It's Not a Bike Accident When a Car Hits a Rider

Get it straight - when a car hits and kills/injures a cyclist, it's a fucking car accident involving a bike, not a bike accident. Cyclists (or bike riders if that's too "lycra" for you) crash plenty on their own - those are bike accidents.

Examples:

Wrong:
NFL Coach Greg Knapp killed
https://sports.yahoo.com/jets-assist...rc=fp_deeplink

Shaun Bradley paralyzed
https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/...-bike-accident

Better:

Gwen Inglis killed by DUI driver
https://www.denverpost.com/2021/05/1...-cyclist-dies/

2 Cyclists Killed in Separate Incidents Near San Diego
https://www.10news.com/news/local-ne...rate-accidents

Hell, most of the time it's not even a car accident when a car crashes, it's "avoidable collision". Avoidable if the driver had their eyes on the road instead of on their phone.

Thanks for the clarification.

I drive a lot on logging roads. My option as the middle dude between a giant oncoming logging truck and a tiny bicycle riding five feet left of the shoulder is.... my own life.

Vibes to the commuters. and get fucked to all the recreational bikers creating dangerous situations on mountain roads.

Why do asshole road bikers ride on the fog line of the Seward Highway in heavy traffic when there's a goddamn paved TRAAK path 25' off the same edge of the road with signs saying BIKE PATH?

Why would I see these these same assholes 58 miles north 10 hours later on the side of the same road administering Pedialyte to their infant in the child trailer?

Because they thought nothing of loading their infant in a bike trailer and bouncing it behind for 230 miles down and back up the fog line of the fucking Seward Highway from Anchorage to Seward while they crushed their little 4th of July bike ride. That's why.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lone Star

I drive a lot on logging roads. My option as the middle dude between a giant oncoming logging truck and a tiny bicycle riding five feet left of the shoulder is.... my own life.

Vibes to the commuters. and get fucked to all the recreational bikers creating dangerous situations on mountain roads.

---

Your option is to wait behind the cyclist until you can pass safely after the logging truck passes, because most likely the reason the cyclist is 5 ft left of the shoulder is that there isn't enough room for you to pass him safely if he was on the edge of the road. And that cyclist has just as much right to use the road as you do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by highangle

Why do asshole road bikers ride on the fog line of the Seward Highway in heavy traffic when there's a goddamn paved TRAAK path 25' off the same edge of the road with signs saying BIKE PATH?

Why would I see these these same assholes 58 miles north 10 hours later on the side of the same road administering Pedialyte to their infant in the child trailer?

Because they thought nothing of loading their infant in a bike trailer and bouncing it behind for 230 miles down and back up the fog line of the fucking Seward Highway from Anchorage to Seward while they crushed their little 4th of July bike ride. That's why.

---

Is there a lot of those?

90% of road bikers near me deserve to get hit. Fuck them and their entitled clueless attitude. Yeh, riding on a mountain pass road with no shoulder during commute time taking up the middle of the lane or 2-3 abreast on blind corners. Go fuck yourself and die.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old goat

Your option is to wait behind the cyclist until you can pass safely after the logging truck passes, because most likely the reason the cyclist is 5 ft left of the shoulder is that there isn't enough room for you to pass him safely if he was on the edge of the road. And that cyclist has just as much right to use the road as you do.

---

I don't buy this argument. They are also supposed to follow traffic laws but we have all seen these pricks ride between cars stopped at a red light and then ride right through the light if it is clear. These idiot road bikers block traffic and make drivers have to dodge their stupid asses when they swerve across traffic. Either keep up with the flow of traffic or get the fuck off the road.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old goat

Your option is to wait behind the cyclist until you can pass safely after the logging truck passes, because most likely the reason the cyclist is 5 ft left of the shoulder is that there isn't enough room for you to pass him safely if he was on the edge of the road. And that cyclist has just as much right to use the road as you do.

---

They taught this in driver's ed BITD: separate the hazards. Lot of flunkies behind the wheel, apparently.

