Car accidents aren't accidents

[anon15258403]

@alistairmichaelkinne

Bikes are not a necessary transport device for the most part. They are part of the leasure industry. Especially where I live where most of the cyclists are hobby racers.

Where I live bikes are a viable everyday transportation mode - particularly in combination with public transit options. All situational anecdotes and regional policy vagaries aside - the critical issue underlying this discussion (both the off topic message board debate and the original topic); is that automobiles can no longer be consider the default, primary and most-rightful road users.

Am confused about your antipathy towards bike lanes - would you rather that cyclists occupy the lane? The biker in your story sounds like they would have been safer doing that. (the disappearing lane thing is terrible and sounds like a half-baked design FWIW).

The idea that the roads are mainly for cars is destructive to communities social and physical infrastructure, the global environment, individual’s health; and this is thankfully changing. I am happy to see more cyclists on the road, it increases awareness and safety among drivers. As a driver it can be frustrating to encounter a slower moving vehicle, and as a cyclist I try to avoid biking on thoroughfares (because of people driving like you describe). There has to be a new type of coordination that allows both modes to coexist.

[AnonyMouse]

@alistairmichaelkinne

And further more, if I had chose to brake in either instance I ran the risk of losing control and harming my loved ones, which is my first responsibility.

If braking risked losing control, it’s pretty obvious you were travelling too fast for the conditions. Posted speeds are the maximum permitted, so you may well have been slower than this and still too fast.

If a cyclist wants to challenge cars he is a menace. Which gas been my point all along, and is my criticism of bike lanes.

If a driver wants to challenge bikes, he is an actual menace - to people other than himself.

Bikes are not a necessary transport device for the most part. They are part of the leasure industry. Especially where I live where most of the cyclists are hobby racers.

This is the message the car industry has tried to instill in many countries since the 60s. It’s very well to say that if you can afford a car or public transport or they make economic sense to use. For many this is not the case. For myself using a bike as opposed to a car or train/underground/bus roughly halves my journey time. In fact, of course, a transition to 0 carbon transport is essential, for everyone.

I own a road bike myself and used to ride on civic roadways until buses became over entitled and would routinely close me off to pick up and drop off passengers, even though I was in a “bike lane” and supposedly had the right of way.

On top of commuter drivers who routinely don’t pay attention, my enjoyment of a 60km ride into Toronto from Hamilton is now a faded memory.

So as a driver, it’s the cyclist or the other driver who’s at fault, but when you’re a cyclist, it’s buses and commuters?

[GorillaCoder]

That’s as ridiculous as saying that since I’m 6’ 4", 300lbs, and know several martial arts, that you’d better cede the right of way to me, as if you don’t kill me, I may in the heat of the moment decide to defend myself against your automotive assault upon me.

And, no, I’m not saying you should cede the right of way to me at all times. Nor that if i were to pummel you that it would be okay. It would not be. I am saying that both assertions are stupid.

And, if you are thinking, “but you’d be dead”, you are most likely wrong. I’ve been riding my bike for 30 plus years and am quite good at avoiding even those who are deliberately trying to run me over (you think things are bad now, you should have seen what things we like 30 years ago). This is true of many experienced cyclists. We regularly must avoid the unaware and the belligerent.

Lastly, most bike riders are horrible. The things I regularly see them do are appalling. But that does not mean you get to wantonly kill or main them, and then blame them for it. And I can’t count the number of drivers who thought it was okay to put me in grave danger, because of what idiot riders do all the time.

I stop at nearly all stop signs. At all traffic lights. Wear a bright yellow safety vest. Am lit up like a freaking Christmas tree. And am riding in a safe and legal manner when these yahoos decide to let me know exactly how pissed off they are cause I’m going near as fast as they are, requiring them to wait 5 seconds before making their turn. Or must wait to pass me when the land is narrow. Or because I’m in the left lane when turning left. Or in the left lane because the right is a turn lane only. Or because I passed them when approaching a red light, even though it was perfectly okay for them to pass me moments before.

So, point freely conceded, many cyclists ride badly, and some are right jerks. And that is entirely irrelevant to the point being made: nearly all crashes are not accidents, and even if some blame lies on cyclists, drivers have the greater duty of care, as they are the ones controlling the more deadly vehicle.

