Fuck no, I’m not. A car is a potential weapon. Eating a bowl of cereal means there’s no way you can properly drive the vehicle, thereby putting other people’s lives at risk. Is it a high chance that they’re going to kill someone? No, but it’s a chance nonetheless. Do a lot of people inflict those risks on others when they’re driving? Yes, and they’re assholes. Sorry if you’re feeling defensive because you’re one of those assholes, too. When you’re driving, you keep your hands free and you focus on the road, period. There’s no excuse.
The bicyclist moved between stopped cars and at no point got in front of moving vehicles. If he was biking in a risky manner, he was risking himself only. The two situations aren’t even remotely equivalent.
I’ve certainly criticised the idiot cereal-eater’s actions, but don’t really see where I’ve said that banging on her car window was the correct repsonse.
Yes, I often contemplate the risk assessment that would be undertaken to introduce motoring in a workplace if it didn’t already exist.
“OK, the cars will travel towards each other and alongside each other at close poximity and on intersecting courses at speeds of up to 120km/hr. If they strike each other or something solid, the occupants have a very high chance of being killed or seriously injured. If they strike a cyclist or pedestrian, then those people will almost certainly be killed or injured. Collisions can occur if there is a failure to manually intervene by braking, or if there is even a slight unplanned movement of the steering wheel that is controlled by impatient, stressed, poorly trained and potentially distracted drivers. To prevent these collisions we will put up coloured lights, signs and paint lines on the road. There, that will fix it. Done”
No wonder it isn’t working too well.
Though I optimistically think that self driving cars may well overcome many of these problems, along with totally different ways of structuring traffic flow - areas can be genuinely made pedestrian or cycle friendly with the expectation that the rules will be obeyed (significant partitioning of roads, most traffic constrained to trunk roads, minor road traffic moving at much lower speeds). That coupled with control systems made by people who actually have safety as the number one priority and it’s hard to see how driving one’s self will be legal in 30 years.
Probably. This was up by Hamden, so… (I pretty much call all of 15 the Merritt)
Speaking as a commuting cyclist myself, I genuinely think these videos are counterproductive when compared to education and signage strategies like “Share the road” or inclusion of cyclist issues in driver’s manuals (for passing the written portion of a driving test.) As someone upthread stated however, I think that the ire is really unfortunate, because it’s mostly the fault of bad infrastructure where bicycles are an afterthought (if that) that creates these conflicts. I do think one element of why I think these videos are unproductive is that cars are enclosed spaces, and people genuinely feel more accosted than they would if they were “out in public.” I know I would, no matter how clearly in the wrong I was. It may be a quirk of human psychology, but quirks of human psychology aren’t things people simply “get over.” They’re things you have to work with if you’re going to treat road use like a public health issue, which it absolutely is.
One might hypothetically say that if every driver was being videoed all the time, with a real possibility any crappy driving will be reported to the police and it will be followed up, then there would be less crappy driving. Perhaps the answer is more videos. shrug.
Your point is generally the attitude I take though, which is that social change needs to happen, and that generally happens through channels other than the legislature. In fact, this is why I think it is important that it becomes acceptable to challenge people when they drive badly, without the emotional response. I actually try very hard to respond courteously when someone takes issue with whatever I’m doing (including driving or cycling). It’s hard, but on the whole I manage and have generally good results from it.
Similarly, I’ve found that as often as not by explaining carefully and politely to someone they sometimes see the problem (assuming you can get their attention in such a fashion). On the road it’s about 50/50 whether the response is positive or not.
A point I hadn’t noted is that it’s actually much easier to have these confrontations on a bike. Clearly someone in a car won’t generally stop and get out to argue, but on a bike it’s easy.
Personally, I’d rather not cry over spilled milk.
If you harrass cars in traffic, may the odds be ever in your favor.
May I wish you a hearty welcome to Boing Boing.
The difference, for those who failed physics, is that a bike is unlikely to kill anyone in a car if it hits them. The opposite is not true.
I don’t know why the car defenders in these threads never get this.
I’ve had Beerios for breakfast. Like this:
But it ended up turning me into Faye Valentine, since I was taking a gamble I knew I’d lose.
Seriously, if driving is so difficult for someone that they have to concentrate that hard to keep from running into something, they probably shouldn’t be driving in the first place. It’s the death-grip, white-knuckled types that cause the most accidents.
Go-Steer-Stop.
It ain’t rocket science.
You cats sound alarmingly close to me here in Stratfraud!
Sounds like a Connecticut boingboing gathering is needed…
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
