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

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

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 186 posts

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

#121

Post by kelnos »

birken wrote: post #63
jinushaun wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a cyclist in the U.S., but have no problem admitting that probably 90% of the time, the cyclist is at fault. I've ridden bikes in Europe with real bike lanes—U.S. urban cycling culture is not Dutch cycling culture. There is not a culture of responsible cycling. We don't have real bike lanes. We don't stop for red lights. We don't stop for pedestrians. As a result, the U.S. also does not have many drivers or pedes…

I'm a cyclist and I completely disagree with this. I've biked thousands and thousands of miles in SF, and I think probably 80 or 90% of cyclists are responsible and law abiding. There are maybe 10 or 20 percent who are bad, run red lights and do other crazy shit. They are not the majority. And if you want further proof, just read the list of bicycle fatalities in SF [1] and see who is at fault. Most of the time it is…

I'm a pedestrian in SF and disagree with this. I tend to walk anywhere between 4-8 miles per day, just as a matter of course, and I see dozens and dozens of cyclists. A significant number of them do not stop at red lights when traffic is light. A majority do not stop at stop signs. When it comes to stopping, cars are much more law-abiding (likely because the penalty is worse, not because of any desire to be safer). Many cyclists make unsafe turns; I've had a few close calls while walking. Many ride on the sidewalk. I even occasionally see a cyclist riding the wrong way on a one-way street (though most will move to the sidewalk instead of doing this, which is just as bad).

And if you want further proof, just read the list of bicycle fatalities in SF and see who is at fault. Most of the time it is the vehicle.

This point has nothing to do with whether or not the majority of cyclists are responsible and law-abiding. All it does is suggest that drivers are inattentive, and that the state is strongly biased toward drivers and wrongly backs them up when they kill someone.

I wouldn't say that most cyclists are irresponsible (more that they tend to take risks, risks which may actually be reasonable and acceptable), and I certainly don't believe that most cyclists are at fault when there's a fatality involving a car (quite the opposite). But suggesting that most cyclists habitually follow the rules of the road... that's just absurd in my experience.

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

#122

Post by oska »

angersock wrote: post #97
oska wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And then there are the pedestrians! If drivers are clueless, people that are ambling around or jogging are malevolently stupid. Call out your passing side ahead of time, and they stop and crane their head around trying to see if God himself was talking to them--instead of, you know, moving out of the way in the indicated direction. Then there are the uppity joggers who will get in your face for sharing a dirt path…

I do see the parallel. Unfortunately, we are accepted neither by the drivers nor the pedestrians...I would be happy to stay off the sidewalks entirely (there being other safety issues with them) were the roads not so much worse. Anyways, gripe as I do, I still consider it my responsibility not to hit pedestrians, since I'm the larger vehicle.

Yes, agree that cyclists often occupy an unhappy middle position between cars and pedestrians.

My position is that walking is humanity's natural way of moving around and that urban landscapes where they maintain primacy are by far the most pleasant in which to exist and move around. We obviously also need other modes of transport in our modern world but every effort should be made to keep these other modes of transport from taking over primacy. Unfortunately this is exactly what cars have done. There is much less of a threat from cyclists to pedestrians but still, as a cyclist, I feel that is up to us to respect pedestrians and not the other way round. Of course, I would also like to see car drivers demonstrate the same attitude towards cyclists (and, of course, pedestrians).

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

#123

Post by peterfirefly »

gamegoblin wrote: post #9
rkischuk wrote: post #3

Almost every time I encounter cyclists in traffic, they context switch between vehicle and pedestrian at their convenience. If you want to be treated as a vehicle, be a vehicle. Don't block a lane between intersections and then ride the divider lines to advance ahead of cars at every intersection so they can wait and merge around you once the light turns. As a former bike commuter, I really don't understand why bikes…

I cycle around Seattle quite a bit and my preference is always to ride on the sidewalk. As far as I know, this is legal as long as I yield to pedestrians. I can ride nearly the same speed as on the road, and stop or slow down at my leisure. It's much more enjoyable. I never find pedestrians to be an issue. It's always far faster than walking and less stressful than riding in the street.

Maybe they find you to be an issue?

If you really do yield to pedestrians than I suppose they don't but most bicyclists are -- like smokers -- not nearly as considerate as they think they are.

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

#124

Post by popopje »

regularfry wrote: post #74
jinushaun wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a cyclist in the U.S., but have no problem admitting that probably 90% of the time, the cyclist is at fault. I've ridden bikes in Europe with real bike lanes—U.S. urban cycling culture is not Dutch cycling culture. There is not a culture of responsible cycling. We don't have real bike lanes. We don't stop for red lights. We don't stop for pedestrians. As a result, the U.S. also does not have many drivers or pedes…

Is that cause or effect, though? The environment is hostile to cyclists, so do you only get those who will be as hostile as they need to be in return to survive?

I work as a messenger and yes - the way to avoid being turned into (the main issue, if you are on the inside of someone who can't see you or someone doesn't signal) is to push in front of and into the flow of traffic. I have no doubt that it is concerning and annoying to drivers, but they have then seen me.

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

#125

Post by claudius »

ptaipale wrote: post #99
claudius wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Of course, most of these wouldn’t be issues if we treated bikes like cars with the exact same rights and obligations as cars. Hmm, I suppose you did not mean this, but I think that mandating a bike rider's license, registration, insurance and annual tax would not help that much to remove problems. Overall, I don't see how bikes could have the exact same rights and obligations as cars, although overall both are vehi…

> Hmm, I suppose you did not mean this, but I think that mandating a bike rider's license, registration, insurance and annual tax would not help that much to remove problems.

