How to Not Kill a Cyclist

http://www.themorningnews.org/article/how-to-not-kill-a-cyclist

by xbryanx • 14 years ago

66 105 14 years ago

themorningnews.org

cpt1138• 14 years ago

Preaching to the choir. The chances of a driver reading this and actually doing anything are nil.

antidoh8• 14 years ago

Maybe. I'm a driver. I read it. I learned.

kabdib• 14 years ago

This is incredibly off-topic for HN.

However, I will add one more piece of advice for drivers: Take a motorcycle safety course. You don't /have/ to ride, of course, but it will probably be a lot of fun and it will teach you a LOT about your level of awareness on the road.

(For instance: The MSF courses teach you to look ahead about twelve seconds. I'm guessing that most drivers only have a couple seconds of planning, if that. Similarly, always having contingencies -- "where do I go if that truck changes lanes?" -- and noticing little things -- "that rear-view mirror is canted, so that driver isn't even bothering to look.")

Okay, back to r/HN :-)

antidoh8• 14 years ago

“Bicycle riders on public roads have the same rights and responsibilities as motorists, and are subject to the same rules and regulations.”

Imagine a car, coming to a red light in the right lane. It then turns right on red, but rather than driving on in the new road, it makes a sudden u-turn, coming back to the intersection. Then makes a right on green, and continues on in the original direction.

If you're a rider, discourage your colleagues from this practice. It's a violation of the responsibilities listed in the quote above, but worse, it promotes contempt for cyclists among us drivers.

It's easier to promote cross-community cooperation when you're not cherry picking your responsibilities.

mikeash5• 14 years ago

Each side wants all of the rights and none of the responsibilities, which should be no surprise. Cyclists like to ignore traffic signals when they're inconvenient. Cars like to pass bicyclists unsafely when staying behind them is inconvenient. Both sides abhor signaling.

I think what we really need is less group labeling. When a car driver fails to signal, we don't generally think, "Man, car drivers are so inconsiderate." (Well, I often do. But I think that's unusual.) Yet when a bicyclist does something against the rules, suddenly this is taken as representative of everyone on two wheels.

WiseWeasel2• 14 years ago

Personally, I think a lot of the contention stems from the huge number of 4-way stop intersections in the US. Coming to a complete stop and starting again is rough on a car engine, and especially rough on a bike rider, who must lose and rebuild all that momentum with his own strength. Also, a bike rider starting from a complete start will go through the intersection much more slowly than car traffic, causing an obstruction to traffic flow.

Other countries use roundabouts, and while that's not necessarily the answer, there might be other remedies. California is famous for the "California Stop", where you come to a near stop and roll forward slowly for a few seconds while you wait your turn, which if done systematically, is an option which seems relatively safe and conserving of momentum.

As a rider, I try to time my arrival at an intersection to share the turn of a car going in the same direction and slip through without coming to a stop if I can.

jberryman3• 14 years ago

> Each side wants all of the rights and none of the responsibilities, which should be no surprise. Cyclists like to ignore traffic signals when they're inconvenient. Cars like to pass bicyclists unsafely when staying behind them is inconvenient. Both sides abhor signaling.

Can we please stop with the moral equivalence nonsense. Yes we should all be more considerate, but please at least try to acknowledge the incredible power imbalance here.

jberryman3• 14 years ago

Yes, this is probably a stupid practice. But if you're stopped at a red and see a biker do this safely, without causing disruption, and that pisses you off, then that is 100% your problem not the biker's.

antidoh8• 14 years ago

It doesn't piss me off.

But in general, we're all ambassadors for our different communities.

viraptor3• 14 years ago

Actually it's most likely not legal. (at larger intersections, of course this is not the case everywhere) In most countries (all?) it's illegal to do a u-turn when there's a double line between lanes and usually they're painted a fair distance before intersections to prevent people from overtaking when they're close to lights / stop signs / intersecions which they may not see yet. On a bike you're really unlikely to get to a legal distance from an intersection and come back in time for the same green light.

Also it's confusing pedestrians crossing the street - you expect vehicles coming from one side or the other, not suddenly appearing on your left, because they did a u-turn right after they passed the crossing.

georgieporgie• 14 years ago

Without further information, I have no reason to think that the scenario you described is illegal. In fact, I've seen any number of motorists, motorcyclists, and cyclists do exactly that.

