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

Things people blamed on bicycles

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 852 posts

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#301

Post by kuschku »

pastage wrote: post #172
jimmytidey wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the point of the traffic signals? A big part of it is safety. I promise you, no matter what cyclists are doing at red lights, cars are orders of magnitude more dangerous than cyclists. Cyclists should obey the law, but people focusing on cyclist skipping red lights are missing the point: cars kill people, cyclists don't. Moreover, if a cyclist causes an accident, they will almost certainly be seriously injure…

No red lights are not a safety measure, they make car traffic go faster. Most intersections have better throughput without redlight for smaller vehicles at slow speed. As long as the speed of cars is lowered to something safe they are also a lot safer.

But that's the point! If the road was bicycles only, the traffic planning would be entirely different, most likely either no traffic light at all, or a small roundabout.

Traffic signals only exist to accelerate car traffic. They slow down everyone else.

The most dangerous thing you can do as bicyclist is stopping, because the first ~10 meters after you’ve just started cycling again your balance won’t be perfect yet. And it happens that these few meters are almost always right in an intersection, in a conflict zone with cars.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#302

Post by martyvis »

ejb999 wrote: post #265
bertil wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cars kill someone every three seconds.

>>Cars kill someone every three seconds. Do you have evidence to back that up? That would imply 10.5 million people are killed by cars each year - I don't buy that. 31557600 seconds in a year, divided by 3 = 10,519,200

One every 25 seconds here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r...

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#303

Post by kuschku »

evandijk70 wrote: post #76
ChrisRR wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the UK as a cyclist I still get so much hate on the road. I'm just trying to get to work like everyone else, but people still drive their cars up right behind me, squeeze past when there's not enough space, beep their horns and shout out the window. And then the justification is always "well I saw a cyclist run a red light once, therefore all cyclists are shit"

How often does that kind of thing happen? Daily, weekly, monthly, yearly?

I originally was making a list of every driver that came close to killing me, noting down their license plate and making a police report.

After a single day with over a dozen, I've stopped counting. Now I only note down the drivers that, when turning a corner or passing me, threw me off the bicycle and/or drove over the bicycle, damaging parts of it.

The list currently contains 2 events this month alone.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#304

Post by wkjagt »

DoubleFree wrote: post #194
montebicyclelo wrote: post #114

Cycling is cheap, often faster than driving (in my city), healthy, less noisy, creates vastly less pollution, less dangerous to pedastrians... And I'd guess that about 95% of drivers that I come across are respectful of the danger they present - overtaking with enough space, and not at too high a speed (my city doesn't have great bike lanes). Unfortunately, a typical journey involves passing more than 20 cars, which…

The problem of dangerous interactions between drivers and cyclists is much smaller here in the Netherlands, mainly due to two reasons. The first reason is the infrastructure, both visible and invisible. Separated bicycle lanes are commonplace and in the few places where they intersect with car traffic, care is taken to make crossing safe and comfortable. This visible infrastructure is complemented by the concept of "…

Another reason is that being really respectful around cyclists is an important part of driving lessons in The Netherlands. And I think you can fail your driving test if you pass a bike too close, open your door without looking if a cyclists is coming from behind, or passing over a bike lane at an intersection without looking.

I am from The Netherlands and I only realized since moving to Canada that my home country is such a safe place for cyclists. I find it interesting that no one in The Netherlands wears a helmet when cycling and yet serious cycling injuries don’t seem to be a common thing, whereas here in Canada I know of multiple people that got “doored” or otherwise have been in a bike related accident.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#305

Post by CalRobert »

catonmylap wrote: post #210
CalRobert wrote: post #160

My family and I just spent a week in Amsterdam and a day in Utrecht. The author of this article was very kind and spent a whole day showing us around her town (Houten, a 9 minute train ride from Utrecht). https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/may/16/welcome-cycle... The number of kids getting around on their own was fantastic. There's a way of life where you don't have to be a taxi. I'm browsing funda.nl now.

Yes, when you once lived in a city in The Netherlands you never want to go back into any other country, where are cars are used as main transportation inside cities. Everybody cycles here and it feels very safe to do it, however the infrastructure is the most important part. Cars are second class citizens most of the time and people driving them know this.

I got my EU passport last year and my wife should have hers in a few months. We're thinking next summer is a good time to move. Our kids will still be young enough to pick up the language easily enough I think (3 and 5).

Shame it's going to get miserable summers thanks to climate change...

Edit: I agree re: not wanting to go back to any other country, except that we're also looking at somewhere like Odense (Denmark).