If that means I can use inner-city roads the same ways cars can use them and that I’m not forced onto shoddy bike lanes the width of a towel, I’m happy to get registered, pay insurance etc. I somewhat expect bike insurance to be less expensive than car insurance on account of you being able to do less damage with a bike; similarly, taxes should be lower as even overland bike paths are much cheaper than anything built for cars. Overall, I’m not unhappy about the idea, though.

> Overall, I don't see how bikes could have the exact same rights and obligations as cars, although overall both are vehicles and should be treated as vehicles, equally. Still, you can't ride a bike on an Autobahn, and neither can you drive a tractor. You may or may not be allowed to ride bike on a road that is dedicated to buses, although you may be allowed to ride a bike there. Etc, etc. Bikes cannot and shouldn't have *exact' same rights and obligations as cars.

Of course there was some hyperbole there – I don’t expect to be allowed to drive on a highway, but not because I am a cyclist but because I can’t meet some minimum speed (i.e. the same rules that mean tractors can’t drive there either). However, I don’t see why I can’t drive on an inner-city road among cars which are at most allowed to drive 50 km/h and instead have to stick to a tiny bike lane next to a series of parked cars.

Regarding bus lanes, I am actually not too fond of them being open to cyclists: A single bus being slowed down annoys substantially more people than even a couple cars being slowed down and passing by a stopped bus is a major annoyance and safety issue. There’s some idea that you can promote cycling by giving out these perks (elsewhere, hybrids or electric cars are allowed to use them, too), but overall that shouldn’t be necessary in a healthy climate.

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

#126

Post by kelnos »

popopje wrote: post #113
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.

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 done when the cyclist believes it's safe to do so, and they're usually very attentive and aware of their surroundings for the duration. It's when the cyclist is in a normal state, and has no reason to expect a surprise attack-by-car, that the fatalities happen.

(As a pedestrian, I very much sympathize with this. I tend to jaywalk quite often when walking, and when I do, I'm super attentive and ensure it's safe before crossing. It's probably more likely that I'd get hit by a car when I have the right of way than when jaywalking. But I'm still breaking the law, as is the cyclist when he/she runs a stop sign.)

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

#127

Post by ffumarola »

bsder wrote: post #79
mdemare wrote: post #52

Some facts about cycling in the Netherlands: - After dark, head- and taillights are mandatory for cyclists, and you will be fined if you don't have them. - Cycling on the sidewalk is prohibited. This too is enforced. - Cyclists in the Netherlands are not generally very respectful of traffic laws - they will run red lights when they can. - Practically nobody wears helmets. - 184 cyclist deaths in 2013 (out of +- 10 mi…

> - 184 cyclist deaths in 2013 (out of +- 10 million active cyclists) Um, isn't that actually quite a LOT . Do we really want to emulate that? The annual cyclist death toll in San Francisco looks to be under 10 people a year. Right about the same level as the fatal car crash death toll per year. Complaining about something that really looks purely accidental from a statistical viewpoint is not going to make people ve…

The population of SF is ~840k.

The SFMTA estimates that 16% of San Francisco residents are "frequent cyclists", defined as cycling two or more days per week.

That means ~135k frequent cyclists.

184:10,000,000 = .0184 per 1,000 10:135,000 = .0741 per 1,000

SF = 4x higher

For SF to be safer than the Netherlands, bike deaths need to pretty much disappear.

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

#128

Post by cperciva »

belorn wrote: post #118
cperciva wrote: post #26

At first I thought this was going to be a parody of "anti-rape-culture" campaigns (e.g., "teaching women to defend themselves from rapists is wrong, because we should be teaching men to not rape women"), but much to my surprise it seems that the author is serious. And so I really have to wonder about his grip on logic: The whole purpose of making cyclists more visible is to prevent drivers from hitting them! Driving…

There is a 100$-200$ fine where I live if you drive around a car without working lights. The same law is used if the rear light of a bicycle is not working. So, to answer your question, people in traffic should follow traffic laws.

I agree. But lights burning out happens, and it's far more dangerous on a bike than on a car -- because a car is likely to have other lights and otherwise be large enough to be easily visible anyway.

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

#129

Post by peterfirefly »

andygambles wrote: post #43

I cycle to work nearly everyday in the UK. Locally we have crazy cycle lanes that at junction take you off the road and then have to yield to crossing traffic at junctions whereas if I stayed on the road I have right of way. I always stop at red lights. I ride the road so follow the rules of the road. However as a cyclist I also have to take command of a lane to prevent vehicles trying to squeeze by between a central…

Turning like that across the traffic is not allowed in Denmark (and hasn't been for something like 30 years). You have to stop first.

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

#130

Post by cperciva »

Digit-Al wrote: post #89
cperciva wrote: post #26

At first I thought this was going to be a parody of "anti-rape-culture" campaigns (e.g., "teaching women to defend themselves from rapists is wrong, because we should be teaching men to not rape women"), but much to my surprise it seems that the author is serious. And so I really have to wonder about his grip on logic: The whole purpose of making cyclists more visible is to prevent drivers from hitting them! Driving…

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.
Post reply on HN