How to Not Get Hit by Cars

I have a similar issue with the common advice for pedestrians (including runners) to stay on the side facing traffic. When all else is equal, fine, but most people never stop to think about why this rule exists. It's about visibility. In the interests of visibility, it's often more important to be on the outside of a curve. There are some curves around town where it would be absolutely suicidal to stay on the left (I'm in the US) because the road's narrow and visibility (or escape) is completely blocked by trees or fences etc. The only time I stay on the inside of a curve is when terrain totally flat providing 100-foot or better visibility.

A particularly important case is at intersections. Being on the left often means that you can't see anyone in the near lane and they can't see you until you're practically in the roadway. I often find it's much better to be on the right, with good mutual visibility, so long as I also keep an eye on potential traffic coming up behind me.

Also, if you're on a sidewalk going past multiple driveways, you're better off staying on the road side whichever that is. People backing out without looking for pedestrians (or at all) are the greatest danger you face, and you want to maximize visibility/reaction time.

  > ...overwhelmingly most common one I see is cyclists not stopping at STOP signs

It's common, yes, but it's not even close to the primary cause of any of the accidents in the article.

For whatever reasons, many folks have a serious problem with cyclists pragmatically taking certain liberties that they, as motorists, don't have. You would be correct in situations where cyclists blindly zip through intersections without awareness, but that's almost never the case. What actually happens is that cyclists assess the intersection from a point of view that's far better than a motorist who is lower and can't hear or see as well as a cyclist because of their position/enclosure. Cyclists choose to take the risk to proceed because it takes physical exertion to come to a full stop and then start-up again. That's very taxing on a commute.

  > ... Again: it is ILLEGAL for cyclists to run stop signs

Sure it is, if you're one of those "letter of the law" people (and your usage of CAPS suggests that you are). In practice, it's allowed with a common sense judgement call. I've done it more times that I can remember in front of police. I have heard of police enforcing this occasionally to "send a message" but it's never sustained.

It's also "ILLEGAL" to run red lights on a bike, but that is done anyways for pragmatic reasons. If you're a cyclist, the most dangerous time is when traffic starts moving again. Motor vehicles can be going at speed just as you're getting clipped in and starting to move. In certain cases, it's just better to get yourself through the intersection and to the other side before the cars start moving. That way, you can position yourself and be visible to them. There's fewer surprises that way for everyone.

But check your local laws first. There are often specific rules for bicycles in the traffic. Here, for example, is Washington state's law on lane position:

RCW 46.61.770

Riding on roadways and bicycle paths.

(1) Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place shall ride as near to the right side of the right through lane as is safe except:

__(a) While preparing to make or while making turning movements at an intersection or into a private road or driveway;

__(b) When approaching an intersection where right turns are permitted and there is a dedicated right turn lane, in which case a person may operate a bicycle in this lane even if the operator does not intend to turn right;

__(c) While overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction; and

__(d) When reasonably necessary to avoid unsafe conditions including, but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, bicyclists, pedestrians, animals, and surface hazards.

(2) A person operating a bicycle upon a roadway or highway other than a limited access highway, which roadway or highway carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more marked traffic lanes, may ride as near to the left side of the left through lane as is safe.

(3) A person operating a bicycle upon a roadway may use the shoulder of the roadway or any specially designated bicycle lane.

(4) When the operator of a bicycle is using the travel lane of a roadway with only one lane for traffic moving in the direction of travel and it is wide enough for a bicyclist and a vehicle to travel safely side-by-side within it, the bicycle operator shall operate far enough to the right to facilitate the movement of an overtaking vehicle unless other conditions make it unsafe to do so or unless the bicyclist is preparing to make a turning movement or while making a turning movement.

(5) Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway shall not ride more than two abreast except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles

>Novice riders are trained to stick to an invisible (or painted) bike lake which ends up with them being far less visible than they need to be.

I don't think it necessarily has to do with being a novice, sometimes it's just the law. I bike mostly in Oregon and as far as I am aware you have stay in the bike lane if there is one, unless you are passing it the lane is blocked. ORS 814.420

People can get sufficiently elderly and sick that an electric tricycle would be the best form of transportation for them. In car centric areas they are usually confined to their homes in these cases.