Is there a fuck cyclists sub?
Go ahead and make one, I’m sure you and a few other carbrains will have a wonderful time.
Be the change you want to see in the world.
Oh yeah. There should be one, because the relationship is perfectly symmetrical. See, sometimes cars hit bikes and murder the bikers, and sometimes a bike will be a minor inconvenience to a driver. Also cars have completely stolen roads from pedestrians in the last 70 years and sometimes bikes take a small portion back. Good point, I’m sure it’ll be a great community! Very healthy!
Fully hinged response.
Get the fuck out the way then, scrub. The only people riding bikes in the street in my area are the people that got tired of getting pulled over for driving drunk and the rich yuppies doing ragbrai. Neither will look before crossing a busy street or highway and I’m supposed to feel bad? Nope.
Fully hinged response
Using light mode on your phone prevents getting blinded by hi-vis tech. Or by flashbang/stun grenades. Or by nukes.
Instead, you try flash-banged by your phone.
I don’t have an iPhone what’s blue vs green?
Blue means the other person has an iPhone, green means android (or not an iPhone)
I think the joke may have been that it doesn’t matter because the driver is looking at their phone anyway. (But I’m not sure)
Even with drivers on cellphones, per mile driven motorcycles kill more pedestrians than cars.
https://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/11/4/232
And I don’t think we need to mention how much more dangerous a motorcycle is for the person riding it.
There’s a big push to always blame drivers of four wheel vehicles, I’ve never heard a good response for why motorcycle riders kill almost 4x as many children pedestrians per mile driven than car drivers though.
I’m sure it’s totally not their fault and if they make their exhaust more obnoxious it will fix everything tho…
This was a surprising tidbit. I’d love to hear some hypotheses of why this might be the case. It seems surprising that a motorcycle would result in more deaths than a car. I wonder if this holds true year over year. I tried to find more info but couldn’t really find anything and I wasn’t going to pay 50 dollars for the article.
Seems like a relatively low number of deaths caused by motorcycles though, so it seems like death by cars/light trucks should be our main focus. (Just as long as it doesn’t result in more people driving busses or, apparently, motorcycles)
I do hate how loud some motorcycles are.
Seems like a relatively low number of deaths caused by motorcycles though, so it seems like death by cars/light trucks should be our main focus.
Like, very few people die from eating 97 XL pepperoni pizzas, robbing the Eiffel Tower, and then swimming across the Atlantic to Boston to escape…
But that’s because very few people are stupid enough to try. It doesn’t mean it’s safer than taking a shit, even tho lots of people die while taking a shit.
Yeah but you generally try to tackle the biggest problem first. If you completely solve motorcycle deaths vs reduce car and truck deaths by 10%, which saves more lives?
On a person by person basis convincing them to do the safe thing voluntarily? What you personally can accomplish?
Your time is best spent convincing motorcycle riders to stop riding motorcycles. I struggle why you’d choose not to worry about the vehicle that is more dangerous to it’s own riders and pedestrians (especially children) on a per mile basis.
As far as chances of passing meaningful laws? Good luck with cars, but motorcycles you have a chance of passing safety regulations because everyone knows they’re death traps.
That’s the key part, not how large the issue is. How easily it can be fixed.
Like, if I shit on your front porch every morning, and everytime you mentioned it I screamed about the polar ice caps are melting…
Would you agree that climate change is bigger issue than shit on your doorstep every morning and just let me poop in peace?
Or would you try to solve the easier problem first? And get me to stop pooping on your doorstep because as an individual you do not have the power or I fluence to fix climate change on your own?
Don’t let big issues stop you from doing what you can. Don’t let people shit on your doorstop dawg.
Do you really think making people not ride motorcycles is easier than getting people to stop texting and driving?
I don’t know anyone who rides motorcycles. I bet I know a lot of people who drive distracted. So, if I were to personally start trying to convince people, is it really worth it to try to track down people who ride motorcycles? So, to me, distracted driving is definitely the pooping on my doorstep as far as the close to home and easy to do something about it is concerned. I bet my situation is pretty common.
Green means text message, blue means iMessage
If you turn off iMessage then iphone to iphone will be green
Blue text occurs in Apple’s own text app, Messages. Green text indicates someone who isn’t using Apple’s Messages app.
