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

[brutah]

this thread illustrates how shitty and inhumane some people are, particularly on this web forum. It's not that hard to be kind to a cyclist on a road no matter the situation. the fact is a car driver is in a vehicle that weighs over a ton and the cyclist is exposed on metal frame that weighs 20-30 lbs and offers no protection beside their styrofoam helmet. If you hit a cyclist in a car, they lose every time, but that still doesn't make you right.

Don't be an asshole, it's that simple. wishing death or injury of a cyclist makes you an asshole and repeatedly arguing your shitty point makes you a fucking loser.

[Benny Profane]

There have been several mentions of lovely separate bike paths, and I can assure you that if it was actually all that, we would fucking ride there. The reality, at least around here, is that they're fine for kids learning to ride bikes but are worse for a training ride than cowering on the fog line. These are shitty, bumpy, unmaintained paths that may have nonexistent sight lines, stop signs every time they cross a road (while the main road 20 feet away has the right of way), and tend to have broken glass and garbage on them. Add a jogger or a dog walker (and these days, tents), and those paths just aren't usable.

Wow, you have shitty paths around you.

[Timberridge]

I thought everyone rode fixies with flat bars in Portland?

[dan_pdx]

I thought everyone rode fixies with flat bars in Portland?

We do! Right down the middle of the lane, thank you very much

[highangle]

There have been several mentions of lovely separate bike paths, and I can assure you that if it was actually all that, we would fucking ride there. The reality, at least around here, is that they're fine for kids learning to ride bikes but are worse for a training ride than cowering on the fog line. These are shitty, bumpy, unmaintained paths that may have nonexistent sight lines, stop signs every time they cross a road (while the main road 20 feet away has the right of way), and tend to have broken glass and garbage on them. Add a jogger or a dog walker (and these days, tents), and those paths just aren't usable.

So you're saying you don't mind the odd truck horn, thrown bottle, or mirror strike. That it's all worth it to get unobstructed sight distance and right of way as you challenge peak aerobics through the many intersections of your urban shithole resort town full of broken glass and homeless filth?

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you road bikers.

[highangle]

Any of you self-appointed “road cops” gonna cite this rider for not sticking close to the rail or for not wearing a helmet?


Attachment 380200

"Of all the times to leave the gap wedge out of the bag..."

[54-46]

Some of you dumbfucks also fail to recognize that MTBers get hit and buzzed by cars on the road on their way to trails.

[dan_pdx]

So you're saying you don't mind the odd truck horn, thrown bottle, or mirror strike. That it's all worth it to get unobstructed sight distance and right of way as you challenge peak aerobics through the many intersections of your urban shithole resort town full of broken glass and homeless filth?

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you road bikers.

All that shit is "could happen," shitty trail conditions are guaranteed. Saying "I could get injured" isn't any different than riding backcountry or, for that matter, riding inbounds with the full complement of yahoos.

[MultiVerse]

If you can't ride on the bike path, and instead choose to ride your expensive bicycle on the fog line of the crowded highway parallel to and in sight of the lovely paved bike path, the odd train horns and random dooshings with ice water or the bottom halves of convenience store fountain drinks should be a welcome part of your elite outdoor fitness lifestyle.
Just be sure to bring plenty of electrolytes, especially when the babysitter flakes out on holiday weekends and you have to tow the infants along on your 200 milers.

You feel better now after attacking, and assaulting, another person's lifestyle?

[AdironRider]

The cyclists here complaining about how bike paths aren't perfect enough or (gasp!) have to obey stop signs so they would rather use a roadway is a perfect example of why most people think they are assholes, notably complaining about having to share them with children.

Deal with it. You are not guaranteed the right to zero annoyances while riding your bike. Share the road (or paths) works both ways. Specifically choosing to not use a dedicated path built for you and instead slowing everyone else down by being in their way is the definition of asshole behavior.

[Jax]

Wow. Some of you have clearly never ridden a bike for exercise, nor do you realize the benefits it provides to well being and mental health. Biking is my pow skiing in the summertime. Sorry, can't help it that my only time to ride is during your 'rush' hour in this town of 22k people.

To be fair, I was never a roadie because you just can't trust every driver. Lee Hill and 119 Diagonal in Boulder were the perfect examples for me to not even risk it.

That said, I often ride my adventure bike from home on gravel, then tarmac, to get to singletrack. I've started to 'take a lane' on this one section of Strawberry park because of tourist drivers and impatient (usually dodge diesels) drivers that blaze within inches of me trying to pass on an uphill blind spot, when the state of Colorado has a 3ft minimum rule to pass a cyclist.

Fuck you mtm- wow.

I pay taxes for these roads, it's my right to ride, and in a responsible manner, and it's your right to ride them, too. But just because you don't, doesn't mean you can keep being a dick about it while using your car as a bullying mechanism. It's literally shocking to me, how many of these pro lifers give zero fucks when it comes to passing a cyclist safely.

Driver's Ed also needs a total revamp across the country.

[dan_pdx]

The cyclists here complaining about how bike paths aren't perfect enough or (gasp!) have to obey stop signs so they would rather use a roadway is a perfect example of why most people think they are assholes, notably complaining about having to share them with children.