Incidentally, the whole notion of cyclists being subject to the same laws as cars is rather ridiculous. Bicycles are not cars, just as cars are not "road train" semis.

antidoh8• 14 years ago

"Without further information, I have no reason to think that the scenario you described is illegal."

It depends on where and when you are. Traffic laws vary from place to place, and change over time.

According to wikipedia, u-turns are generally legal in Indiana and generally illegal in Oregon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-turn

In Colorado, u-turns are subjectively legal under safe conditions. http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/Revenue-MV/RMV/12126578...

In Colorado, you will be fined and assessed costs and points for a subjectively illegal u-turn: http://www.denvertrafficlawyer.com/index.php/legal-services2...

I don't know what "points" means to a bicyclist, or one who has or doesn't have a driver license.

hughw3• 14 years ago

I've been told it's illegal here in Texas -- evading a stop light. I can't find the Texas law saying so, at least not after 5 minutes of searching.

mc32• 14 years ago

>Incidentally, the whole notion of cyclists being subject to the same laws as cars is rather ridiculous.

That may very well be how you feel; but, according to California vehicle code, bicycles and automobiles are bound by pretty much the same traffic laws, with few differences --such as a few sidewalk exceptions, having to keep right, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_law_in_California

SkyMarshal• 14 years ago

Good point. As a cyclist, I see stuff like this a lot - running stop signs, short-cutting intersections, etc. But cyclists who do that stuff never consider the near or long-term consequences - more annoyed drivers, increasing road rage, etc.

There are consequences to cherry-picking your responsibilities, even if you can't see them right away.

rizzom5000• 14 years ago

I've been known to do this when there aren't any cars on either side of the stop light, and the light is known to ignore cycles. Other than waiting a random amount of time for a car to come along and trip the sensors, my only other alternative is to go up to the sidewalk and trigger the crosswalk signal - which may be more correct behavior from a legal standpoint; but is not as efficient as me making a U-Turn which I can do much more safely and efficiently than a car can.

slantyyz5• 14 years ago

> “Bicycle riders on public roads have the same rights and responsibilities as motorists, and are subject to the same rules and regulations.”

Not wholly true. Cyclists aren't required by law to have insurance, a riding license or a license plate to even be on the road. Cyclists might get fined or punished for disobeying the law, but in most places, they can't be banned from getting on the road again like a car driver would.

westbywest• 14 years ago

But the increased restrictions on operating a motor vehicle come from the assumption driving one is a privilege, to be earned upon demonstration of appropriate competence (incl. liability insurance). Likewise, the usual consequences of a abusing a motor vehicle far more disastrous than abusing a bike, prompting a greater required performance to avert such consequences.

Moto74513• 14 years ago

Not all motor vehicles are required to carry insurance. In CA for example, Mopeds, Motorized bicycles, and certain classes of scooters do not require insurance and some only require a one time registration fee. Some also do not need to display a license plate. Off highway-on highway vehicles are also a special consideration.

In many places, including the whole of CA, you can get points or loose your license for violations on a cycle. DWI on a bicycle is equivelent to DWI in a Car for example. And I've even met someone it happened to. Not exactly something they like to brag about ;).

oasisbob• 14 years ago

Oddly enough, Portland has integrated a variant of this pattern into some of its bike lanes. There is a busy bike boulevard (Williams Ave), that is commonly approached from a left-turn off a busy road.

Instead of cutting across several lanes of traffic to make the left turn, the bike lane veers right and cuts through a courtyard, depositing the bikers in the orthogonal bike lane. It really helps reduce conflict in this intersection.

Should cyclists do this on their own? Probably not. But if built into the infrastructure its a great trick. You can see it here:

http://bit.ly/Ly64VI

viraptor3• 14 years ago

And yet there are strange projects going on like allowing bicycles to run red lights: http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyclesafety/article3311... Apparently the change was discussed in UK too for some test periods and I'm really afraid of it.

The greatest danger in my mind is not that the collision may happen. The worst part is that if I collide with another car at 10mph, the worst that can happen is that both cars will need some new paint, even if I don't hit the break. At the same speed, it's possible I'm going to kill a cyclist - pretty much actually run over him before I start breaking if he suddenly appears in front of me.

zaccus• 14 years ago

In Chicago I've almost never seen a cyclist stop at a red light or stop sign. Cyclists here feel free to ride on the wrong side of the road, weave in and out of traffic, and cut off drivers. I'm no lawyer, but I fear that if I hit one of these clowns then I'll be completely at-fault. It sucks.