I drive a motorcycle regularly. I make it a habit to check where people ahead of me are looking (by looking into their side mirrors) so I can predict whether they’ll merge into me.
About 1/3 of drivers are on their phones, not looking at the road at any given time
I ride daily, also skateboard and work in transport, my local political rep came past the other week and all I could say was “can we get those phone cameras every 200m on every road in the country? It’s the only way we’ll get the fuckers off their phones.”
Hope she took it on board tbh.
Yeah, but do you actually wear high vis?
Vest and helmet cover?
Or are you one of those people that say noise is the only indicator completely disregarding the advances in car sound proofing that only makes loud bikes an annoyance to pedestrians?
Did you know by mile driven, motorcycles kill more pedestrians than cars or trucks?
Compared with cars, the RR of killing a pedestrian per vehicle mile was 7.97 (95% CI 6.33 to 10.04) for buses; 1.93 (95% CI 1.30 to 2.86) for motorcycles; 1.45 (95% CI 1.37 to 1.55) for light trucks, and 0.96 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.18) for heavy trucks. Compared with cars, buses were 11.85 times (95% CI 6.07 to 23.12) and motorcycles were 3.77 times (95% CI 1.40 to 10.20) more likely per mile to kill children 0–14 years old. Buses were 16.70 times (95% CI 7.30 to 38.19) more likely to kill adults age 85 or older than were cars. The risk of killing a pedestrian per vehicle mile traveled in an urban area was 1.57 times (95% CI 1.47 to 1.67) the risk in a rural area.
https://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/11/4/232
Literally 3.77x more likely to kill a child per mile than a car, and you’re focusing on peeping in windows as you zip by?
So can you please stop trying to see how many car drivers are on the phone while you ride one of the most dangerous vehicles possible for you and people minding their own business walking around?
Your hobby isn’t more important than people’s lives, even if it makes you feel better about other shortcomings you may be dealing with and can’t change.
Don’t be so condescending.
Is this per accident? or pee accidents that didn’t happen with motorcycliats not on phones? People reading phone while driving are just selfish asaholes. Bluetooth exiats, talk to text exists, ok google, ok siri and yet…assholes
Is this per accident? or pee accidents that didn’t happen with motorcycliats not on phones?
It’s per mile driven…
killing a pedestrian per vehicle mile
Motorcycles are exponentially more dangerous than cars, or are you going to blame pedestrians and imply they died because they were on their phones and not listening to obnoxious exhaust despite the Doppler effect meaning you don’t hear it till you’ve been run over?
What i mean is it it only counting miles for vehicles that struck a person, or killed driver, because how do you have stats on vehicles that never report an incident. like i had 60 000 km on bike, no incident, who gathers that for averages, otherwise it is the survivor bias problem
What i mean is it it only counting miles for vehicles that struck a person,
Jesus…
who gathers that for averages
The people who did the peer reviewed academic study I quoted…
It ain’t easy, that’s why it’s not done often and by the time it’s published their data set is already 5+ years old…
You might not like the results, but you that doesn’t matter.
It has nothing to do with the results it is a “survivor” biased stat article. It says based on accident fatalities so does not account for all miles driven per vehicle type(not in an accident), only those actually hitting somebody. So you don’t get a proper per mile look at the data. it is like that helmet stat from decades ago that said wearing a helmet is more likely to result in a neck injury, becauae they left out the people who died…since dead people weren’t counted as injuries. I have no issue with busses and motorcycles killing more people struck than cars, the article presents as if it includes all vehicles on the road,but if you ran a study on deatha by vehicle type there would be less for motorcycle because there are just way less on the road to start with, even science writers like to skew things if they want to prove something a certain way so saying per mile driven while excluding all milages from non accidents is misleading stats
but if you ran a study on deatha by vehicle type there would be less for motorcycle because there are just way less on the road to start with,
And more people die on the toilet than playing Russian roulette, doesn’t mean taking a shit is more dangerous.
That’s why you can’t just look at total deaths.
I’m sorry I couldn’t find a way to explain this that you could understand
I see what you’re trying to say here, but the study gets its mileage data from the US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) 2002 highway statistics, so it’s an estimate of the total number of miles driven by each category of vehicle. I think the bigger problem with using this study to say that motorcycles are worse than cars is that the “3.77x more likely to kill a child per mile” is based on 4 deaths caused by motorcycles that year. We’re dealing with numbers so small that one accident caused or prevented could swing the “probabilities” wildly in different directions.