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#306

Post by gspr »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #239
davisoneee wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if a driver has to 'squeeze past', they are a bad driver. if a driver is driving so close that they couldn't react to a cyclist falling, they are a bad driver. You should drive within safe limits. If you cannot brake in the distance between you and the car in front, you are _too close_. If you squeeze to overtake, you are too close. Potholes exist. Wind exists. In the UK, the (edit) guidance is that you should pass a…

> if a driver has to 'squeeze past', they are a bad driver if they do not kill you, they are not. or maybe if you are scared of other road users and need a "safe space" you aren't a good road user. just maybe > if a driver is driving so close that they couldn't react to a cyclist falling, they are a bad welcome to the reality. I'm not driving too close to you, you are zig-zaging in the middle of the street and you we…

You're the kind of driver who makes me want to kick cars off of roads in densely populated area. What a ridiculous notion that it's the soft participants in traffic that need to heed the hard ones!

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#307

Post by markus_zhang »

There are so much love for bicycles. I'll offer something from the other side that people who drive. What I really find it scary is that cyclists often take the road as they wish and then block dozens of vehicles, or do something else that might seem to be quite normal from their perspective, but nevertheless is dangerous from drivers' perspective (e.g. suddenly get into road from sidewalk, are you going to cross or not?)

Basically, if the road you are cycling on are not reserved for cyclists, I'd say you are putting yourself and other people in risk. My city has a lot of cycling lanes but unfortunately not every road has one.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#308

Post by Jochim »

eptcyka wrote: post #201
ajuc wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, at intersections, as a driver, I will let bicycles and pedestrians cross first if there's a stop sign or the traffic is moving slowly. There's no if, and you're not in a position to "let" them do anything. Doesn't matter how fast they go. If they have the right of way - they do. If they don't - they don't. Speed doesn't matter and it's not your decision. > I am specifically referring to a situation where there…

The soccer mom comment is a bit insensitive, but I meant to imply that the person operating their vehicle isn't paying attention to driving much. As for the cycling enthusiast remark, if you're cycling on mountain roads for the purpose of recreation, I think it's fair to say that you'd be interested in cycling more than most other people. I might be very wrong. I don't have anything against cyclists, I am one myself.…

> Yes there is. In the UK, as per the latest changes to the highway code, slower traffic should let faster traffic pass, when possible to do so in a safe manner.

I haven't been able to find this change sorry, where did you see it? It's not mentioned in any of the update articles I've been able to find[0]. The pre-existing rule 169 is the closest match and only suggests that road users do not create long queues of traffic. This doesn't mean that slower road users are required to pull over for any faster vehicle, only that they should try to if a longer queue begins to form behind them.

Older articles[1] indicate that 169 doesn't apply to cyclists at all but I imagine this is an overgeneralisation of the rule that allows cyclists to take a lane position that prevents cars from overtaking when it is unsafe to do so.

[0] https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-highway-code-8-change...

[1] https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/law-slow-m...

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#309

Post by maxerickson »

markus_zhang wrote: post #307

There are so much love for bicycles. I'll offer something from the other side that people who drive. What I really find it scary is that cyclists often take the road as they wish and then block dozens of vehicles, or do something else that might seem to be quite normal from their perspective, but nevertheless is dangerous from drivers' perspective (e.g. suddenly get into road from sidewalk, are you going to cross or…

Laws vary widely of course, but for example, in my state, cyclists have a right to all roads except limited access highways.

They are meant to keep as far to the right as is safe, so for example, to execute a left turn you enter the middle of the lane and follow the same path a car would. Or another example, if there is a parked car blocking the right side of the street, the cyclist can take the center of the lane to go around the parked car.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#310

Post by antihero »

DoubleFree wrote: post #194
montebicyclelo wrote: post #114

Cycling is cheap, often faster than driving (in my city), healthy, less noisy, creates vastly less pollution, less dangerous to pedastrians... And I'd guess that about 95% of drivers that I come across are respectful of the danger they present - overtaking with enough space, and not at too high a speed (my city doesn't have great bike lanes). Unfortunately, a typical journey involves passing more than 20 cars, which…

The problem of dangerous interactions between drivers and cyclists is much smaller here in the Netherlands, mainly due to two reasons. The first reason is the infrastructure, both visible and invisible. Separated bicycle lanes are commonplace and in the few places where they intersect with car traffic, care is taken to make crossing safe and comfortable. This visible infrastructure is complemented by the concept of "…

Just need a way to deal with bike theft. My number one concern is parking my pretty decent bike within view of where I’m sitting or not leaving it unattended for over five minutes. I’m insured, but I have a bond with my wheels!

If anyone has recommendations for stealth theft detection/tracking devices I’m all ears.

Post reply on HN