorded. While I haven't done a scientific study, I believe this causes some drivers to restrain themselves.

I've only recently installed cams (front and back) on my bike. I hadn't felt the need, but a couple of weeks ago a friend of mine was pelted with eggs while he was riding.

I decided that being able to gather evidence and, if lucky, license plate numbers, is not the worst idea.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#472
post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds good to me, as long as cyclists follow the same rules drivers do . Just yesterday I had a cyclist blatantly roll a stop sign on a side street, entering the main road I was on. If I was an inattentive driver I would have creamed him! He even looked to the left, saw me, and just kept rolling through!

Sounds like the cyclist properly judged the danger for himself, and his judgement was correct, because he's still alive. When riding a bicycle, you often choose to endanger your own life and break the law in order to be less of an obstacle to motorists -- motorists, who in turn, almost certainly curse under their breath about how you should just obey the rules. Aggro assholes are gonna be aggro assholes.

> his judgement was correct, because he's still alive.

That's faulty reasoning. His judgement could have been completely wrong, and he just got lucky this time.

> When riding a bicycle, you often choose to endanger your own life and break the law in order to be less of an obstacle to motorists

I don't. The only time I would choose to endanger my own life on my bike is if the alternative is endangering someone else's life.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#473
post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds good to me, as long as cyclists follow the same rules drivers do . Just yesterday I had a cyclist blatantly roll a stop sign on a side street, entering the main road I was on. If I was an inattentive driver I would have creamed him! He even looked to the left, saw me, and just kept rolling through!

Rolling a stop sign (slowly, if there's no one at the intersection) is safer on a bike than stopping. In SF the Board of Supervisors voted to make it legal, but the mayor vetoed it.

They're considering changing the law in my state along these lines -- to allow bikes to treat stop signs as yield signs. I'm ambivalent about it, personally.

However, in the story that abstractbarista tells, that bicyclist didn't even treat the stop sign as a yield.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simple answer is bikes and cars should never share the same infrastructure. They'll never get along with each other and the bike loses every time. It also doesn't help that bikers don't follow the laws properly. Bikers have to pay attention more than drivers, they should act like it

I don't know the statistics for the US, but here in Germany 75% of the accidents between cyclists are cars are caused by the car.

I know that an anecdote is not data, but the only time I've been in an accident with a car, it was because the car ran a stop sign, causing me to slam into the side of it.

And yes, I was seriously hurt.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I don't want people to risk their lives for anything. I want things to change. 40,000 people die a year in the US while driving or riding in cars, following your logic, that is also extremely risky, and so we shouldn't do it.

I am not sure thats a correct analogy. Driving a car to work is not an optional activity for most ppl. Ppl riding their bikes in the city are doing it for fun/thrill/whatever, its an optional activity for 90% of the ppl doing it. I have a theory that most of these ppl would stop doing it once the thrill/'cool factor' goes away with protected bike lanes.

> Ppl riding their bikes in the city are doing it for fun/thrill/whatever, its an optional activity for 90% of the ppl doing it.

Riding a bike for your transportation is exactly as optional as driving is. Most cities have multiple choices for transportation.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you been to cities in Netherlands or Danmark?

They were meaning US cities, we can certainly be very US centric in our thinking. And to keep on that theme let me talk about my city. If you don't actually need to get anywhere and want to ride for leisure Denver has some nice built up trails that sort of meander through neighborhoods that are completely separated from roads. Very safe and usually very pretty to ride on. Downtown looks pretty dangerous though.