Here’s a link to the full study if you’re interested. You’re right that it doesn’t seem to cover injuries though.
Note the publication year of the article, and the year of the data collected. 2005 and 2002, respectively. Trucks and SUVs are demonstrably larger and more prevalent on the roads in the last twenty years in the US, and those were pre smartphone.
And plenty of us ride motorcycles for commuting and economic reasons, they’re not only toys… Even if it is a vehicle that attracts a bunch of assholes, which I’ll clearly admit
Oh ok. I’ll wait for your updated data then before dismissing mine.
I wasn’t dismissing the data! I was reading it because it’s intriguing, and was surprising, and felt compelled to highlight the age of the data given the relevance to the discussion about smartphone usage.
Likewise the change in vehicle size in the twenty years since the study is worth considering, IMHO. The stats you provided aren’t to be dismissed, through their context is important.
Vehicle Type Count Percent Passenger Cars 2,591 39.66% SUVs 1,912 29.27% Pickups 1,188 18.18% Large Trucks 469 7.18% Vans 288 4.41% Motorcycles 42 0.64% Buses 42 0.64% From page 25 of that pdf.
Which, if you then wanted to combine it with vehicle miles traveled from something like this, you’d get:
Vehicle Type Vehicles distance Traveled Pedestrian Fatalities Fatalities per 10,000 miles driven Passenger Cars, SUVs, Pickups, Vans 2,822,664 5,985 21.20 Buses 18,490 42 22.715 Motorcycles 23,765 42 17.67 If you find a source that breaks down vehicle miles traveled by specific vehicle type let me know, otherwise this is probably the best you’re going to get.
combine it with vehicle miles traveled from something like thi
That link is average miles driven per vehicle…
You’re skipping the amount of vehicles that drive those average miles…
Like, your formatted it nicely, but the math doesn’t make any sense at all.
You took the average miles traveled, total pedestrian fatalities, and then claimed that answer meant anything at all?
Like, A for effort, but you didnt accomplish anything that means anything…
I see my mistake now, those are millions of vehicle miles driven. But they’re definitely not average miles driven per vehicle like you’re assuming.
I took the total urban and rural miles traveled and matched them up to the pedestrian fatalities of the corresponding vehicle types. The vehicle miles traveled data doesn’t break the vehicles down into smaller categories like the pedestrian fatality data does.
Wait…
So you think the effort into that peer reviewed research paper took more effort than just looking at two PDFs and finding the rate between two sets of numbers?!
Crazy man.
Hey I think you missed this extremely important part of your quoted source:
Results: Passenger cars and light trucks (vans, pickups, and sport utility vehicles) accounted for 46.1% and 39.1%, respectively, of the 4875 deaths, with the remainder split among motorcycles, buses, and heavy trucks.
Hey. I think you don’t understand average or what the phrase “per mile driven” means.
There’s a shit ton more cars and trucks than motorcycles.
But per mile while you’re operating a motor vehicle, motorcycles kill more pedestrians
Does that make sense?
If not, can you clarify what in this sentence is causing your confusion?
Did you know by mile driven, motorcycles kill more pedestrians than cars or trucks?
Hey I think you have never taken a statistics or logical reasoning course.
Yes in total number cars and light trucks kill the most pedestrians. That’s not what is being discussed.
Per mile driven, motorcycles are more than 4x more likely to kill a pedestrian. If motorcycles were used the same amount as cars and light trucks, the total number of deaths per year from them would be almost 20,000 people
Motorcyclist are statistically more dangerous drivers to pedestrians.
I am glad to see you made an attempt to identify your error, but that’s the wrong logical fallacy.
What you did is:
“If motorcycles were used the same amount…”
They aren’t, so who cares?
I ride as well and I apply this method to driving my car too.
As some asshat in a reflective vest and a strobe light on his forehead blows a stop sign.
Perfectly legal in my state (MN) as long as that “asshat” would have the right of way if they stopped. I also see pretty much everyone doing a rolling stop in a car which IS illegal.
