Lethal memory fail: Why drivers see, and then forget motorcyclists

> This I disagree with.

Well the law and society disagree with you. The type of reasoning is very ubiquitous too. The more dangerous thing you are operating the more responsibility you have. We generally have morals that align to it being worse to take someone else's life than your own, though we don't encourage either. A car can do much more damage to others than a motorcycle can. A motorcycle can do more damage than a bicyclist can. A bicyclist can do more damage than a pedestrian. It isn't surprising that the right of way follows the inverse of this; those that are most vulnerable have a higher right of way.

I think you are also conflating two different things. Legally and socially we consider the car to be held to a higher standard because it is more dangerous. Practically when I'm on a bike I have to be more vigilant because I'm more vulnerable and I value my life. But when we say that someone should be held to a higher standard we can take an inverse to check our understanding. Disagreeing that cars should be held to a higher standard is equivalent to saying "cars should be held to less (or equal) standards as bicyclists", which I think sounds kinda absurd.

> The difference is that being careless on a bike of any type is more dangerous to you than being careless in a car

And I think this demonstrates that confusion. The bike is not more dangerous, the car is. There is more danger involved when riding a bike, but the car is definitely more dangerous. There is no way you can argue that a bike can do more damage than a car can. The car is more dangerous, therefore it has more responsibility. But that doesn't mean you should trust them to be responsible. Different things.

At this link you will find official stats from EU for 2018.

https://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/sites/roadsafety/...

Bikes are dangerous (for bikers most of all) and, unexpectedly, countries with more bikes and with better biking infrastructures have higher mortality rates.

For example Italy is safer than Holland or Germany and the majority of fatalities happen in the age range 50-65+, because bikes are inherently dangerous for old people (a lot more than cars).

And in practically every country men are dominating the rankings. EU average is 80% men 20% women.

If you think that in Italy in 2018 there have been 172.344 accidents, causing 3.325 deaths it means that only 1,9% of the accidents cause a death. That's quite safe if you ask me, especially if you consider the total number of kilometers traveled. The statistics must be improved, but it's good nonetheless.

In the same period 275 bike fatalities were registered, it means that ~1 death every 10 is a bike related accident. If you think that Italy has the highest ratio of car owned in the entire west (more than US) at 89% and it is safer than other bike friendly countries like Germany or the Netherlands, it is quite easy to conclude that cars are safer than bikes.

Another interesting data point is "Accident Causation"

~20% of the accidents are caused by ‘incorrect direction’ by the biker, while `other drivers/bikers in bicycle accidents` have taken ‘incorrect direction’ only 2% of the time.

‘incorrect direction’ refers to (I will quote the study here)

> ‘Incorrect direction’ refers to a manoeuvre being carried out in the wrong direction (for example, turning left instead of right) or leaving the road (not following the intended direction of the road). ‘Premature action’ describes a critical event with an action started too early, before a signal was given or required conditions established.

It looks like imprudence by the bikers causes at least 20% of the accidents.

Another 20% is caused by `premature actions` that refers to

> ‘Premature action’ describes a critical event with an action started too early, before a signal was given or required conditions established.

Bikers are also more subject to fractures and open wounds

Fracture bikers: 34%

Fracture all modes of transport: 27%

Open wound bikers: 13%

Open wounds all modes of transport: 10%

So the question remains: why most of the time bikers don't wear any kind of protection?

Could it be because it's a majority of males and the testosterone in their bodies is known for promoting risk-taking behavior?

Could it be that countries with bike-only infrastructures promote taking more risks because are publicised as "safer" but they really are not?

Could it simply be that women are just wiser?