Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It's Never a Bicycle Accident

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 189 posts

Re: It's Never a Bicycle Accident

#171

Post by novok »

wozniacki wrote: post #58
ehnto wrote: post #5

I always tell people I am not a cyclist, I am a bloke who rides a bike. The vilification of a group is how you make harming them palatable to people, and we have all heard the rhetoric surrounding "cyclists". I am far sooner a friend, a son, a partner and someone you know, than a cyclist. I don't even qear lycra, and I spend my whole ride trying to be courteous so at least extend me the same courtesy. Also, get off y…

and we have all heard the rhetoric surrounding "cyclists". Are you saying that not even a smidgen of truth belies such rhetoric? Cyclists roll through signals, intersections & stop signs as if they were mere suggestions and nothing more. I know how entrenched each sides are in this argument - drivers and cyclists. Neither will give an inch. The best way to get cyclists some kind of safety is to INSIST on a full bore…

We don't have a walking license and sidewalk tax either, and humans do not need to walk around with identifying serial numbers visible from afar either. Licenses are often about mitigating safety risk more than what the average human body could do alone.

Re: It's Never a Bicycle Accident

#172

Post by novok »

gorgoiler wrote: post #74
clairity wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “...I would love it if reckless drivers would lose their license at the first offense.” that’s too punitive, but i’d be quite happy with a quickly escalating, income-/wealth-adjusted fine. so like 0.01% of yearly income on first offense, 0.1% on second offense, 1% on third offense, or something like that, on a rolling 12-month basis, where you can voluntarily give up you license for 3 months to reset the scale of y…

In societies with professional money managing services, how do you fine someone who has no personal income, no wealth, and is in millions of dollars in debt*? *...to an offshore shell company over which they have 100% control.

You remove their license and impound cars they have permission to drive

Re: It's Never a Bicycle Accident

#173

Post by novok »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #98
albertgoeswoof wrote: post #10

One of the linked accidents in the article looks terrible, a man is cycling along the road, a bus overtakes him and clips his handlebars, knocking him to the ground and then running over his torso with the rear wheels of the bus. What a lot of people don’t realise is that you can’t overtake bicycles in a single lane. If there’s no cycle path/markings a bicycle takes up the full lane for exactly this reason. Bicycles…

The solution to this is fixing local legislation. As a car driver your risk is asymmetric: you will have a few scratches/dents on your car and the other side ends up in hospital (or worse). So, it's important to bias traffic rules to protecting more vulnerable participants like cyclists or pedestrians. Here are some examples of things that work in various countries: The Netherlands fixed this ages ago. You hit a cycl…

Unfortunately I don't think such a law would be politically tenable in america, which is probably why it hasn't happened.

Re: It's Never a Bicycle Accident

#174

Post by Laarlf »

anoncake wrote: post #168
Laarlf wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is the thing that annoys me the most. You don't walk on train tracks, you don't drive on the sidewalk. Excessive speed differences like these are dangerous. Either accept that cycling on the road is dangerous and work with that mindset or choose a fitting medium to travel for the ground given. On a bike, you are weaker and slower than the cars you share the road with. Being hit by a car won't fix infrastructure.

Bicycles are vehicles. Vehicles belong on the road. Where else?

On the bike lane. There is none? Either well behaved and aware of the circumstances on the road or under the car.

Re: It's Never a Bicycle Accident

#175

Post by anoncake »

Laarlf wrote: post #174
anoncake wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bicycles are vehicles. Vehicles belong on the road. Where else?

On the bike lane. There is none? Either well behaved and aware of the circumstances on the road or under the car.

Every cyclist is inherently more well-behaved than anyone driving a dangerous, noisy and polluting machine driving through a populated area.

