Don’t make bicyclists more visible. Make drivers stop hitting them • Hacker News Board

Re: Don’t make bicyclists more visible. Make drivers stop hitting them

#151

Post by brandonmenc » Thu, Apr 16, 2015, 10:30 AM UTC

pascalo wrote: post #98

hueving wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you going on about? The person was complaining about bicycles on the sidewalk where it is illegal for them to be. Who cares if they don't kill people that often? It's not the point!

I am talking about perceived risk of cycling as a hyperbole vs actual risks that don't get mentioned. I'm pretty sure more people get killed by cars mounting the sidewalk.

Cripes, you win. I was using "nearly killed" as a figure of speech. Guilty as charged!

But here's the rub - people don't want to put up with even a 1-in-1000 chance of getting a broken arm just from walking on the sidewalk, and they don't want to constantly be on guard against bikes zipping all over the place on what should be a relaxing walk.

It's annoying, and that's why we have things like noise ordnances even though no one ever like, dies because the neighbors are too loud.

Re: Don’t make bicyclists more visible. Make drivers stop hitting them

#152

Post by ptaipale » Thu, Apr 16, 2015, 10:36 AM UTC

Sharlin wrote: post #103

keyanp wrote: post #27

This article is mostly nonsense. The way I look at it, mandatory helmet laws are protecting not only cyclists but also drivers by reducing the likelihood of a serious injury resulting from an accident. In regards to improving bike-ability, adding more bike lanes is certainly the best way forward. Meanwhile we can encourage responsible bike use for those who share the roadways with motor vehicles. I'm frankly appalled…

There's some fascinating data hinting that drivers behave more recklessly towards cyclists who wear a helmet, presumably thinking that a collision won't be so big a deal if the cyclist is "protected".

I think the presumption is wrong; if the phenomenon is true (somewhat doubtful yet) it may be more related to the driver thinking:

1) "that guy wears helmet; he seems to be a law-abiding cyclist who knows what he's doing and behaves in a predictable way"

2) "that cyclist doesn't seem to control his vehicle; I need to pass by a wider margin".

Re: Don’t make bicyclists more visible. Make drivers stop hitting them

#153

Post by ptaipale » Thu, Apr 16, 2015, 10:37 AM UTC

bytecycle wrote: post #81

keyanp wrote: post #27

This article is mostly nonsense. The way I look at it, mandatory helmet laws are protecting not only cyclists but also drivers by reducing the likelihood of a serious injury resulting from an accident. In regards to improving bike-ability, adding more bike lanes is certainly the best way forward. Meanwhile we can encourage responsible bike use for those who share the roadways with motor vehicles. I'm frankly appalled…

To justify the cost of these additional bike lanes and infrastructure you'll first need people actually riding their bikes. A change of mentality is required here. As a cyclist you shouldn't feel so unsafe that you have to put on a helmet and war paint. The money spent on ridiculous bike laws and expensive special infrastructure should first be allocated to educating all drivers. There needs to be a shift in attitude…

> To justify the cost of these additional bike lanes and infrastructure you'll first need people actually riding their bikes

Chicken-and-egg. On the other hand, to get people riding their bikes, you need to offer them an infrastructure that feels safe enough to get started.

Re: Don’t make bicyclists more visible. Make drivers stop hitting them

#154

Post by thaumasiotes » Thu, Apr 16, 2015, 10:55 AM UTC

danielwarna wrote: post #132

thaumasiotes wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pedestrians and bike riders are not compatible either Maybe you could explain what you're thinking of when you say this? My experience says that pedestrians and bikes are fully compatible; they commonly share sidewalks.

I'd claim that cyclists tend behave a lot more like other motorists than like pedestrians The speed difference between a cyclists and a pedestrian is usually bigger than that between a car and a cyclists, at least in urban traffic. Pedestrians can be very unpredictable and they don't tend to signal very clearly what they are about to do, not to mention that a pedestrian can stop or turn around pretty much instantly.…

So, I live in Shanghai, which hopefully qualifies as "urban" with a population of over 20 million people (according to wikipedia, almost 10k per square mile, healthily above LA). All of the following situations are routine:

1. Dedicated bike lanes.

2. Bikes hiding along the side of a street without bike lanes, hoping not to be killed.

3. Bikes using the sidewalk.

Sharing the sidewalk is far and away the safest thing for the bikers; even if you're using a dedicated bike lane you'll sometimes have to cross car traffic (say, if you're making a left turn -- I'm willing to do this as part of a giant herd of bikes, but if I'm on my own I just use crosswalks with the pedestrians). Cars are fast; bikes aren't. I could see myself potentially injuring a small child by crashing into them with my bike; I cannot imagine seriously injuring an adult the same way. I have personally been involved in a bike crash; I crashed into a motorized bicycle going the other way in a bike lane. This is much worse in terms of speed differential than a bike hitting a pedestrian, but the total of my injuries was a bleeding knuckle.

> The optimal solution is of course to build dedicated bike lanes

This is phrased with much more confidence than I believe you can reasonably have. Maybe a better solution is to assume that bikers aren't such idiots that they'll be crushing children beneath their wheels all the time if you allow them on the sidewalks. I fairly frequently get stuck behind groups of pedestrians when the sidewalk isn't wide enough for me to go around them. I've often heard one of them say to another "hey, let that guy by". I've never heard anyone say "hey, get off the sidewalk".

