Live data from Hacker News

Is It O.K. to Kill Cyclists?

nytimes.com

111–120 of 168 posts

Re: Is It O.K. to Kill Cyclists?

#111

It's just completely surreal driving a bicycle in car traffic. The vast majority of car drivers simply lack the moral character and should not ever be allowed to drive such dangerous machinery. Cycle paths are optional here, and I very regularly opt out of driving on them because they are in a constant state of disarray, had snow and glass shoved on them, are too close to parking cars or end abruptly, forcing me to m…

> It's just completely surreal driving a bicycle in car traffic.

As true as that is, I almost wouldn't have it any other way. Biking in city traffic is exciting and almost like meditation to me. It's way less dangerous than biking in the country where I live now and biking here is pretty damned boring anyway.

I'm getting fat!

Re: Is It O.K. to Kill Cyclists?

#112
post #17

No, it is not. But it is also not OK to prevent cyclists to kill themselves by car. I've witnessed an accident recently when the car in front of me hit a cyclist. He was: a) riding at night without lights b) running red light c) against the traffic d) without a helmet I'd say this guy (Stanford student, which IMHO implies some intellect) could serve as an encyclopedic definition of our Bay Area cyclist. Cyclists who…

scratch off point d. Helmets don't really do anything to protect you unless you practically fall off your bike standing still. I've seen brains on the street from at least two low-speed bike accidents where the cyclist was wearing a helmet. Also, it's not that all cyclists are disobeying the law. Those are just the ones you choose to see. Drivers and pedestrians alike just aren't looking. I always obey traffic laws o…

Wearing a helmet is always better than not wearing one. You never know what kind of accident you might be in. Sure there are some a helmet may not protect you from, but there are plenty where a helmet will. It's a stupid, pointless risk not to take such an easy precaution to reduce your odds of permanent brain injury.

Case in point, a few years I was on the home stretch of a 50 mile weekend bikeride, less than a mile from home. I was tired, dehydrated, and fuzzy-brained, but still alert enough to be paying close attention to the traffic around me. I was riding ~10-15mph in the far left lane of one-way 4-lane primary thoroughfare (35mph speed limit).

4-way intersection ahead, figured I'd cross the intersection and ride up onto the very wide sidewalk on the far side so I could get out of traffic, slow to a crawl, relax, and take it easy the rest of the way home. As I came up to the intersection I angled slightly toward the sidewalk ramp on the other side, then turned my head around to the right to watch the traffic coming up behind me to make sure no car was going to make a left turn at the intersection and either turn into me or cut me off.

All clear with cars, no left turners, but when I looked ahead again I saw I'd miss-judged my path and was going to miss the on-ramp by about 5ft and hit the nearly 1ft-high curb instead. Going too fast to correct course and hit the ramp, or to slam on the breaks and stop, only thing I could do was try jump the bike, or at least the front wheel, over the curb.

Too tired, botched the maneuver, not quite high enough, front wheel hit the curb about halfway up and went from around 10-12mph to 0 in a millisecond. Of course me and the rest of the bike kept going, me slingshotting over the handlebars (bike shoes clipped in so angular momentum at work here) and then piledriven head first into the concrete sidewalk. My head landed first with a loud crack, then my body landed on my head, then the bike on top of my body.

I might have been out for a few seconds, not sure, but the first thing I remember was thinking, "ok don't move a muscle, just lay perfectly till, you might have just broken your back and even the slightest movement could cause a tear in your spinal cord." Slowly, gradually, tentatively I started testing that individual fingers and toes worked, then hands and feet, then arms and legs, and finally body and neck.

Everything was ok, but I was still lying there not daring to try to get up. Next thought was, "ok, that loud crack was my head hitting the concrete, I probably have a concussion. gotta be careful, don't black out." Reached up to my head, started feeling around. Helmet broken in places, totalled as designed, but still attached, strapped on, conformed to my head.

Still lying on the sidewalk with bike on top of me, afraid of further injury, and feeling around my head checking for injury. No blood, no pain anywhere. Disbelief. Check again, thoroughly. Still no blood, no pain. More disbelief.