Seeing a cyclist in hi-vis is enough for a driver to downgrade their phone to iOS 9
But their friend isn’t on android
And degrades their ability to read
Locking due to too many people raging and inciting violence against people riding bikes.
Separated bike lane is the only way. Anything else is knowingly getting bikers killed.
Nuh uh. My city painted pictures of bicycles on the asphalt in the right lane of a busy road, so now drivers know it’s also for bikes and it’s suuuuuper safe.
That’s what Big Bike Lane doesn’t want you to know. You don’t need to build a bunch of infrastructure to separate cyclists and cars - you just need paint! Especially the new kind that wears off the road in less than a year and doesn’t get repainted.
In my city, all of the pictures of bicycles on the asphalt are underneath parked cars.
I thought about making some stickers that say like “I’m as asshole that parks in the bike lane” and slapping them on cars that were doing so, but I’d probably get caught and sent to jail for a decade.
Just routinely ride into them at high speed. What are they gonna say in court?
I asked my lawyer friend and she advised against this course of action :(
If it helps I found and bought some “you park like a cunt” stickers a few years back, good times.
Ah good, that way they won’t wear out too quickly!
Come to my city, Edmonton, Alberta. Vehicles regularly drive on dedicated bike lanes. Poor signage, barricades and dumb drivers.
Separated bike lanes. Not by a line of paint or some curb at the intersection but by several feet of physical barrier. Raised planters work well and are attractive but putting the parking strip between traffic and bikes (as long as the parked cars can’t open doors into the lane) also gets the job done.
Yep, we have all of the above. I still see bewildered drivers in the bike lanes every week.
I’d say the police could be useful for once and crack down but we know that won’t happen.
I’ve had a few times in a few metropolitan areas where I had no car, and commuted 15+ miles of urban riding a day.
Both times started super conservative with my riding. By the end of was blowing lights and stop signs, had a whistle necklace, carried pepper spray, and was happier than I had ever been in traffic in a car.
Stop signs and traffic lights are a car concept. Pedestrians don’t need them and have NEVER needed them because they move slow and can see all around them without blind spots. Cyclists are a lot closer to pedestrians than to cars unless you’re in an ebike with no governor. Ride on man!
This comm should be named „Fuck idiots”
Yall don’t have a problem with cars but with morons behind the wheel
Any driver, pedestrian or cyclist/etc knows full well that there is no non-hostile way to interact with others when you’re behind the wheel. It’s just the psychology of operating a vehicle with enough mass and traveling at such velocities which destroy the human body. Our car culture was groomed by businessmen, and big business never cared about you and me.
So no, when I see a car or I see a highway, i dont see just a tool. I see a system which DEMANDS I give it my fealty, that I internalize it’s propaganda that I oWn ThE rOaD and peer out from a tinted window tank with paranoia for all those community members that I’d otherwise meet while walking and cycling in cities made for pedestrians, rather than the hellscape of industry, of commuting from suburbs to be a drone in steel-tower-hives, of just-one-more-lane eminent domain dividing residental areas, dividing neighbors.
I dont like the word idiot. That it is common parlance isnt the defense of it’s use we think it is. Eptymology reveals more than just ableism, no oppression exists in a vacuum.
I see the need for fast-transit for medical emergencies. I want an international supply chain for medicine. I see the purpose of transportation as tools.
When I say “fuck cars” I am not talking about “cars” as tools. I am talking about cars as
-
A culture
-
A system (working-class [can’t retire b4 40]) americans cant opt out of
And
- A lingering spectre; I was force fed and helpless to avoid enjoyment of it all: Hotwheels, NASCAR, Cars-the-movie and role models raising me.
Now in adulthood I have seen countless friends, and then eventually a close family member, ripped violently from this mortal coil by some selfish arrogant asshole’s impatience.
From there you look to data: 35-45k Fatalities per year in the US related to Car Accidents, and manufactuers can improve odds of the operator/passengers surviving, but forget your neighbors outside the vehicle who are still struck by a massive projectile, right?