This morning I got to watch an anus with out-of-state plates pull out to pass me as we came down a blind hill somewhere above the speed limit, only to find a car coming up. It almost seemed natural that she gunned that Prius to a full half throttle and only forced the uphill driver down into second gear before getting back over.

I'll be taking the lane more aggressively from now on. Seeing over the hills before the morons with no projectile at hand is just frustration.

My only beefs with cyclists is when they do not behave predictably, like, if they are riding on the sidewalk, they need to act like a pedestrian. If riding on the road, act like a vehicle. If switching modes, use caution and yield to vehicles that aren't expecting you to decide to change form.

Also, super annoying when they dont pull off when they have a tail of 10+ cars and its unsafe to pass.

The worst "cyclists", though are your crackhead/methhead homeless dudes. They are usually going thr wrong way in the bike lane on a stolen bmx or a huffy "mountain bike".

It's not a cyclist when it's a homeless crackhead going the wrong way in the bike lane on a stolen bike.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benny Profane

It's not a cyclist when it's a homeless crackhead going the wrong way in the bike lane on a stolen bike.

---

WTF is it then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cspringsposer

WTF is it then?

---

Bike thief. Duh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cspringsposer

WTF is it then?

---

Then it's a homeless crackhead going the wrong way in the bike lane on a stolen mountain bike.

What about when you're driving and you get hit by a cyclist? Has happened twice to me (once not a big deal, the other had the cyclist flat out on the pavement behind me after he slammed into the back of my car--I had to stop abruptly because of a car in front of me and the cyclist hadn't been paying attention to what was in front of him, which was my car).

When I see cyclists on the ground following an incident with a car I tend to assume they were doing some of the crazy shit they do all the time--running lights without even looking for oncoming traffic (they just assume the cars will give way), riding against traffic, weaving between cars and getting ahead of them at traffic lights. It's too bad cyclists are so exposed, but I usually can't go two minutes in the street without seeing at least one (and usually a few) doing something dumb. But it's just accepted that that's how they operate (probably 50% or more are delivery guys and using e-bikes, but they're still on bicycles).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MakersTeleMark

90% of road bikers near me deserve to get hit. Fuck them and their entitled clueless attitude. Yeh, riding on a mountain pass road with no shoulder during commute time taking up the middle of the lane or 2-3 abreast on blind corners. Go fuck yourself and die.

---

You are a fucking cunt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ötzi

Is there a lot of those?

---

Not that many giving their dehydrated kids CTE so they can celebrate their athleticism, but every sunny spell brings a whole new crew of spandex physics deniers wobbling down the fog lines with the diesel pushers and super B-train doubles, too totally into themselves, their tattoos, and their caloric burn rate to ride their road bikes on the fucking paved bike paths.

Makes a person want a train horn...

BTW, think we took a wrong turn on the way to this thread: https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...*king-Cyclists

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jono

Then it's a homeless crackhead going the wrong way in the bike lane on a stolen mountain bike.

---

Fkn Rockhoppers!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MakersTeleMark

90% of road bikers near me deserve to get hit. Fuck them and their entitled clueless attitude. Yeh, riding on a mountain pass road with no shoulder during commute time taking up the middle of the lane or 2-3 abreast on blind corners. Go fuck yourself and die.

---

There oughta be a jail cell for drivers like this. Parole hearing in 25.

Bunch of fucking babies. The people on bikes are…people, and they getting killed because of idiots and assholes like some of you this thread.

If you get hit carrying your skis in the ski hill parking lot by some idiot turning on their phone, is it a skiing accident?

WHOA WHOA WHOA….are you seriously suggesting I wait…for like 1.5 minutes until the road is clear? I got fucking places to be! Fuck that guy on his bike following the traffic laws….he shouldn’t be there b/c, you know, I’M THERE AND I GOT PLACES TO BE!!!

PS: lots of places, like Delaware…and the Idaho stop…a cyclist is following the law if they treat a stop sign as a yield and a red light as a stop sign…but again FUCK THAT LAW….I GOT PLACES TO BE!