Can I really have just had a crash that bad, where my head alone absorbed the entire impact of my 200lb self and ~20lb bike, without any injury besides skinned hands and some bruises? Mindbogglingly, yes that was exactly what happened. That helmet absorbed the whole damn thing, and I walked away without either a concussion or any kind of neck or spinal injury, just some scrapes and bruises.

So yeah, just wear a helmet. Even if you have 10 accidents where a helmet is irrelevant and just 1 where it is, it will have been worth it.

If my anecdotal evidence doesn't impress you, then think of it terms of Expected Payoff E(X). Wearing a helmet costs nothing of consequence, yet the benefits could range from 0 (you're never in a crash your entire life and never need it, or you're in a crash where a helmet makes absolutely no difference) to everything (you're in a crash that would cause permanent brain damage or death without a helmet protection). You can see how the averages work out.

Humans are very poor by default at evaluating risks that have low odds of occurring, but very high consequences if they do occur. Bike crashes are exactly this kind of risk, so don't be a typical human here - don't blow these types of risks off, discount them, or ignore them. Be smart, mitigate or neutralize them.

Re: Is It O.K. to Kill Cyclists?

#113
For those questioning whether having and enforcing laws that protect cyclists may help:

In Germany, drivers are obligated to look back over their shoulder when they make a right-turn to make sure they don't run over a cyclist. This law is being actively taught, checked during the driver test, and enforced.

In Poland, a similar law was passed only 2 years ago. Driving a bicycle in Poland is considered more dangerous than driving one in Germany - cycle trip guides (that run through both countries) specifically mention that one should be much more careful around crossings and cars turning right in Poland.

Berlin, where I live, is quite close to Poland, so there are often polish drivers around. I'm careful in general, because there are enough inattentive German drivers... but once they've seen me because they've overtaken me, they will make sure not to run me over. Polish drivers, on the other hand, expect that the cyclist will give way in certain situations (i.e. they make a right turn across a bike lane) - because they have learned it that way in driving school and it works this way in their home country. Luckily, it always worked out, but I had several very close encounters with Polish drivers.

So, yes, having and enforcing laws to protect cyclists do help and increase safety.

(I may add that I don't hold a grudge against Polish people - in fact, most I've met are more easy going and less grumpy than the average German :-) I'm glad they passed this law recently and I'm sure the situation will improve in the long term).

Re: Is It O.K. to Kill Cyclists?

#114
post #75

It's just completely surreal driving a bicycle in car traffic. The vast majority of car drivers simply lack the moral character and should not ever be allowed to drive such dangerous machinery. Cycle paths are optional here, and I very regularly opt out of driving on them because they are in a constant state of disarray, had snow and glass shoved on them, are too close to parking cars or end abruptly, forcing me to m…

You've answered your own question. Why would people be upset when you've ignored the lane provided for you and instead decided to slow traffic to a grinding halt by taking up an entire lane? Certainly, it's unfortunate that the bike lane is poorly maintained, but to wholly place the blame on the drivers strikes me as questionable.

+1. +1,000,000 if I could.

Re: Is It O.K. to Kill Cyclists?

#115
post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a child gets run down by someone who didn't see him... ...an investigation will be launched to find out whether it was an accident (i.e. child did jump in front of car) or a crime (i.e. driver was texting, easily could have spotted child). Similarly, an investigation should be launched if someone runs down a cyclist. Could be the cyclists fault (i.e. running a red light) or the drivers fault (i.e. running down a c…

Why do you assume that doesn't happen?

a) The way you stated it implies that it is ALWAYS an accident, never a crime.

b) The article claimed so.

> “We do not know of a single case of a cyclist fatality in which the driver was prosecuted, except for D.U.I. or hit-and-run,” Leah Shahum, the executive director of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, told me.

Re: Is It O.K. to Kill Cyclists?