Worst of all, I've never, ever seen a cyclist get pulled over. If cyclists were held to the same responsibilities as drivers, that would be one thing. But they're not, hence the resentment.

dasil003• 14 years ago

> In Chicago I've almost never seen a cyclist stop at a red light or stop sign.

Then you're not paying enough attention to cyclists. Stop and take a deep breath before you kill someone.

nachteilig• 14 years ago

That's really unnecessary. In fact, cyclists here rarely if ever stop at stop signs. It's a very dangerous situation.

to3m2• 14 years ago

Well, I don't know if you've noticed, but cyclists ride bikes, whereas car drivers drive cars. Car drivers should be prepared to take a bit more responsibility for their actions, given the amount of damage they can cause.

Anyway, is it seriously that big a deal? Avoid them, like you'd avoid a dog, or a toddler, or a man in a BMW, or some other agent that doesn't seem to comprehend the rules of the road, and then ignore the matter.

slantyyz5• 14 years ago

Where I live, a pedestrian was killed by a cyclist.

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1048256--cyclists-defend...

zobzu8• 14 years ago

I've been riding bikes to work every day in a few parts of Europe for about 10 years, including big cities traffic, suburbs and rural areas.

I've been doing the same in San Francisco for some month recently.

In Europe, everyone treat the bike as a vehicule, no question asked. Everyone knows the hand sign. People get doored, and the like but it's rare. You gotta be more careful in heavy traffic, but basically, when riding, it feels safe in most areas. Cars will wait behind you when they can't pass super-safely-with-5-meter-distance-from-your-side almost every time. Nearly everyone of them used a bike and knows how it is, at least, that's the feeling.

Now, fast forward to SF. I was surprised, to say the least.

If there is no bike lane, something like 90% of the cars simply do not give a single shit about bikes. That is, if you're on the rightmost part of the road, they will pass, no matter what (you can choose here: get even more right and risk being doored, the risk is rather high here. slow down to a near halt and go right [that's what I do]. go straight and hear the honk + generally get hit by the rear view mirror.)

Knowing that you can avoid streets without a bike lane, and when forced, take the full lane (you'll hear the honk but you'll live).

Here's one that happened to me recently: some streets in SF have a tram lane and a car lane. No bike lane. car pushed me on the tram lane thinking 'thats where cyclists go'. Tram was coming behind of course. Got to feel the friction of both car and tram. No injuries. Unfortunately I don't have a good alternative route.

Here's another thing that happens everyday:

Car park in the bike lane, so you gotta pass it. Look behind you, car is coming, so you slow down, and let them pass (they will never let you pass). If there is a continuous flow of cars, and it happens, none will let you pass. Most cyclists just pass and assume the driver will slow down (and get angry but hey, you gotta pass some day). Personally, I just wait as long as it takes or walk it on the side walk if its more than a minute.

Pedestrians are no better. They don't cross at red if cars are coming. But they do for bikes. Why the hell? I understand crossing at red when it's safe, don't get me wrong, but don't cross in front of bikes that's extremely dumb.

Cyclists are no better either. 50% (?) ignore the signs and traffic entirely. That being said I noticed that in some parts of the city this is actually safer to cross at the red light while cars are waiting, than waiting with the cars (in line or slightly in front, although I always go slightly i front to be sure they see me). Sad but true. If you start with the cars, they wont let you start first and thus you may get hit if the bike lane is not wide enough or simply not there. Even if there is a bike lane, its gone when there's a crossing and drivers naturally push you on the right side for some reason. I still stop at all traffic lights but this is disturbing me a lot lately. Whats the point of respecting the red light in all situations in the US, being killed? and I bet that's why so many ignore them.

Finally, after a few month I personally got "right turned", and broke some bones, hence my super-safe behavior assuming the driver is going to be doing the wrong thing in every situation. Before I would expect that some situations were safe, such as the right turn if you're in front of the cars. But no. They just turn into you even thus they've seen you, because, you're a bike, you'll probably brake in time, plus you should be on the sidewalk, etc. So yeah, I never cross a street without slowing down a lot if a car is less than 10 meters behind me (and obviously if its next to me or slightly ahead, even thus I'm on a bike lane, although they're supposed to switch lane)

As a last anecdotal story of this very long post, I was also surprised by rainy days. About, let's say, 15% of the cars take the opportunity to splash you when they can. Seriously. My last rainy day in SF, that happened 3 times over my 20min ride back home. The last one the guy stopped and laughed. I was 100% soaked. It means to me that a high enough number of drivers absolutely hate cyclists with passion. WTF is wrong with people?

carguy1983• 14 years ago

Yeah. In Europe, cars treat bikes like vehicles, and bikes treat cars like vehicles.

