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

641–650 of 852 posts

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#641

Post by bertil »

yodelshady wrote: post #474
bertil wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the cost is the biggest driver of tension unless you listen to professional drivers. People don’t blame bus riders for not "paying the road tax" (a UK trope, that tax was abolished). It would explain why things got worst recently, but people don’t hate electric cars the same way for instance. The most common angle of attack is territorial: "get off _my_ road". Cyclists shouldn’t belong there, because of…

> The most common angle of attack is territorial: "get off _my_ road". Yeah, but why do you think it's your road when in a car, especially when the same attitude exists in places without the tax, or with drivers cars that are exempt, or hell, if you've just not bothered paying it? My bet is it's nothing to do with ~£100 of tax, and everything to do with not wanting to admit you were misled by advertisers into thinkin…

A better argument that it’s not really how much it costs, but some territorial sense that anything paved with macadam is there’s is how violent conversations about parking gets:

* if someone “steals” a spot in a parking lot that you felt you wanted,

* if someone parks on the public road in front of one’s house,

* or worse, more recently when people started taking over streets for other use than car storage.

If this was seen as a commercial transaction ("as a driver, I paid the £100, therefore it is mine, and people who haven’t paid shouldn't be allowed in") then for-pay parking spots wouldn’t be seen as such an unfair tax, even when they aren't that expensive. The outrage comes from seeing those as the birthright of any car driver. Taxing that right is inherently wrong, even for a few dollars an hour (which is several orders of magnitude cheaper than the value and externality of any urban parking lot).

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#642

Post by bertil »

simongr3dal wrote: post #312
ejb999 wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>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

bertil seems to be off by an order of magnitude. WHO claims 1.3 million people die from car related injuries every year, 1 person every 25 seconds. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/road-traffi...

Yeah, sorry.

My calculator is not good with numbers.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#643

Post by richiebful1 »

_chu1 wrote: post #481
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…

I live in the American suburban/rural spillover, riding a bike is a fever dream, I wish I could but then again it's a tradeoff of not living in any big city of my state (I live in Alabama so I obviously don't have good choices)

Oddly enough, my main concern riding in rural Kentucky is loose dogs. The roads are not very suitable to driving at highway speeds and most of my route to the nearest grocery store is sparsely traveled.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#644

Post by gknoy »

lastofthemojito wrote: post #569
bluGill wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 Neurosurgeons in the Netherlands disagree with this, and are begging locals to wear helmets. https://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2021/10/neurologists-launch-ca... I don't know how rates of injuries compare between countries, but that is irrelevant.

As I understand it there are 2 Dutch words for cycling [0]: >Crucially, the Dutch distinguish between everyday cycling (fietsen) and competitive cycling (wielrennen). Fietsers (cyclists) are found everywhere. ... The term wielrennen, on the other hand, is reserved for the sweaty, colourful and seemingly endless cycle races on which the people of Benelux are so keen. In my experience, at least in my area of the US, mo…

    at traffic lights they cut to the front, 
    only to advance relatively slowly when the light turns green

    they blow through a stop sign as a car is approaching
I thought the former was entirely proper -- motorcycles do similarly, going up the gap between traffic. The latter, though ... I've seen that far too much, and is frustrating.

I also see kids and adults riding their bicycles on the sidewalk, sometimes even the wrong direction. I used to get mad at that, until I realized that our local cycling infrastructure is crap, and _on that street_ I'd not want to cycle on the road either.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#645

Post by micromacrofoot »

philwelch wrote: post #494
micromacrofoot wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1 in 3 car drivers admit to running a red light in the past month (33.3%) in 2017 over 900 americans died in accidents involving running a red light https://newsroom.aaa.com/2019/08/red-light-running-deaths-hi...

It’s surprising how low that is. As a point of comparison, in 2008, 809 Americans died tangled in their bedsheets (which correlates to total revenue generated by skiing facilities: https://tylervigen.com/view_correlation?id=1864 )

Right, more cyclists die in general every year (1,000+), but there doesn't seem to be any data on the percentage of those deaths that may be caused by cyclists running red lights.