I'm talking about stop signs every 100 feet. At that point, why bother. And it may surprise you to hear this, but walkers and runners don't particularly cotton to cyclists doing training rides on those paths.

Deal with it. You are not guaranteed the right to zero annoyances while riding your bike. Share the road (or paths) works both ways. Specifically choosing to not use a dedicated path built for you and instead slowing everyone else down by being in their way is the definition of asshole behavior.

Right, any more than you're guaranteed the right to zero annoyances while driving your car. So...looks like we're both right. Participation trophies all around?

[MultiVerse]

or (gasp!) have to obey stop signs

People on bikes break fewer laws than people in cars.

People in cars are triggered when they see people on bikes breaking the law (it happens to me too) because when you're in a car you're part of the car tribe so speeding, texting, honking, not yielding to pedestrians, etc. is socially acceptable as long as it isn't egregious.

When a person on a bike breaks the law however they are seen as an outsider deserving of punishment even though statistically people on bikes aren’t posing a threat to anybody.

[Dantheman]

The cyclists here complaining about how bike paths aren't perfect enough or (gasp!) have to obey stop signs so they would rather use a roadway is a perfect example of why most people think they are assholes, notably complaining about having to share them with children.

Deal with it. You are not guaranteed the right to zero annoyances while riding your bike. Share the road (or paths) works both ways. Specifically choosing to not use a dedicated path built for you and instead slowing everyone else down by being in their way is the definition of asshole behavior.

When I ride on the road it's for transportation, so choosing a route that gets me to my destination in a reasonable amount of time matters. This is mostly a hypothetical circle jerk since the times when you have a choice between a road and an adjacent MUP are rare exceptions. However, when that decision does exist, every instance is different. I'll take the bad MUP over a shoulder-less major highway with lots of truck traffic. But, near my house there's a canal trail a block from a road that both end up in basically the same place. The road is low-traffic with a clean wide shoulder and three signals. The canal trail has a dozen stop signs in the same stretch, has goatheads everywhere, and has pedestrian signals at all the arterials that stop heavy cross-traffic just so that I can cross. Taking the road is better for everyone involved.

eta: It's absurd for any modern road to be built without a shoulder. If there a decent shoulder there's no need for bikes to be "slowing everyone else down" and the shoulder benefits all road users (room to pull over if needed, etc.).

[altasnob]

Society should do everything it can to encourage people to ride their bike rather than drive. Much less carbon footprint, much less damage to the roads than heavy cars, is good exercise. A healthy society reduces medical and insurance costs for all. And society should promote forms of exercise and recreation you can do from your front door instead of ones that require a long drive from your house (like skiing and mountain biking).

When I lived near downtown Seattle, I almost never drove my car in the city and exclusively biked and walked. I enjoyed my time living in Seattle. Contrast my friend who went to school in Bozeman and liked driving his Tacoma everywhere in the city. He couldn't stand Seattle. I think riding your bike instead of driving promotes general well being and happiness. My dream city to live is Amsterdam, which puts cyclist ahead of cars.

[EWG]

When a person on a bike breaks the law however they are seen as an outsider deserving of punishment even though statistically people on bike aren’t posing a theat to anybody.

I think this concept that folks on bikes are "outsiders" on the road is a big part of the issue. In Colorado about half of the cost of roads are paid by general taxes - not gas taxes, transportation fees etc. Which means that people driving are being subsidized to an enormous extent for their right to drive on a road. Which also means that they needs to share it fully with farm equipment, horses and bikes. But they've been taught it's theirs, and anything else is an inconvenience. It's not "theirs." They didn't pay for it.

And the more rural the road the more the people who are NOT driving cars are subsidizing that road. To the tune of 90% or more of the cost in very rural areas.

[old_newguy]

Multiverse gets it.

Some people on here must be foaming at the mouth on a daily basis if they are so hung up on stopping at stop signs, not running red lights, etc. Traffic violations are like an every 30 second occurrence around here.

Go sit at any stop sign with any traffic and watch how many people actually stop fully where they are supposed to.

[Dantheman]

It's literally shocking to me, how many of these pro lifers give zero fucks when it comes to passing a cyclist safely.

"If you're pre-born you're fine, if you're pre-school you're fucked."

-George Carlin


Though, I will say, it does the cycling community no good to deny that some cycists are cunts and that some accidents are entirely the fault of the cyclist. Neither is the norm, but they certainly exist.

[altasnob]

Here's the guy who was the first cyclist in the country to be convicted of felony manslaughter for mowing down a women in a crosswalk on his fixie in San Francisco:

https://sfbayca.com/2018/08/01/bicyc...-deadly-crash/

And for all y'all who can't ever go to Canada because of your DUI, ride your bike to the bar. While technically illegal to bike fucked up, unless you are in a collision, you will almost never get in trouble for it. In Washington, you can't get a DUI on a bike (because bike doesn't meet the definition of "vehicle") but can get Reckless Endangerment, a lesser charge than DUI (same charge as those Summit County snowboarders who dropped into I-70).

[jono]

I read the link. Irony is you are basing this all on some supposition about what I'm trying to do--which I thought I made clear wasn't the case. Strike two. Defensive projection indeed.