In America, bikers simply do not follow the laws they are supposed to - and neither do cars. It's not really a "bike is victim" paradigm - it's more like nobody pays any attention to the god damn laws, at all. Because the fucking cops don't enforce the rules!

They give tickets to speeders and red light runners but NOT - NEVER, in fact, to people who don't signal when turning or changing lanes, people who drive too slowly in the fast lane, people who pass on the right, people who stop in the middle of the street to wait for a parking spot, people who do not use turn lanes appropriately, people who stop at yellow lights, people who drive too slowly, people who do not yield to pedestrians, people who block driveways, people who turn left or U-turn illegally, people who ... the list goes on for miles.

Bicycle riders make all these same mistakes as well.

jmadsen• 14 years ago

sorry to break in on the generalizations, but -

When I lived in Spain they killed so many cyclists every year, it was the source of macabre jokes. I found that to be true in several other countries.

Probably should leave out the "Europe vs US" bit of your argument, and just stick to what you think the causes are.

zobzu8• 14 years ago

I see cops every now and then, and I know how they are feared and hated in the US (it's true in EU as well but not nearly as much). And I was surprised because indeed, they don't ticket anybody. I don't know if ticketing people every time they pass on red, etc would work, but maybe. I know that if I do that in Germany for example and a cop is around I'm going to pay for it every single time.

springishere2• 14 years ago

Imagine if 50% of car drivers ignored all signs and traffic entirely. You'd hate them too.

So many times I am stopped at a stop-sign, starting to make my turn or go across, and a biker blows through that I almost kill. When a full 50% of your group is breaking the rules and causing problems, it makes sense that people going to hate you. You guys are just lucky that I am extremely careful, someday the driver will be distracted and you WILL get splattered.

(I have zero problems with bikers who follow the rules of the road.)

zobzu8• 14 years ago

If the cyclist is following the rules there's no reason to hate them as you pointed out. And I don't think cyclists are better than drivers (i know its a long post, but i did say 50% of cyclists ignore rules. Actually its more than drivers IMO. But that may be specific to SF, I don't know.)

Note that if you turn after a stop and you almost kill a cyclist it means that you are most likely turning RIGHT. Because cyclists almost never go on the LEFT.

It means also that you're not in the proper lane for making a right turn. You have to go in the bike lane BEFORE stopping. The bike lane is a lane like every other lane, unless both lanes are "forced turn right". I've never seen a bike lane that was "forced turn right" however (or the lane next to the bike lane for that matter)

viraptor3• 14 years ago

"In Europe" / "in San Francisco" - that's a huge difference there - like between ~50 independent countries and one big city. It's a completely different experience between (for example) Netherlands and Ukraine. In Amsterdam you'd probably feel safer on a bike than in a car, while in Lviv you'd probably feel safer far away from the streets in general (unless there were some radical changes in the last 6 years).

Then again, I think the situation is slowly improving everywhere. At least that's what I'm seeing for some time. Higher number of cyclists is definitely helping in making them a norm rather than an exception.

the_mat• 14 years ago

A good article, thanks for writing it.

I'm not convinced that a majority of cyclists understand that they have to follow the same rules as motorized vehicles. It's unusual to see the driver of a car blast through a stop sign without slowing down at all. It happens, but not that often. On the other hand, it's unusual for me to see a cyclist who doesn't run stop signs.

I can see why: because you're going slower and have a full view around you. But that's still not an excuse if you're going to play the "cars and bikes are both vehicles" card.

mattstreet• 14 years ago

There are different laws for bikes, it isn't just bike == vehicle.

Example: http://bicycling.com/blogs/roadrights/2009/07/28/a-stop-sign...

ronnier• 14 years ago

To the cyclists among us, how do you overcome the fear of riding in the middle of heavy trafficked roads during rush hour? This is very common in the Seattle area and almost as common in Dallas.

awolf2• 14 years ago

For me, the realization that it is actually SAFER to claim the lane rather than be meek and risk getting doored or risk being in a position where cars assume they should pass you. Better to piss people off than risk your life. Plus, in most of those heavily trafficked roads the cars that are getting pissed off are delusional and don't realize that you're basically moving at the same speed as traffic anyway.