[winkybber]

There’s a hill near my place where that sign would be a good idea. The posted speed limit is 90kmh, and on a bike you easily coast down at 70kmh. Cars, of course, actually go 100-120 (or faster) down that hill and riding on the narrow shoulder at speed with cars going past at ludicrous speed is sketchy. Taking the lane would be much safer, but motorists will not acknowledge a cyclists’ legal right to do that, and would be extremely annoyed at, and in some instances respond aggressively to being held up for the additional 20 seconds (takes a bike 60 seconds Vs a car at 40 seconds to get down that hill). It doesn’t seem worth it. (They’ve widened and re-paved the shoulder a bit making it a better option now)

The 20 second bit is what I just don’t get. Just what is it about getting behind the wheel of a car that turns us all into impatient arseholes with a steaming hot rage against anyone with the temerity to delay our journey, even for a few seconds? We are so enraged that we will regulalry drive in manner that places vulnerable road users in mortal danger. There is NOTHING else we do in life where we make those sorts of choices. There is nothing we do that places ourselves, our family, our friends and other innocent people in as much danger as loading our family into our car and taking them on road.

[alistairmichaelkinne]

Hard braking always risks a loss of control. In fact it pretty much guarantees it.

Regarding fault, I made a conscious choice to not ride in a hazardous environment, as buses have become another trade union workplace and as such they pretty much do what they want when they want to and have new laws to further allow them snap lane changes and quick stops.

But keep rowing your boat mate…

[AnonyMouse]

@alistairmichaelkinne

Hard braking always risks a loss of control. In fact it pretty much guarantees it.

So can you explain to me what the difference is between a situation that requires hard braking and one where gentle braking is sufficient?

Regarding fault, I made a conscious choice to not ride in a hazardous environment, as buses have become another trade union workplace and as such they pretty much do what they want when they want to and have new laws to further allow them snap lane changes and quick stops.

Oh, so now it’s ‘the unions’?

But keep rowing your boat mate…

I’ll keep rowing as long as you keep digging!

[alistairmichaelkinne]

This is too easy…

[gwwar]

@alistairmichaelkinne

Hard braking always risks a loss of control. In fact it pretty much guarantees it.

You probably shouldn’t be on the road if you think this is true. Being able to emergency stop is a tool all drivers and riders should have.

[OtherMichael]

He already said he was going slower than posted.

[anon37332521]

Posted and “safe for conditions” are actually 2 different things when it comes to the law. Typically “unsafe for conditions” involves weather, but it can also involve traffic on the road. I’m not making an argument for or against the individuals involved, but it is an important distinction.

[OtherMichael]

Jesus Christ people, if the traffic moves at 60kph and you push a baby carriage into the road 20 meters in front of a car that isn’t a parked car, you are the one who kills the fucking baby, not the driver of the car.

Unless, of course, it was posted “Warning: slow-moving baby carriages may pull into roadway without notice”.

[anon37332521]

We get rockfall here. What’s your point?

(Oh, and bighorn sheep did I mention bighorn sheep?)

ETA: Got too shouty to get punctuation right.

[CaptainPedge]

So if a rock falls and crushes a car, is that the driver’s fault?

[anon37332521]

On? Not at all. In front of, possibly yes. Not in a legal sense, I’m talking about driving safe speeds for conditions.

[CaptainPedge]

@tropo

In front of, possibly yes.

… wow

[anon37332521]

Welcome to physics. Screw with it at your own risk. (and try not to take anyone else out while you’re at it.)

[CaptainPedge]

@tropo

Welcome to physics. Screw with it at your own risk.

Tell that to cyclists who pull out in front of cars moving faster than they ever could.

[anon37332521]

That’s not smart either. I never said it was.

[AnonyMouse]

Posted is a maximum.

[AnonyMouse]

There’s a difference between an act of God type incident and one where the possibility of the incident is determinable. Although it is possible to signpost for falling rocks it’s unlikely that one can know when or where each rock will drop. However it is perfectly possible to identify potential hazards ahead of you in day-to-day driving and account for them. For instance a road may have a 30mph limit, but if it is a residential street with parked cars on both sides, I can’t always see enough of the street to drive at that speed safely - being aware that children and pets may pop out between parked cars, etc. If I can see that up ahead, a bus is stopping or a truck is parked in the inside lane, then it’s predictable that any cyclists behind that bus will come out to go around it, and if they’re ahead of you, suck it up - they’ll be back out of the way in no time and you can get back to the important business of sitting stationary behind another car. If I can see that a pedestrian is stepping out while looking the wrong way (mainly a UK issue) then they’re probably a tourist used to the traffic running in the opposite direction.