Re: It's Never a Bicycle Accident

#176

Post by anoncake »

prower wrote: post #118
sneak wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That said, bikes are dangerous for everyone involved. If you encounter a bike you slow down all traffic (because you can't overtake safely, and that's difficult on busy roads), you have to keep distance and account to the fact that you could run over the iker AT ANY TIME because bikes are NOT reliable when roads are not 100% correctly maintained. Going slower isn't unsafe, it's safer. You're confusing inconvenience…

That's not true when you're forced to do 10km/h for prolonged periods of time (that's hindrance to traffic and you can usually get a fine for that) because you can't safely overtake a bycicle that's going in a zig-zag way on the lane to avoid a myriad of potholes, or because it's an uphill road and it's too physically taxing for the biker, sice he choose the wrong vehicle for the wrong road. That's only stress and us…

And what's the danger here? If having to drive slowly makes you so angry you can't drive safely, you shouldn't be driving at all.

Re: It's Never a Bicycle Accident

#177

Post by Laarlf »

anoncake wrote: post #175
Laarlf wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the bike lane. There is none? Either well behaved and aware of the circumstances on the road or under the car.

Every cyclist is inherently more well-behaved than anyone driving a dangerous, noisy and polluting machine driving through a populated area.

If your oh-so-superior lifestyle is so much better, just move to a country where cars don't exist.

Cars and bikes do not belong on the same road without seperation. Mixing different speeds of transportation on the same road is inherently a stupid idea. And if you hold up everyone, don't expect people to like or respect you. Maybe i should start to park in bike lanes. Same issue really.

Re: It's Never a Bicycle Accident

#178

Post by anoncake »

Laarlf wrote: post #177
anoncake wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every cyclist is inherently more well-behaved than anyone driving a dangerous, noisy and polluting machine driving through a populated area.

If your oh-so-superior lifestyle is so much better, just move to a country where cars don't exist. Cars and bikes do not belong on the same road without seperation. Mixing different speeds of transportation on the same road is inherently a stupid idea. And if you hold up everyone, don't expect people to like or respect you. Maybe i should start to park in bike lanes. Same issue really.

Why, yes. I pollute less and I'm drastically less likely to kill someone. I don't drive people mad with noise. My lifestyle is superior. Deal with it.

> Cars and bikes do not belong on the same road without seperation

That is not true. Even inside towns, cars can be driven safely at reasonable speeds of 10-20 km/h.

Re: It's Never a Bicycle Accident

#179

Post by [deleted] »

Laarlf wrote: post #177
anoncake wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every cyclist is inherently more well-behaved than anyone driving a dangerous, noisy and polluting machine driving through a populated area.

If your oh-so-superior lifestyle is so much better, just move to a country where cars don't exist. Cars and bikes do not belong on the same road without seperation. Mixing different speeds of transportation on the same road is inherently a stupid idea. And if you hold up everyone, don't expect people to like or respect you. Maybe i should start to park in bike lanes. Same issue really.

[deleted]

Re: It's Never a Bicycle Accident

#180

Post by Laarlf »

anoncake wrote: post #178
Laarlf wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your oh-so-superior lifestyle is so much better, just move to a country where cars don't exist. Cars and bikes do not belong on the same road without seperation. Mixing different speeds of transportation on the same road is inherently a stupid idea. And if you hold up everyone, don't expect people to like or respect you. Maybe i should start to park in bike lanes. Same issue really.

Why, yes. I pollute less and I'm drastically less likely to kill someone. I don't drive people mad with noise. My lifestyle is superior. Deal with it. > Cars and bikes do not belong on the same road without seperation That is not true. Even inside towns, cars can be driven safely at reasonable speeds of 10-20 km/h.

Well why are you still around cars when your lifestyle is so superior? There must be billions of people choosing the "superior" life.

How great that you are so superior yet you want cars to take 2-10 times as much fuel to let them drive at speeds they are not made for while creating more traffic jams. The next time i overtake a cyclist i will keep that in mind and use the first gear and full throttle.

People like you are the reason why "cyclist" becomes an insult. Justifying being annoying is a great way to make you popular i've heard.

Post reply on HN