Some grim cycling stats

Greens said:

"Wayne Pein" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

bdbafh wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

A situation that evoked a honk from a displeased motorist yesterday on
PA State Route 463 west just northwest of where the BicyclePA south
route heads to the north ...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

A right turn lane splits off to the right with no additional lane
striping for bikes. I took the normal action of riding a few inches to
the right of the white stripe that separated the through lane from the
right turn lane. An angry, clueless motorist passes by closely,
honking. This evokes the normal display of a hand signal from me,
along with a "lets go, right now!" with me pointing to the shoulder.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Obviously the motorist made an unsafe pass. They didn't take me up on
the offer to discuss their infraction after dropping their weapon
(exiting the vehicle).

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Perhaps I'll change my tactic there to just take the lane instead of
splitting the through lane and right turn lane, preventing such an
unsafe pass next time.

Quoted message said:

It sounds as if you were a through bicyclist but riding in the
right-turn-only lane. Such riding sends an ambiguous message and is not in
accordance with the rules of the road. You should use proper destination
positioning.

Quoted message said:

Wayne

Do you mean that he should have been in the middle of the road in the lane
cars use to go straight as oppossed to the right lane where he feels safer
but is designated for right turns only by cars? I think you're right, but
then again I've seen motorists so confused that they might just roll right
over me when the light turns green not out of avarice, but out of a desire
to be courteous to the drivers behind them who are equipped with loud horns
that they eagerly use. I'm serious. I bet there are people that would at
least nudge you out of the way with their bumpers if you don't move fast
enough.

I'm curious where you ride that has such an unpleasant atmosphere. I
meet with the occasional jerk out on the road, but for the most part
everywhere I've been, most people are ok. The numers of jerks and
incompetents varies widely of course, but they are still always in the
significant minority.

Joseph

"Wayne Pein" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I believe that the "more cyclists the safer" scenario is a population,
rather than individual, based phenomenom and is likely attributable to
slow speed locations. The slower the motor vehicle typical speed due to
congestion the more likely cycling is attractive and the less likely are
collisions. The more congestion the more people also have to be aware of
their surroundings.

The recent London experience belies those claims. A massive increase in
cycling and at the same time IIRC car speeds went up since there was less
congestion.

I agree it's a population thing, and I think it's reasonably simply
attributable to people just being more used to being around cyclists.

cheers,
clive

"bdbafh" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Greens said:

U.S. Bikers Less Safe Than European Counterparts

In the United States, cyclists are 12 times more likely than people in
cars to die en route to their destinations. On a per-kilometer and
per-trip
basis, U.S. cyclists are twice as likely to die on the road as German
cyclists, and more than three times as likely as Dutch cyclists. While
cycling fatalities in all of these countries have fallen in the last 25
years, U.S. cycling deaths have declined largely because of a drop in
cycling, while in the Netherlands and Germany investments in
infrastructure
that make cycling safer account for much of the decline.

http://www.thebicyclebum.com/

note: I didn't read the fine article.

A situation that evoked a honk from a displeased motorist yesterday on
PA State Route 463 west just northwest of where the BicyclePA south
route heads to the north ...

A right turn lane splits off to the right with no additional lane
striping for bikes. I took the normal action of riding a few inches to
the right of the white stripe that separated the through lane from the
right turn lane. An angry, clueless motorist passes by closely,
honking. This evokes the normal display of a hand signal from me,
along with a "lets go, right now!" with me pointing to the shoulder.

Obviously the motorist made an unsafe pass. They didn't take me up on
the offer to discuss their infraction after dropping their weapon
(exiting the vehicle).

Perhaps I'll change my tactic there to just take the lane instead of
splitting the through lane and right turn lane, preventing such an
unsafe pass next time.

-bdbafh

Yea. They're very arrogant and sure of themselves while they're in their
protective cages. And of course it's easier to keep a heavy firearm in a car
than it is on a bike so don't be so eager to catch them.