> They were meaning US cities

Even just considering US cities, that statement is not true. Some cities are very dangerous for bikes, but many are not.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#477
post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would never yell at a bicyclist, and certainly would never hope one got hit. But I have to say, as an NYC pedestrian, I actively hate bicyclists. They don't follow the rules of the road-- at all . Red lights? Stop signs? Ignored. Pedestrians crossing in a crosswalk? Probably fine to whiz past them with 6 inches to spare. I almost get hit by fast-moving bikes once or twice a year. A car has never even come close to…

As a former NYC cyclist, I can say that your accusations are patently absurd. First, if cyclists blasted through red lights without looking we would all get hit by cars within a few intersections. Second, of course cars have come close to hitting you. It's New York. That's how they drive there. It is always jarring to hear what I anecdotally believe to be a minority of pedestrians who actually believe that cyclists a…

> if cyclists blasted through red lights without looking we would all get hit by cars within a few intersections

It is left up to the drivers and pedestrians to get out of the bicyclists' way and avoid collisions.

> of course cars have come close to hitting you

Not in my personal experience. One example is what happens when there is a red light and I have the cross signal. If I see only cars I will begin crossing, because the cars typically have already started to slow down well before the light so I know they will stop. If I see a bike I will typically wait for it to pass. And sure enough, most of the time the bike will continue through the red light.

Another example is when the light is green, and there is traffic taking a left turn into a crosswalk which has the cross signal. Cars go so slow to the point that they stop several times before completing the turn. Bikes just make the turn at full or maybe half speed, and sometimes ring their bell. Scenarios like this are what have caused most of my near-collisions. There's no chance of seeing them coming.

> It is always jarring to hear what I anecdotally believe to be a minority of pedestrians who actually believe that cyclists are in any way, shape, or form more of a threat to their safety than motor vehicles.

It does seem that both sides of this issue believe the other side is living in a bubble. All I can say is what I see. Look around any intersection in NYC where there are red lights and stopped cars. If there are any bicyclists around, they will be the fastest moving objects you can see.

From what you wrote it sounds like you've heard this more than once. So have I!

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#478
post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Winter (ice, snow, freezing winds) Rain storms People who don't want to show up to work sweaty (my work never had showers and I'm the sort of person who creates a lot of sweat (and smell) even if I'm taking it easy on a bike People who live more than X miles from where they are going People who live up/down major hills etc..... I lived IN Boston for a while, and actually rode my bike to work during the summer (didn't…

Wow, excuses? Ok. Yes, car driving is easier, it always will be. But how about you drivers start actually paying for what you use, the pollution you create, the roads that are paid for by taxes?

You mean gasoline taxes? lol

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#479
post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "I hope you get hit!" This, to me, signals the general attitude people have towards bicyclists in the US. The average person either doesn't care or, for some misguided reason or another, actively hates bicyclists. I've been yelled at by drivers for no apparent reason so many times I've lost count. I've had so many friends hit by cars. My partner was struck by a car last fall and broke her leg in two places. She's s…

I would never yell at a bicyclist, and certainly would never hope one got hit. But I have to say, as an NYC pedestrian, I actively hate bicyclists. They don't follow the rules of the road-- at all . Red lights? Stop signs? Ignored. Pedestrians crossing in a crosswalk? Probably fine to whiz past them with 6 inches to spare. I almost get hit by fast-moving bikes once or twice a year. A car has never even come close to…

"I almost get hit" – so, you don't get hit? Once or twice a year you get... startled?

In NYC in 2017, cars injured 10561 pedestrians and 4397 cyclists, and killed 106 pedestrians and 24 cyclists. Cyclists injured 315 pedestrians and killed one. http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bicycle-crash-data...

In NYC in 2016, cars injured 10775 pedestrians and 4592 cyclists, and killed 148 pedestrians and 18 cyclists. Cyclists injured 311 pedestrians and killed none at all. http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bicycle-crash-data...

So the "different" thing that bicyclists see about cycling is that it's much less hazardous to pedestrians.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#480
post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, excuses? Ok. Yes, car driving is easier, it always will be. But how about you drivers start actually paying for what you use, the pollution you create, the roads that are paid for by taxes?

You mean gasoline taxes? lol

No, since that only covers a small amount of what you use. Think about the 40,000 deaths a year. Who pays for that? Not you. The 500,000 seriously injured? Not you. The pollution you cause? Not you. The 3m children with Asthma caused by drivers? Not you. The list goes on...
Post reply on HN