When I say fuck cars, No: It’s not “Oh shucks i sure wish everyone would be patient and generous behind the wheel”
It’s: “We have been boxed into a system of commuting which has alienated us from our neighbors. We must rethink fundamentally our approach to planning cities. Light rail, trains, cycling and walkable cities. I am full of Love and Hope fueled by Rage and Loss. I will make connections with my neighbors to counteract the alienation and hostility. I will do my damndest to drive like a demure grandma when i must be behind the wheel”
Very entertaining read, sorry for your extreme far left brainrot though.
No one should have to be so desperate to fall into the deepest caves of the underground, hardcore red ideology. Unable to even voice an opinion in real life for the fear of immediate and justified ostracism…
It must be truly hard to live like this, alone with views incompatible with society. Why persist even if everyone tells you how ridiculous it is?
There we are, vitrolic projection, mask off and all. Did that feel good?
Red? No shame in that but more about the pink-and-black, which yes indeed is opposed to state in addition to class and money. Oh, won’t someone think of the dehumanizers? Clutch ya pearls!
I am grateful for the community I’ve found myself surrounded with. I’ve got the best people I know looking out for me – Which is not something I could say until I cut ties with the conservative bubble I’d been raised and suffocated by. Long overdue.
Have a nice day :)
You are projecting your ptsd on whole locomotion means, it’s literal insanity
-
That’s kind of analogous to saying we don’t have a problem with zebras, but with zebra stripes. It’s like that old joke, that the morons behind the wheel give the other 1% of drivers a bad reputation.
But on a serious note, even if we had some foolproof test to weed out the morons, cars are dangerous, loud, polluting, expensive, and anti-social. We have plenty of other reasons to dislike having a society built around them.
Well give me a better way to transport lots of stuff from point A to B.
Guns are dangerous, loud, polluting, expensive and anti-social yet we don’t have fuck guns comm idk why tbh.
Also there are electric cars and trucks.
In my imagined dream land I would like to get around on a horse, it would be fun but we have vastly more efficient machinery now.
You guys need to pull yourself together and stop cieclejerking life away on some most absurd of topics. c/FuckPneumaticDrills when? c/FuckShoppingTrolleys?
What stuff? Where does it have to get to? Why?
That’s not even what cars are used for, as the majority of car trips are under 3 miles, and the average occupancy is 1.2 persons. I think we don’t have c/fuckguns because nobody is forcing us to have and use guns every day for everything.
Okay but it’s just a tool to get from a to b with baggage or get stuff from a to b in a very efficient modern way. It’s kinda insane to protest that and I blame westernoidism and living in too lavish conditions.
Let’s all return to monkey and go on foot with some wagons propelled by slaves muscle power for hundreds miles
When you say “Fuck cars” you can’t really cherry pick some easy case scenarios where they could be easily swapped for something else. You say something general then you have no way to defend your point usually
You would have to change to “Fuck people who use cars stupidly” which can be generalised to “Fuck stupid people”
We can’t cherry-pick scenarios in which cars could be easily replaced by something else? Good lord, why not?! Nobody has a magic wand that we can wave to undo nearly a century of demolishing and building a landscape exclusively for cars. It’s going to take incremental change to undo that, and the wise way to do that is exactly to cherry-pick the easiest scenarios and start there. Best benefits for the effort, and all. Then, as alternatives expand, those alternatives become an option, or even a better way, for more and more people.
Speaking of too-lavish conditions, that exactly describes using a 4,000lb. luxury machine to cart a 185lb. body around from point A to point B, which is located much further away from A than it needs to be, in order to accommodate the operation and storage of those machines. It’s really the opposite of efficient—less than 1% of the energy in gasoline gets used to move the human.
In short, using cars stupidly describes the vast majority of how people use of cars. The reason that it seems reasonable is that everybody else is doing it. Monkey see, monkey do, eh?
You can’t cherry pick because the name of the comm is FuckCars. Not FuckICECarsInCities
That’s the problem with sweeping generalisations. They are undefendable
using a 4,000lb. luxury machine to cart a 185lb -
Again cherry picking to paint convenient target for a broad statement.
Ah, so your issue is with the branding, not the substance of the argument. Fine, cars are not luxury goods, even though most car commercials sell them as such.
High vis is always a good idea, especially at night. There’s a reason utility and road workers wear it, after all
Anytime I’m cycling I make sure I know where every car is and never let any vehicle sneak up on me, because I expect car drivers to be distracted and oblivious to most laws of the road. Because of this I’ve not had any close calls yet
Bicycles should have mirrors and turn signals for this reason IMO.