Moto74513• 14 years ago

At least in LA around the parts that I commute, when rush hour hits cars are traveling at walking speeds or completely stopped except for short bursts so I'm traveling between three and five times faster than they are if I'm lane sharing (Lane sharing is legal for cycles in CA).

If I take the lane I'm in the clear during rush hour as well. The thing to remember is that a cyclist on a road bike is generally able to accelerate faster 0-5 or 0-10 than most vehicles from a stop so clearing an intersection with the cars isn't hard. Cars obviously leave cyclists behind past 5-10MPH because they've overcome their inertia. Usually the only guys clearing an intersection before me on a start are guys on sport bikes and I can lane share with them (though we'd look silly for not just bypassing the traffic).

When you're the faster vehicle its rather reassuring since you can more or less get the same respect as everyone in a car after a couple blocks. If the traffic is moving at a good speed for a bike, you can usually you can just blend into a lane and no one will honk or look at you funny... after all, the cars holding the cyclist up and I think everyone is happier when we're not lane sharing.

WiseWeasel2• 14 years ago

Find bike routes or low-traffic streets and stick to those.

zobzu8• 14 years ago

Personally, I don't. I always think about it.

I watch my back at every single crossing. Every one of them, zero exception. I slow down when it goes down hill. I slow down when cars are next to me. I don't care if some bikes pass me full speed like "hey look how fast i go". I don't go slow either, but I'm not "full speed". Bikes brake very poorly, specially road bikes. (Mountain bikes brake a lot better, btw. Much larger tire.)

Also important, if there are cars parked in busy areas I go on the far left of the bike lane (there's no way you can anticipate being door'd). Saves me about twice a week. I go back on the far right whenever there's no cars parked.

And when there's no bike lane and cars go by relatively fast, I just claim the lane (of course you need to go nearly as fast as cars for that, else you're going to piss off a lot of people and create traffic issues).

swdunlop• 14 years ago

"If, for instance, you are behind a cyclist and approaching a stop, passing the cyclist likely will gain you nothing. In fact, you may end up passing the cyclist twice: once before the intersection, a second time after. Which, let’s face it, is going to annoy you."

Speaking as a cyclist, I hope not -- that means the cyclist has advanced past a car in front of him in the lane, which is a stupid thing to do. Either own the lane and be a vehicle, or get off the bike and on the sidewalk.

zobzu8• 14 years ago

Actually that doesn't work that way. In many states sharing the lane is legitimate, and biking no the sidewalk as well.

But that means, you're fine with all bikes claiming the complete lane right? That means you can't pass them at the stop, and you can't pass them as long as the left lane is not 100% free (just like passing a car).

When I do claim the lane when I bike (it happens that I need to, if there's no bike lane and it's a dangerous part of the road), I don't pass cars at the stop. But again, most of the time, I don't, and can't, claim the lane. This means I'd rather be in front of the cars at the stop (= they see me) than next to the cars 3 cars behind the stop (= whoever turn right, won't see me, and since they rarely use the signalization lights, or perform another stop before turning right, it means its horribly dangerous)

scott_w2• 14 years ago

In the UK, many traffic lights have a space for cyclists at the front and centre, so cyclists can skip to the front and maneuver the junction more safely.

This leads to many cases where a driver will have to pass a cyclist twice.

awolf2• 14 years ago

A regional note for San Francisco: the bikers here aren't helping things. We seem to have a disproportionate number of asshole bikers who seem to think they are entitled to fly through stop-signs as 10/15 mph. As a person who both bikes and drives a lot in the city I see both sides of this coin. I understand that coming to a full stop is an expensive operation for cyclists... but approaching a 4 way stop with cars already at the intersection and then suddenly deciding that you're a magical cyclist that doesn't need to obey traffic laws is both dangerous and pisses of motorists which only increase tension for all people involved.

vbtemp2• 14 years ago

Amen to that!

garyrichardson• 14 years ago

I believe this is universal -- it also happens in Vancouver, BC.

Cyclists complain about motorists, motorists complain about cyclists. A certain percentage of each group are jerks who don't play nicely.

tomjakubowski• 14 years ago

I was taught to always open the driver's-side door (left-hand drive) with my RIGHT hand, which forces you to turn your body (and head) to look for potential dooring victims.

aidos• 14 years ago

Good idea, like it. If everyone was taught that I could have been saved a fair amount of pain in the past.