Incorrect. I'm supposing nothing, but thanks for providing another example. I'm basing this on what you literally described: the thoughts of people who are not yourself which you claim to know anyway. You have multiple personalities, maybe? Or maybe you are getting stuck on this fact: there's no one in your head except you. Therefore, all of the ideas you have about other people's ideas are your own ideas. Ascribing them to others is called projection. Hence the link.

Unless you can tell me the story of how you came to know the thoughts of the cyclists you describe and somehow it doesn't involve your imagination, you've been projecting.

[Dexter Rutecki]

There's really no comparison in terms of who violates traffic rules like running red lights and biking against traffic more often--unless it's late at night I can't get to the corner without seeing several cyclists run lights, ride the wrong way, etc.

People on bikes break fewer laws than people in cars.

People in cars are triggered when they see people on bikes breaking the law (it happens to me too) because when you're in a car you're part of the car tribe so speeding, texting, honking, not yielding to pedestrians, etc. is socially acceptable as long as it isn't egregious.

When a person on a bike breaks the law however they are seen as an outsider deserving of punishment even though statistically people on bikes aren’t posing a threat to anybody.

I personally know two people who have been hospitalized after being run down by cyclists (both while crossing the street). One didn't have any real injuries (lasting--I assume just bruising or something), but the other had major orthopedic surgery and will apparently never walk/run normally again (and the cyclist got up and took off--fortunately this woman had health insurance so presumably didn't have to pay too much for her medical care). This is another example of what cyclists do all the time (people get injured and even occasionally killed by cyclists riding recklessly)--fly through intersections with people crossing the street, thinking it's fine to do it because they're on a bike. I understand that in rural areas cyclists are rarely a threat to pedestrians, but most people live in/around cities. I think there should be some consensus over whether or not bikes are treated like cars--cyclists often seem to want it both ways, they get the rights of cars when it suits them but should also get special dispensation to do things we'd never tolerate from a driver (when was the last time you were driving and just flew through every red light in your path without even slowing down? Bikes do that tens of thousands of times every day just where I live).

edit: just to be clear, none of the above in any way excuses/justifies what drivers do around cyclists every day, and those drivers should really be aggressively prosecuted when they endanger people. If someone hits a cyclist because they were reckless and/or driving in such a way that made hitting the cyclist likely then they should be treated criminally. But saying cyclists, at least in urban/suburban areas, are not a risk to others is very untrue (and no, I'm not saying they're as big a danger as reckless drivers are).

[Dexter Rutecki]

Incorrect. I'm supposing nothing, but thanks for providing another example.

Well, no--again, I explicitly told you I am not trying to put anyone in their place, so you projecting that onto me is still incorrect and is the irony of you doing exactly what you want ascribe to me. Third try still hasn't done it for you here.

I'm basing this on what you literally described: the thoughts of people who are not yourself which you claim to know anyway. You have multiple personalities, maybe? Or maybe you are getting stuck on this fact: there's no one in your head except you. Therefore, all of the ideas you have about other people's ideas are your own ideas. Ascribing them to others is called projection. Hence the link.

Unless you can tell me the story of how you came to know the thoughts of the cyclists you describe and somehow it doesn't involve your imagination, you've been projecting.

OK, sure. Everyone is suffering from the same delusion about these people. Really? That's what you want to claim? How about when a car very apparently intentionally endangers a cyclist? How do you know what's in the driver's head? You're just projecting, amirite? Come on, man. Don't be pedantic about this (and having confronted a few cyclists over the years about exactly their behavior I am very certain about at least part of their motivation--of course I can't say what their thoughts were, but their responses when confronted and their actions made clear to me what I already basically knew--that's not projection, that's just accepting reality).

[Dantheman]

Bikes do that tens of thousands of times every day just where I live).

Where you live is not representative of 99% of the country, including most "cities." I live in a "city" and commute ~2,000 miles/year. If I see a single bike on either leg of my daily route it's notable.

[dan_pdx]

There's really no comparison in terms of who violates traffic rules like running red lights and biking against traffic more often--unless it's late at night I can't get to the corner without seeing several cyclists run lights, ride the wrong way, etc.

Really? Because any time I drive the speed limit on any road, almost all other drivers will pass me, or tailgate if passing isn't possible. And I'm sure you know that the number of cyclist-caused injuries is an insignificant fraction of the number of injuries caused by motorists, right?

W/E, this is pretty much like discussing politics at this point, we're just bloviating to hear ourselves talk and no opinions will be changed. I'll still ride (on snow) with any of you guys any time except that one asshole.

[Dexter Rutecki]

Where you live is not representative of 99% of the country, including most "cities."

Well, simply by population numbers alone your percentage is wrong--over 5% of the U.S. lives in the greater metropolitan area, and I would refer you to Boston, Chicago, or a number of other large cities where you often see similar things (admittedly it seems less frequent, but it may seem that way only as a result of less volume, I'm not sure).

Regardless of whether or not this is 'representative' of what happens in all U.S. cities (does it have to be?), it's happening, and it's not some kind of special rarity that almost never occurs.