Lol they have turn signals, big ones, with their left arm. Of course, they need to actually use the signal…
And the mirror? But sorry, there’s a reason we don’t stick large mannequin hands on cars, never mind that it forces driver to hold the handlebar with one arm as they have to prepare for a turn.
If you think hand signals are a substitute for turn signals and make no note for mirrors, you don’t drive, period. As someone who drives and bikes, I can tell you that cars pay a lot more attention when you put in the effort.
You can literally buy a mirror that attaches to your handlebar… I don’t know what you are getting so worked up about.
Which is what I’m saying people should do. You can also literally buy turn signals, for your helmet or bicycle. They just aren’t required.
Bicycles should have mirrors and turn signals for this reason IMO.
Reading comprehension, it’s hard. Then again, this is fuckcars.
I’ll get downvoted and told I’m an idiot and whatever else, but I just ride on the sidewalk and it takes all the issues away. It’s a million times better to me, and when I’m in a car I fucking hate cyclists in the road. You guys can keep putting your lives on the line if that’s what makes you feel good, I guess.
Same, I live in a smaller city that has wide sidewalks. You slow down when approaching pedestrians and blind corners, stop at crosswalks, etc. It’s alot lower risk in general.
The idea that we lump bikes in with cars, as if every biker is some competitive racer who has to go 40 on their bike, is ridiculous, and opens bikers up to being killed by cars. On the sidewalk, the chance of a crash is lower, an DM the results of crashes minor in comparison. Its a no-brainer for me.
If my city had fully founded bike lanes that didn’t merge into the main road, though, I’d switch to those in a heartbeat.
Yeah it’s honestly hilarious to me after a certain amount of comments. Like either I’ve found all the professional bike riders in one place or a lot of people who are very full of both themselves and a little shit. Why they’re all acting like they ride their bikes at car speeds is beyond me. Maybe they all have cognitive issues that impair their reaction times?
I fucking hate cyclists in the road
Well that’s too bad because the road is for everyone. Keep your road rage in check and be more constructive next time.
We need a change in our culture. Selfish, foolish impatience, drivers insisting they OwN tHe RoAd is exactly what’s killing pedestians and cyclists. You can get where youre going fast enough, but it’s never enough. Fuck that noise, bunch of drunkards ( be it on alcohol or arrogance)
We all know there’s no non-hostile way to interact with others when youre behind the wheel. Its just the nature of such a heavy vehicle traveling at speeds to where collision destroys the human body. Business men made it this way, and big business never cared about you or me.
This is why I like multi-use paths.
It’s illegal to cycle on the pavement in many countries, and it’s a danger to pedestrians.
In my experience you will generally only be stopped if you are riding in a way that’s a risk to the pedestrians around you, and there’s plenty of ways to avoid that. Police have better things to go after unless they are deliberately trying to fish for fines income.
Police may have better things to do but periodically they are still there giving fines for not having lights or cycling on the driveway, easy cash low risk
Yeah, being stopped by the police is unlikely, but when the norm and the law is for people to cycle on the road rather than the pavement it leads pedestrians to wander round without watching for cyclists, which in turn means you have to cycle slowly to be prepared for someone to step out in front of you.
Yeah, you have to slow down, but that’s normal, the real problem isn’t the vehicle, it’s its speed and compared to the traffic around it. In roads, cars have to slow down because of bicycles, it makes sense that in pavements with no dedicated bicycle lanes you have to slow down to the speed of pedestrian traffic when present. The real answer is really dedicated bicycle paths.
Yeah, you have to slow down, but that’s normal, the real problem isn’t the vehicle, it’s its speed and compared to the traffic around it.
Car speed is an issue. Kinetic energy increases with square of velocity, so when a car goes faster, its energy increases exponentially. This is why faster moving vehicles exponentially increase fatality rates when crashing into a person.
In roads, cars have to slow down because of bicycles, it makes sense that in pavements with no dedicated bicycle lanes you have to slow down to the speed of pedestrian traffic when present. The real answer is really dedicated bicycle paths.