SteveC• 14 years ago

In Japan, where many people cycle, they ride on the footpath. It seems to work out fine.

fivethirty4• 14 years ago

The trade off being that it takes twice as long to get anywhere because you can't go very fast. At least that was my experience commuting on a bike in Japan.

cmod2• 14 years ago

Pedestrians also become hyper aware and responsive: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_MphtzCOEc

grannyg00se4• 14 years ago

"If there is no bike lane, something like 90% of the cars simply do not give a single shit about bikes."

You have to respect the culture in which you are immersed. It seems insane to me that cyclists would even consider riding on a road that has no bike lane.

Right or wrong, the existence of bike lanes sets up a dichotomy in people's minds. Either there is a bike lane and bikes belong there (and I have to be aware of them), or there is no bike lane and bikes do not belong (I won't be expecting them - I may even resent their presence).

Pedestrians have their place, and cars have their place. Bikes have their place, but unfortunately only on a few select roadways.

fivethirty4• 14 years ago

Except that, as is mentioned in the OP, in the US cyclists are legally allowed use most all roadways and are treated legally like an automobile in cases where a bike lane does not exist.

grannyg00se4• 14 years ago

That may be the case, legally. But as the OP indicates, that is not always the case, culturally.

But if bicycles are treated like motor vehicles, why is it that you often find them creating a lane where there is none? You don't often see motorcycles riding alongside cars, in the same lane, grazing parked vehicles.

Swizec• 14 years ago

Actually that is not entirely true. (at least in Europe)

As per the law, if there is no bike lane, bikes belong on the road as normal vehicles. If there is a bike lane, they belong on the bike lane, but must still follow all the normal traffic rules as normal vehicles.

revelation• 14 years ago

Can we shortcut through the usual discussions?

As a cyclist, I'm hyper aware of the fact that I'm not a 4 ton steel SUV. If you see me do something dangerous, comfort your rage with the simple fact that it will likely kill or severely injure me if it comes to that.

If you see me break the law, know that per law I'll be fined like a normal vehicle, even though these are based off the danger radiating from a SUV going 40mph.

furyofantares• 14 years ago

> If you see me do something dangerous, comfort your rage with the simple fact that it will likely kill or severely injure me if it comes to that.

Why would that comfort anyone? It's distressing to watch someone do something dangerous specifically because of the fear that they may injur or kill themselves.

wccrawford• 14 years ago

As a cyclist and a motorist, that's bullshit.

As a cyclist, you're making motorists angry, and that makes it less safe for me.

As a motorist, there's a chance you'll pull some stupid shit and I'll be the one that hits you. And then I have to live the rest of my life with your death on my conscience, even though it wasn't really my fault.

Stop doing dangerous shit on the roads.

vbtemp2• 14 years ago

I want to co-exist with bikers, I really do. I wish our cities on the east coast would be more bike friendly.

But bikers need to make up their minds. Who are they, vehicles or pedestrians? Each comes with it's own rights and obligations.

I see bikers all the time blow through red lights, stop signs, and pedestrian crosswalks. When I'm a driver I always need to slam on the breaks to avoid hitting them as such intersections when I have the right-of-way or a green light. And in dense cities a biker can cause a tremendous backup, with gridlock followng him as he makes his way through the city.

Likewise, when I'm a pedestrian, I constantly need to watch not for cars, but for high speed bikers blowing perpendicularly through pedestrian crosswalks when the pedestrians have the crossing light. Why do they get to blow through pedestrian crosswalks and red lights and stop signs?

EDIT: And bikers who listen to their iPod and wear headphones while blowing through red lights - F you!

gte910h3• 14 years ago

I drive a Prius. I have been hit by cyclists t-boning me 3 times because they follow the "listen, don't look" school of cycling.

(I have never hit one)

eaurouge• 14 years ago

Oh my! A Prius driver complaining about other road users :-)

I have a problem with Prius drivers, they always seem more interested in improving their gas mileage personal best than driving a reasonable speed on the freeway.

zobzu8• 14 years ago

How did that exactly happen? I understand the car is quiet, but I'm wondering how the situation was. Most of the time cars pass and brake (bike can't brake nearly as good as a car).

zobzu8• 14 years ago

I agree. That being said bikes ARE both "vehicles" and "pedestrians" and that's something you have to know as a driver.

The thing is, you CAN'T behave like a vehicle on the side walk and you can't behave like a pedestrian on the street.