One safe assumption is that the number of drivers killed by bikers running red lights is near 0.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#646

Post by celtain »

ricardobeat wrote: post #556
bluGill wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 Neurosurgeons in the Netherlands disagree with this, and are begging locals to wear helmets. https://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2021/10/neurologists-launch-ca... I don't know how rates of injuries compare between countries, but that is irrelevant.

Cycling already has the lowest percentage of road traffic fatalities compared to other modes. The highest is pedestrians - should pedestrians wear helmets? A helmet requirement is wholly incompatible with the role of cycling in NL. You hop on a bike anywhere, regardless of what you're wearing. It's a casual transportation mode, just like walking, not a sport activity. This proposal can only make sense for people who…

>A helmet requirement is wholly incompatible with the role of cycling in NL. You hop on a bike anywhere, regardless of what you're wearing.

I don't really understand this. I keep my helmet clipped to my handlebars, so if I have my bike, I have my helmet. Is it really so much of an inconvenience?

I'm sympathetic to the overall anti-helmet-requirement position, even seemingly trivial concerns like "it messes up my hair" sound legitimate to me. The convenience argument in particular just never made much sense to me though.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#647

Post by jotm »

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 "…

Wait, you can ride drunk? That's a point deduction on your driver's licence in other countries lol

Tbf I stopped doing that because I fell a couple of times, last time really hard, too.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#648

Post by jotm »

ericbarrett wrote: post #564
bluGill wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 Neurosurgeons in the Netherlands disagree with this, and are begging locals to wear helmets. https://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2021/10/neurologists-launch-ca... I don't know how rates of injuries compare between countries, but that is irrelevant.

I'm alive today because of a bicycle helmet. Put it on, it takes 5 seconds.

I fell a lot and never hit my head. I get the danger but I'm glad it's not legally required

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#649

Post by tomjen3 »

usrusr wrote: post #392
411111111111111 wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tbf, the danger of drunk cycling is significantly lower to third parties vs driving in a car. And you're unlikely to succeed if you're too drunk as well, as you still need to balance - which drunk people can't. It's still illegal in most places however, so your point stands

Drunk cyclists can. Back in my wild years, on some occasions walking to the bike was the difficult part. Bikes are much better at self-stabilizing than legs. The main danger (outside of going too fast, if you happen to have the training) is losing track of traffic. This isn't much of a problem on deserted night-time streets, but can easily be overwhelming during the day. Don't ever consider the bike when planning for…

Here is Denmark there is a BAC limit for cars, motorcycles, mopeds etc of 0.5

The limit for a bicycle is if you can cycle safely, and it is only a fixed fine. You can go to prison for doing it in the other cases (though you will typically not, for a first offence).

The other advantage is that you can walk home with your bicycle if you are too drunk to drive it. You don't have that option with a car.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#650

Post by bertil »

ryyr wrote: post #347

the only thing i don't like about cyclists (online, key distinction) is their insistence to group bikers/pedestrians together as some sort of coalition when lobbying solely for their own cause

Do you have evidence of that? Cyclists clearly ask for dedicated lanes, separated from the pavement. They very often mock pedestrians, often tourists, for blocking the lanes they have and not responding to calls to clear the way. It’s far too antagonist to be interpreted as fake solidarity.

They do welcome scooters, mobility aids, and powered wheelchairs in the lanes, often implicitly — and there could be confusion there, but honestly, that’s not something that feels inorganic. Anything faster than a jogger, non-polluting qualifies.

There are discourses about natural or active mobility, quieter street, and pollution that does encompass public transport, pedestrians, and cyclists. It is meant as a coalition of anyone who isn’t a giant pain for everyone around them, but I don’t think that’s a confusion. If you start seeing discourse about a clearer separation between bikes and pedestrians on quiet streets, sure, but that’s not really something cyclists talk about, or want: bikes are for mobility, not browsing between café terraces.

Post reply on HN