> If cycling is to be seen as a form of transportation they also need to have access to proper infrastructure.

Trust me, cycling is viewed as a form of transportation here. And yes, dedicated bike lanes are all over the place. But it's still routine for bikes to use the sidewalk. There are plenty of older areas with wide sidewalks and narrow streets.

Re: Don’t make bicyclists more visible. Make drivers stop hitting them

#155

Post by ptaipale » Thu, Apr 16, 2015, 11:02 AM UTC

cperciva wrote: post #130

Digit-Al wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As both a cyclist and a driver, I agree with you to a point. However, the wife of an ex-colleague of mine cycles to work every day. She was knocked off her bike by a car one dark morning (luckily not hurt, just a bit shaken up). She had lights front and back on the bike, was wearing a high visibility jacket, had a head mounted light, and little lights on her body. Basically, she was lit up like a Christmas tree. The…

Sure, and there's a point where "I didn't see you" means "I was negligent and not paying attention" rather than "You weren't visible". I'm not saying that motorists have no responsibility to look for bicycles; rather, that there is a shared responsibility: Motorists should look for bicycles, and cyclists should ensure that, if looked for, they will be seen.

Quite right. There are some cases where the cyclist is actually not visible enough (no lights, no reflectors). But more common is 1) the driver didn't look, 2) the driver didn't look carefully enough, 3) the driver couldn't see even if he/she was careful.

For case 3) and HGV, a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzL0Kyk4m-8

Re: Don’t make bicyclists more visible. Make drivers stop hitting them

#156

Post by c22 » Thu, Apr 16, 2015, 11:07 AM UTC

maaaats wrote: post #108

pandaman wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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…

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).

Re: Don’t make bicyclists more visible. Make drivers stop hitting them

#157

Post by c22 » Thu, Apr 16, 2015, 11:13 AM UTC

kelnos wrote: post #126

popopje wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cyclists do not _want_ to be hit by vehicles - if they are not stopping, they have looked around and deemed the situation to be safe enough.. That's not to say it's legal, but they do not have a death wish.

Not really the point (though I agree with you): the grandparent suggested that 80-90% of cyclists follow the rules of the road. The parent (and I) disagree with that; no one's suggesting those people want to get hit or are inattentive, just that they're not abiding by traffic laws. In fact, it's somewhat telling that most bicycle fatalities don't involve a cyclist doing something stupid: most cyclist law-breaking is…

My observations suggest that close to 100% of road users are not strictly law abiding and likely break multiple rules during most trips.

Re: Don’t make bicyclists more visible. Make drivers stop hitting them

#158

Post by pascalo » Thu, Apr 16, 2015, 11:14 AM UTC

santaclaus wrote: post #100

pandaman wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

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.

Re: Don’t make bicyclists more visible. Make drivers stop hitting them

#159

Post by pascalo » Thu, Apr 16, 2015, 11:24 AM UTC

claudius wrote: post #88

yitchelle wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They seem far more compatible to ride sidewalks and co-travel with pedestrians. Pedestrians and bike riders are not compatible either. I am a bike commuter as well. I live in West Germany at the moment, but I have also bike commuted to work in Australia. In general, commuting in Germany is a much safer proposition than in Australia. The German drivers seem to be more aware and tolerance to the bike commuters. The b…

I’m cycling to work in Munich at the moment. There’s a little piece (~800m) of one-way street with traffic lights at both ends. Due to the layout of the initial traffic lights, cyclists usually enter that street before traffic, as they have to obey their special bike-traffic-light. On that street, cars attempt and do pass by me every day, despite there definitely not being enough room for a bike and a car to move nex…

> The idea that German drivers are aware or tolerant of bikes is absolutely ridiculous – though of course they may be more aware and tolerant than Australian bikers, but I don’t know that (:

Trust me, they are.

Re: Don’t make bicyclists more visible. Make drivers stop hitting them

#160

Post by c22 » Thu, Apr 16, 2015, 11:27 AM UTC

baddox wrote: post #20

makeitsuckless wrote: post #12

I've repeated this dozens of times whenever Americans come up with lame excuses for why cycling is dangerous in the US: in the Netherlands cyclists still share the road with cars a lot of the time. The rules however are very simple: as a driver, you're not allowed to hit weaker traffic like cyclists and pedestrians. Period. If it happens, the burden of proof that you could do nothing about it is on you. Is this insan…

But I feel like the causal direction might be mixed up here. There are two phenomena: Netherlands is safer for cyclists, and Netherlands punishes automobile drivers more for hitting a cyclist. You seem to be implying that the latter causes the former. But it seems to be that both could be caused by a third (potential, I don't actually know) phenomenon: that the ratio of cyclists to automobiles in the Netherlands is m…

The dutch have done significantly more to encourage bicycle trips than this one law. Bike paths, separated bike lanes with independent signals, removal of (previously existing) automobile-focused infrastructure in cities, etc. These changes were fought for and implemented with the absolute intent of increasing bicycle access and they have been wildly successful.