That means no blowing through the crosswalk obviously.

In most part of Europe (yay I'm generalizing again), there's no "turn on red" and there's no grid system, thus this is less of an issue

fotbr• 14 years ago

Invalid assertion. I didn't notice more cyclists on my commute, and it is absolutely not a cause for concern - there were none. That's right. None. Zero. Zip. Nada.

The entire list of vehicles encountered during my commute on the 18th was: the same guy I often see around town on his goldwing, a maroon 70s or very early 80s firebird or camaro, three pickups, a dump truck, the county sheriff in his personal car (he lives a few houses down from me), and a rather large John Deere tractor being moved from one field to another on the other side of the railroad tracks. Oh, and a train, on those tracks, carrying, amongst other things, 737 bodies on their way to final assembly. And while it's not a vehicle - one skunk, freshly killed.

My commute is 12 miles (one direction) of 2 lane roads across farmland. It's flat, boring, and the roads are in pretty poor condition with no shoulders. The cyclists in this area stick to other routes for their long-distance rides, where the pavement is in much better shape, and they have a shoulder that they can use if they have to dodge an idiot, instead of finding an overgrown ditch and a barbed-wire fence.

Moto74513• 14 years ago

Common reason is comfort but I think the loud colors are purely for show. Just like having a flashy car. They make cycling kits that look like every day wear, especially for mountain biking where having a bit if extra material is extremely helpful when you run out of talent and crash ;).

Personally, I just wear cargo shorts with gussets and a brightly colored exercise shirt (like the kind worn for running). Visibility and comfort without looking like a billboard.

WalterBright• 14 years ago

I live in Seattle, and there are a lot of cyclists. I don't bike any more because it's too dangerous. But I have a question for the cyclists:

What's with wearing the tour de france outfit? 9/10 cyclists are wearing racing outfits covered with logos. They aren't racing, they're just biking to work or biking because it's a nice day out.

1/10 is wearing shorts and a t-shirt, what I wore when biking.

cletus• 14 years ago

Cars aren't just rough on cyclists. Being a pedestrian is dangerous enough. In NYC it's not so bad since there are so many pedestrians that drivers are somewhat used to it (and are often pedestrians themselves). But even here you have to watch out:

- In NYC it is illegal to turn right at a red light. Seriously, I wish people would learn this. Actually I wish cops would enforce this;

- As a whole you can't trust cars to indicate in the US in my experience. Not indicating and turning is common enough but you sometimes see indicating and not turning. I guess people change their mind;

- Running red lights, particularly at night, seems to be common in NYC. I certainly see garbage trucks do this but I see taxis, delivery trucks and normal cars do it as well. Most slow down to make sure there's no oncoming traffic from the side street but you can't rely on being noticed as a pedestrian.

- In Australia, when cars turn left (remember, other side of the road there), pedestrians have right of way when crossing the street (if it's not at a traffic light). You're playing with your life as a pedestrian if you rely on that however.

I think I would go ballistic if I ever got a ticket for jaywalking in NYC. Fact is, it's most dangerous as a pedestrian (and probably a cyclist) when you believe you have right of way. When you know you don't you're much more careful.

In California I feel like I'm taking my life in my hands anytime I walk anywhere (in SV although SF is fine). The whole turning right at red lights being OK thing is a recipe for killing pedestrians and I really wish it didn't exist.

I really look forward to the day when all cars are self-driving. If the number of people killed in car accidents were killed by disease it would be epidemic. It's hard to fathom just how blase people can be about injury and death on such a massive scale.

Of course how this will play out will be fairly predictable. You will have probably a large segment of the population who sticks to their guns regarding driving themselves as a personal liberty, lives be damned.

blaubaer• 14 years ago

>Lay Off the Horn

If you're cycling on the road, even though there is a perfectly good bike lane right next to it, I will honk at you. Every single time.

Zak2• 14 years ago

Is this common where you live? I do quite a bit of cycling and am very aware of cyclists when driving. I often see what the author describes as "pedestrians on bicycles" using the sidewalk when a bike lane is available, but cyclists outside of a bike lane on the road are quite rare most places unless they're preparing to turn toward the inside (i.e. a left turn in places where it's customary to drive on the right).