Also: any shitbag that would intentionally harm other humans beings (whether pedestrians, bikes, or other modes of transport), deserves as much prison time as humanly possible….they’re people for fuck sakes.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smartyiak

WHOA WHOA WHOA….are you seriously suggesting I wait…for like 1.5 minutes until the road is clear? I got fucking places to be! Fuck that guy on his bike following the traffic laws….he shouldn’t be there b/c, you know, I’M THERE AND I GOT PLACES TO BE!!!

PS: lots of places, like Delaware…and the Idaho stop…a cyclist is following the law if they treat a stop sign as a yield and a red light as a stop sign…but again FUCK THAT LAW….I GOT PLACES TO BE!

Also: any shitbag that would intentionally harm other humans beings (whether pedestrians, bikes, or other modes of transport), deserves as much prison time as humanly possible….they’re people for fuck sakes.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

---

Thank you, smartyjack. The fact is that the vehicle driver just has to slow down and then can regain momentum with the slightest effort of pushing the throttle pedal is enough to have drivers reconsider the possibility of seriously injuring or killing a cyclist.

MTM - I hope that was a terrible joke and you never have to live with the guilt of taking away someone's father, mother, sibling, etc. due to your selfish actions behind the wheel.

I can't be the only one thinking this is the most predictable thread type we have. If you fed the 'cyclists suck' thread into an AI it could have produced this new thread, no problem,

I think the reasons for these feelings on both sides are pretty obvious...people aren't good at understanding where others are coming from. Yes, there are total assholes cyclists who like to assert themselves on the road by making life difficult for drivers (cyclist boosters: I understand 'making life difficult' is a relative term and doesn't compare to endangering someone). Yes, there are total asshole drivers who put cyclists in jeopardy by driving like idiots--sometimes even intentionally. But I think we could help both sides if everyone acknowledged that the entitled cyclist (or oblivious cyclist, as sometimes they clearly have no idea how they're impacting others) mentality fosters some of this anger, just as the actions of the shitty driver make cyclists hate drivers in general. Something should be done about dickhead cyclists and dangerous drivers, but the rest of us don't need to adopt the most radical positions as a result of those two groups. (Getting a little Rodney King here, but seriously...and it does seem like there's a little more rage here than there should be.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

I can't be the only one thinking this is the most predictable thread type we have. If you fed the 'cyclists suck' thread into an AI it could have produced this new thread, no problem,

---

You're seriously blowing my mind here Dexter. You saying that some of the stuff posted in the PR is generated by AI?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

Yes, there are total assholes cyclists who like to assert themselves on the road by making life difficult for drivers (cyclist boosters: I understand 'making life difficult' is a relative term and doesn't compare to endangering someone). Yes, there are total asshole drivers who put cyclists in jeopardy by driving like idiots--sometimes even intentionally.

---

Close, but in most states and in most circumstances cyclists have as much right to use the roadway as a vehicle. In other words, legally I can ride my bike down the middle of the lane without concern for vehicles getting backed up behind me. If I move over at all to provide some space for a vehicle to pass me, I am already being polite and making it easier for the drivers. There are many times that 'taking the lane' and riding in the middle of the road (in towns and cities for example) is the safest option available to the cyclist to avoid getting doored (hit by someone exiting a parked vehicle), squeezed to the curb by a passing car, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Timberridge

You're seriously blowing my mind here Dexter. You saying that some of the stuff posted in the PR is generated by AI?

---

I've been pretty sure for years that you're an AI, so yeah, I guess I am. It would save us a fuckload of time if we could just get AI to hammer out these posts, anyway.

Timberridge 9000 has read your post and will respond shortly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Timberridge

You're seriously blowing my mind here Dexter. You saying that some of the stuff posted in the PR is generated by AI?

---

If it weren't for AI, we'd have no I at all

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

...people aren't good at understanding where others are coming from.... But I think we could help both sides if everyone acknowledged that the entitled cyclist...

---

Tell me more about this AI. Can it trim posts down for quicker reading?