#116
post #17

No, it is not. But it is also not OK to prevent cyclists to kill themselves by car. I've witnessed an accident recently when the car in front of me hit a cyclist. He was: a) riding at night without lights b) running red light c) against the traffic d) without a helmet I'd say this guy (Stanford student, which IMHO implies some intellect) could serve as an encyclopedic definition of our Bay Area cyclist. Cyclists who…

You ever seen Amsterdam traffic? Lots of cyclists ignore red lights etc, etc, etc, and yet for some odd reason that's not considered an excuse for just running them over with your car.

I totally get the American argument in favor of the right to bear arms, but at least that's based on the assumption of responsible gun ownership.

When it comes to cars however, any sense of responsibility seems to go out of the window. Cars and bicycles aren't equals, a car is a heavy piece of machinery that can kill a grown man in an instant. The driver of a car has a much, much greater responsibility to the safety of those around them.

Re: Is It O.K. to Kill Cyclists?

#117
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That'll teach me a lesson! Seriously though, he said that he was getting run over, he said he was being passed by in a dangerously close way. Have you ever tried to pass a cyclist on a two-lane road without a shoulder? You'll find it's extremely difficult.

Then slow down and wait until it's safe to pass. What could you possibly be doing that is more important than endangering someone's life? Do you understand that the cyclist has a legal right to be there, and that the reason for that legal right is safety?

What could the cyclist be doing that is more important than getting off of the road and letting traffic go around them instead of holding it up?

Re: Is It O.K. to Kill Cyclists?

#118
post #3

The US has always had a horrible "you are on your own mentality". I mean, over a hundred kids have been killed by gun rampages in schools over the past several years and nothing has changed. Oh wait, no MORE guns have been made legal and available, not less. So basically the American public becomes trained to be desensitized to deaths, cyclists, schoolkids, drunk driving, etc.

The US has always had a horrible "you are on your own mentality". I get where you're coming from, and I wouldn't say it's wrong, but I really think there's something else going on in this case. If a driver kills a pedestrian or a person driving another car, there are consequences; if a driver kills a cyclist, there are effectively none. That contrast isn't explained by a "you are on your own" mentality.

> If a driver kills a pedestrian

The situation isn't a whole hell of a lot better for walkers vs. bike riders. "I just didn't see him" still works.

Re: Is It O.K. to Kill Cyclists?

#119
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That'll teach me a lesson! Seriously though, he said that he was getting run over, he said he was being passed by in a dangerously close way. Have you ever tried to pass a cyclist on a two-lane road without a shoulder? You'll find it's extremely difficult.

Then slow down and wait until it's safe to pass. What could you possibly be doing that is more important than endangering someone's life? Do you understand that the cyclist has a legal right to be there, and that the reason for that legal right is safety?

> Then slow down and wait until it's safe to pass.

I agree with your point, but to be fair, you could make a similar point about cyclists pulling over to let traffic pass. There are cases where overtaking is difficult for long distances, and in practice it's not realistic for a car to go at 10-15 mph behind a bike for miles at a time. For one thing, you risk drivers behind trying to overtake multiple vehicles at once.

There has to be some sort of accommodation, at least in that limited case where passing is difficult, and cyclists moving slower than the flow of traffic. Although clearly that doesn't legitimize risking someone's life.

Edit: Added second paragraph.

Re: Is It O.K. to Kill Cyclists?

#120
post #12

>So here’s my proposal: Every time you get on a bike, from this moment forward, obey the letter of the law in every traffic exchange everywhere... Hahahahaha. I see a flaw in this plan. I don't see why the author views a lack of criminal charges as evidence of some kind of travesty of justice. If a cyclist gets run down by someone who didn't see him, that's an accident, not a crime.

Well, theres a problem here, no? Even if we assume these are legitimate accidents, then there still has to be a reaction, or they will just happen again. The buck has to stop with someone, the person who planned the street in the first place, the project manager at Toyota responsible for the software that caused the unstoppable acceleration, and so on.

Can't just ignore the problem. If you pour your wine all over your shirt, thats an accident, if someone is critically injured or killed, that warrants an investigation.

Post reply on HN