When learning to drive (and before), I was taught that that the horn is for alerting other people to dangerous situations and preventing collisions. It is not for expressing anger or frustration at other people. I've noticed that people tend to become angry or frustrated much more quickly when driving and when interacting with someone who is driving (e.g. as a pedestrian). You might want to consider whether you're acting under the influence of a disinhibition effect and ask yourself whether you want to yell "CHANGE WHAT YOU'RE DOING OR I'LL HIT YOU WITH MY CAR" at a cyclist for forcing you to drive slower for 30 seconds. That's what honking a horn conveys.

bryanlarsen• 14 years ago

As somebody who sometimes cycles on the road even though there is a bicycle path and gets honked at by assholes like you, there are usually many different reasons why a bicycle isn't using the bicycle path.

Here are some of them:

- it's actually not a bike path. It looks like a bike path, but if it doesn't have a yellow stripe down the middle and isn't signed, it's a sidewalk, and it's illegal and probably dangerous to cycle on it.

- the speed limit on the path is 20 km/h, and I'm going 30.

- it's a mixed use path, frequented by toddlers who are very unpredictable and sometimes hard to avoid when going at high speed. I'd rather deal with assholes on the road than endanger toddlers.

- it's a mixed use path, frequented by people walking dogs. They're dangerous because dogs can veer suddenly, and that leash can snare a bicycle very easily

- it has poor road crossings. Most "recreational" bicycle paths in North American cities are much more dangerous for cyclists than riding on the road is, even though they seem safer. Why? 90-95% of all bicycle fatalities happen at intersections. The bicycle path still has to cross roads, and they generally do so either by merging with the sidewalk or by setting up a crossing a few yards away from the intersection. Some drivers do not slow down or look until they reach the intersection proper. To cross safely you have to slow down to walking pace and be hyper-vigilant like a jaywalker. The safest place in an intersection is as close to the centre as you can get, where you are visible to everybody.

- it has lots of curves and lots of close trees. Which means that visibility around curves is very poor, so it's not safe. It was designed for pedestrians, not cyclists.

- it doesn't actually go where I want to go. This is more common than you think: just because it parallels your road now, doesn't mean it will later

- I don't know where I'm going. Bike paths are very random, and often aren't marked on maps. If I'm following a map designed for cars, I have no choice but to use your road.

In summary, most so-called "bike paths" in North America are really just repurposed walking paths, and are unsafe and slow. Cyclists should be on the road.

SoftwareMaven• 14 years ago

I would love to road bike, but northern Utah doesn't have a year-round cycle culture, which means people never quite learn how to ride with cyclists. Scares me to death (and this coming from a motorcyclist, so my tolerance isn't super low).

bkrull• 14 years ago

Honest question for cyclists - why do you continue biking?

It sounds like cycling is far more dangerous and potentially deadly than driving. As others mentioned you'll never "educate away" the problem. The road system is clearly not designed for cycling so both drivers and cyclists are annoyed.

What is it that you get out of cycling to make it worth the risk?

Zak2• 14 years ago

The cost of keeping a car legal to drive (insurance, registration) for a year is enough to buy a fairly nice bicycle. That doesn't count the fuel and maintenance costs if you actually drive the car nor the cost of buying the car. In many areas, parking is very limited, but there's usually something sturdy to lock a bike to or the option of bringing it inside. There's also the bit where a commute is also a workout.

rwallace• 14 years ago

Two things that may be worth taking into account:

1. Most people have a value system that doesn't refer only to themselves. Driving has staggering negative externalities. Every time somebody forgoes a car for some - any - other method of transport, everyone on the planet becomes a little better off.

2. Daily exercise is one of the few things really demonstrated to significantly improve your health, productivity and lifespan. If you have the temperament or willpower to go to the gym everyday, that's fine. If not, being able to make your mode of transport double as exercise is arguably worth significantly increased risk.

cmod2• 14 years ago

If you want to become a superb cyclist, three months of riding around Shanghai is an excellent training course.

jack-r-abbit2• 14 years ago

I hear a lot of complaining about not being enough bike lanes. I get that. we need more. But I absolutely do not understand why cyclists that do have a bike lane still choose to ride right on the white line that separates their lane from mine. You have a good 3-4 feet all to your self... use it! Oh... and stop at traffic lights and stop signs like everyone else.

freiheit• 14 years ago

Because many of those bike lanes are 90% door zone or have other hazards, leaving almost on top of the white line the safest part of the lane.

jack-r-abbit2• 14 years ago

Not the ones I'm talking about. I see many more bike lanes that have no road side hazards and bikers still ride on the white line.

How to Not Kill a Cyclist

Related Stories