Hi Dexter, how may I assist you today?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peruvian

Close, but in most states and in most circumstances cyclists have as much right to use the roadway as a vehicle. In other words, legally I can ride my bike down the middle of the lane without concern for vehicles getting backed up behind me. If I move over at all to provide some space for a vehicle to pass me, I am already being polite and making it easier for the drivers. There are many times that 'taking the lane' and riding in the middle of the road (in towns and cities for example) is the safest option available to the cyclist to avoid getting doored (hit by someone exiting a parked vehicle), squeezed to the curb by a passing car, etc.

---

This.

In all honesty, for the longest time, I rode as far right as possible. I figured: there's no point in blocking the road when there are cars behind me. But, in the last few years, there are times (blind corners, uphill on two lane roads, etc,) where I will move left and "take the lane." This is a direct reaction to being "buzzed" too many times in the last few years (it really does seem that driver's have gotten exponentially less patient in the last 5yrs or so) by drivers who seemingly can't wait 10 seconds for an on-coming care to get by (and yes....I have literally looked at my watch and timed it....the longest any car has ever had to wait behind me is about 25 seconds; I know it seems like longer, but next time you're behind a cyclist, check your watch....I'll bet you're behind them for a much shorter period than you think)). If a driver can't give me courtesy of waiting 10-30seconds to pass safely, then they're just gonna have to wait behind me until I feel it's safe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peruvian

Close, but in most states and in most circumstances cyclists have as much right to use the roadway as a vehicle. In other words, legally I can ride my bike down the middle of the lane without concern for vehicles getting backed up behind me. If I move over at all to provide some space for a vehicle to pass me, I am already being polite and making it easier for the drivers. There are many times that 'taking the lane' and riding in the middle of the road (in towns and cities for example) is the safest option available to the cyclist to avoid getting doored (hit by someone exiting a parked vehicle), squeezed to the curb by a passing car, etc.

---

I'm aware of the law. But this makes my point--what you are legally entitled to do isn't the same as what you should be doing, and if people were just better about considering how they impact others probably most of these problems could be avoided. When I drive and I know a cyclist is going fast on my right when I am about to make a right turn, I try to let the cyclist go by (unless they're going too slowly for it to make sense) even though in NYS I am allowed to make the turn as long as it won't cause a collision (I don't need to let the cyclist go by, even if he has to slow down for me--I think some states are different). Point is, I don't consider just what the law allows, I try to figure out how to accommodate the cyclist (while trying not to inconvenience drivers behind me too much). If you're only thinking about what the law allows you to do we inevitably end up with these conflicts--especially if your mentality is that you are entitled to behave in this way and you don't take into account how your actions are likely to impact others (and of course I would say the same to drivers interacting with cyclists).

Note: I'm not saying you are the kind of cyclist who unnecessarily hogs the road, I'm just speaking generally. I assume you're not one of those people who gets a rush from keeping a line of cars behind you crawling around at 20 mph (or less).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Timberridge

Hi Dexter, how may I assist you today?

---

Ah, I knew it would start working better. Now we're talking! I'm sure you know what I was perusing on Amazon earlier today, so can you produce some related posts?

https://thechive.com/wp-content/uplo...rip=info&w=400

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

Ah, I knew it would start working better. Now we're talking! I'm sure you know what I was perusing on Amazon earlier today, so can you produce some related posts?

---

...typing...
Hi, based on your recent search history you may be further interested in the following
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...jYpiiQOqkp-BdI

..typing...
Thank you for contacting TGR today and should you need further assistance feel free to contact us via the chat function.

...typing...
Have a great day!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

I'm aware of the law. But this makes my point--what you are legally entitled to do isn't the same as what you should be doing, and if people were just better about considering how they impact others probably most of these problems could be avoided. When I drive and I know a cyclist is going fast on my right when I am about to make a right turn, I try to let the cyclist go by (unless they're going too slowly for it to make sense) even though in NYS I am allowed to make the turn as long as it won't cause a collision (I don't need to let the cyclist go by, even if he has to slow down for me--I think some states are different). Point is, I don't consider just what the law allows, I try to figure out how to accommodate the cyclist (while trying not to inconvenience drivers behind me too much). If you're only thinking about what the law allows you to do we inevitably end up with these conflicts--especially if your mentality is that you are entitled to behave in this way and you don't take into account how your actions are likely to impact others (and of course I would say the same to drivers interacting with cyclists).