Yes, the answer is dedicated bicycle infrastructure to separate bikes from vehicles. But the reason is safety. A car momentarily slowing down to pass a person on a bike on a road with poor bike infrastructure is a several second inconvenience which will be nullified by the next light they are stuck at for several minutes. What is much more important is that people die because of being hit by cars, which makes it unsafe for people to choose any form of transport other than cars.
So yes to what I was saying, that vehicle speed is an issue? What you really meant to say is that vehicle mass is an issue, but that only happens when you actually get hit when the problems that led up to that collision happened long before. The real issue is being able to predict and adapt to traffic, such as you imply in your next sentence that the car must do. Applies perfectly well to people in bicycles as well, or to any person. The real problem is speed, doesn’t matter how much mass or energy a vehicle can have if it’s not moving.
My dad got hit by a kid in a bicycle causing a wound that never really healed. People die from doing activities with risk, the answer is not to lock yourself in a room and live afraid. People die from hitting their heads on low hanging branches and from just simply falling, even off of bicycles. That you dismiss the utility of cars is more of a commentary of the bubble and environment you’ve had the opportunity to enjoy, it is far from universal and more than likely probably still involves the use of larger, more “kinetic energy” where “people die” vehicles.
the real problem isn’t the vehicle, it’s its speed and compared to the traffic around it.
I distinguished that speed of a vehicle itself is an issue and not primarily, as you stated, how its speed relates to traffic around it. A car that’s going with the flow of traffic at 80km/h is still fatal to be hit by when you’re walking or biking.
The real problem is speed, doesn’t matter how much mass or energy a vehicle can have if it’s not moving.
This shows a fundamental lack of understanding; a stationary vehicle has no kinetic energy. When you get hit by a car, the energy you are hit with (kinetic energy) depends on the mass and speed of the vehicle.
My dad got hit by a kid in a bicycle causing a wound that never really healed.
I’m sorry to hear that, it sounds like I really difficult experience. I fail to see how a child making a mistake while riding a bike is relevant to your claim that “the real problem isn’t the vehicle, it’s its speed and compared to the traffic around it.” and how “cars have to slow down because of bicycles” is the cause of danger. Orders of magnitude more people and children die being hit by cars than any other form of transportation and the answer is not blaming people on bikes for collisions since they “made” cars change their speed relative to traffic around them.
People die from doing activities with risk, the answer is not to lock yourself in a room and live afraid
No such claim was made.
That you dismiss the utility of cars is more of a commentary of the bubble and environment you’ve had the opportunity to enjoy
Nobody is denying the utility of vehicles. Our infrastructure are designed with cars having absolute top priority, making short trips by bike and walking dangerous. Most trips in cities are short and doable by bike or walking, but when the infrastructure is poor and people perceive it to be an unacceptable risk, they take a car. How many times have you seen people riding on sidewalks because they don’t feel that the line of painted bike lane protects them from a driver on their phone who could kill them? Or someone on a mobility scooter in a bike lane because the uneven, discontinuous sidewalk that lowers for cars at each crossing presents more danger of them falling over? I bike, I walk, and I drive; everything I’ve mentioned is the product of not living in a bubble, otherwise I wouldn’t see the problems.
I’m starting to see ad hominem and straw man arguments, so I’m not going to put the energy into continuing this conversation. Enjoy the rest of your day. :)
Bicycling on a sidewalk and hoping the cops don’t care is not a solution.
That’s right, that’s why I said the real answer is really dedicated bicycle paths.
I’m not riding my bike at 30MPH with my eyes closed, so so far no incidents.
The longer you go without hitting someone the more likely it is, hubris or not.
The longer you go without dying the more likely it is.
I don’t think the vehicle itself matters as much as its speed and whether is is paying attention or not. I would not mind bicycles going at a pedestrian pace on the sidewalk who slow down and stop if necessary, and I even think bicycles on roads should be limited to either low traffic situations or having pedal assist so that they are at least able to travel at 25km/h.
So what you’re saying is that your car / cyclist / pedestrian infrastructure sucks.
I fully agree with you that bicycles don’t belong on the road with cars, it’s suicidal. They also don’t belong on the sidewalks where they’ll be the danger themselves.
Bicycles need their own infrastructure. Take it away from the cars,.there is way way too much car infrastructure and once you have good bicycle infrastructure, you won’t need thatuch car infrastructure anymore