Note: I'm not saying you are the kind of cyclist who unnecessarily hogs the road, I'm just speaking generally. I assume you're not one of those people who gets a rush from keeping a line of cars behind you crawling around at 20 mph (or less).

---

I understand you aren't directing this to me personally.

So how does the cyclists decision to 'take the lane' if they feel that's the safest choice negatively impact the driver behind them? A few seconds worth of delay?

Not dissimilar to the whole trans bathroom debate, this is a problem of infrastructure. If sidewalks were built out into 'recreation path' widths and the rules of the road required bikes to remain on the paths, this issue could be resolved immediately. Until that nirvana happens, vehicle drivers need to understand how dangerous their aggressive behavior can be to a cyclist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smartyiak

This.

In all honesty, for the longest time, I rode as far right as possible. I figured: there's no point in blocking the road when there are cars behind me. But, in the last few years, there are times (blind corners, uphill on two lane roads, etc,) where I will move left and "take the lane." This is a direct reaction to being "buzzed" too many times in the last few years (it really does seem that driver's have gotten exponentially less patient in the last 5yrs or so) by drivers who seemingly can't wait 10 seconds for an on-coming care to get by (and yes....I have literally looked at my watch and timed it....the longest any car has ever had to wait behind me is about 25 seconds; I know it seems like longer, but next time you're behind a cyclist, check your watch....I'll bet you're behind them for a much shorter period than you think)). If a driver can't give me courtesy of waiting 10-30seconds to pass safely, then they're just gonna have to wait behind me until I feel it's safe.

---

As a counterpoint, there are cyclists who seem to think that any time they have to use their brakes as a result of what a car does then it's a crime against cyclists. I think you're doing the right thing (I assume you are, and based on what you described you are), but there's also the fact that, for example, when I drive I will typically encounter a few dozen cyclists during my drive. Waiting 30 seconds for each of them (this has never happened to me) now starts to represent a significant amount of time--multiply that by 200 days (or whatever) of driving and you're talking about hours of time. If the cyclists are forcing that time to be spent for no real reason then I can understand why drivers may feel antipathy.

I'll say again that what you describe makes it sound like you're doing the right thing, but obviously the best solution would be a road that allows cyclists to be there safely while not slowing down all the other traffic (but then we get into cost/benefit and all that kind of stuff--clearly there are roads where it's probably never going to be a good idea to ride a bike, and there are roads where drivers simply need to get used to making room for bikes).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peruvian

I understand you aren't directing this to me personally.

So how does the cyclists decision to 'take the lane' if they feel that's the safest choice negatively impact the driver behind them? A few seconds worth of delay?

---

Coincidentally, I guess you can see what I posted in response to smarty while you posted this. What I was trying to say is that the cyclist's decision to take the lane is sometimes sensible and merited, and drivers should understand that, but other times the cyclist is just being a dick (I'm thinking especially of cyclists riding two abreast when there's a wide shoulder area--not because they need to take the lane for safety, but just because they're oblivious or somehow like to assert their right to take the lane).

Quote:

---

Not dissimilar to the whole trans bathroom debate, this is a problem of infrastructure. If sidewalks were built out into 'recreation path' widths and the rules of the road required bikes to remain on the paths, this issue could be resolved immediately. Until that nirvana happens, vehicle drivers need to understand how dangerous their aggressive behavior can be to a cyclist.

---

Right, which is my point--both sides should take into account how they're impacting other people. But with militant cyclists intent on putting drivers in their place and idiot drivers being unaware of the danger they pose (or, again, intentionally making things more dangerous) we end up with what we have now.