Greens said:

"bdbafh" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Greens said:

U.S. Bikers Less Safe Than European Counterparts

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In the United States, cyclists are 12 times more likely than people in
cars to die en route to their destinations. On a per-kilometer and
per-trip
basis, U.S. cyclists are twice as likely to die on the road as German
cyclists, and more than three times as likely as Dutch cyclists. While
cycling fatalities in all of these countries have fallen in the last 25
years, U.S. cycling deaths have declined largely because of a drop in
cycling, while in the Netherlands and Germany investments in
infrastructure
that make cycling safer account for much of the decline.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

http://www.thebicyclebum.com/

Quoted message said:

note: I didn't read the fine article.

Quoted message said:

A situation that evoked a honk from a displeased motorist yesterday on
PA State Route 463 west just northwest of where the BicyclePA south
route heads to the north ...

Quoted message said:

A right turn lane splits off to the right with no additional lane
striping for bikes. I took the normal action of riding a few inches to
the right of the white stripe that separated the through lane from the
right turn lane. An angry, clueless motorist passes by closely,
honking. This evokes the normal display of a hand signal from me,
along with a "lets go, right now!" with me pointing to the shoulder.

Quoted message said:

Obviously the motorist made an unsafe pass. They didn't take me up on
the offer to discuss their infraction after dropping their weapon
(exiting the vehicle).

Quoted message said:

Perhaps I'll change my tactic there to just take the lane instead of
splitting the through lane and right turn lane, preventing such an
unsafe pass next time.

Quoted message said:

-bdbafh

Yea. They're very arrogant and sure of themselves while they're in their
protective cages. And of course it's easier to keep a heavy firearm in a car
than it is on a bike so don't be so eager to catch them.

But a handgun shoved into some lycra shorts if VERY noticable. I rode
a few times in Brooklyn with a guy from the West Indies who rode
around armed. Folks are few and far between who would have dared give
this guy any [censored]!

Joseph

Jay Beattie said:

Now, if you are going from an area of zero bicycles or a couple of
bicycles to a lot, then there will be a traffic calming effect --
maybe. But the studies that I recall reading used city-wide numbers
without reference to bicycle populations in particular areas, which is
very important. Where you have any significant, existing population
of cyclists, doubling that population does not double driver awareness
or account for the reducion in injury statistics. That is simply a
function of populations and statistics. -- Jay Beattie.

Well there are a lot of variables intertwined, perhaps it's not possible
to (dis)prove the "eeek, there's a cyclist" theory. Perhaps I didn't
read the studies as closely or critically as you have, but it always
seemed to make an intuitive sense, not that intuition is always right.
I'll try to look at it further.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Greens said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sep 14, 12:33 pm, "Greens" <[email hidden]> wrote:
> U.S. Bikers Less Safe Than European Counterparts

Quoted message said:

> In the United States, cyclists are 12 times more likely than people
> in
> cars to die en route to their destinations. On a per-kilometer and
> per-trip
> basis, U.S. cyclists are twice as likely to die on the road as German
> cyclists, and more than three times as likely as Dutch cyclists. While
> cycling fatalities in all of these countries have fallen in the last
> 25
> years, U.S. cycling deaths have declined largely because of a drop in
> cycling, while in the Netherlands and Germany investments in
> infrastructure
> that make cycling safer account for much of the decline.

Quoted message said:

> http://www.thebicyclebum.com/

Quoted message said:

I'm not saying cycling in the US is safe or anything, but comparing
these countries is like apples and oranges. Holland is as big as New
Jersey but has twice as many people with lots of congested urban areas
jammed full of folks on bikes. Lots of "normal" people too taking
short trips down to the baker, etc. Germany is perhaps a better
comparison, but still isn't really comparable.

Quoted message said:

In the US it seems to me bike users are either winos on their way to
the liquour store the wrong way at night, or fitness cyclists out on
relatively long rides on roads with fast car traffic. These are both
more dangerous than putting along basically on the sidewalk in a
congested urban area like millions do in Holland. I'm sure this skews
the numbers at least some.

Quoted message said:

Joseph

In other words you don't think the entirely different attitude that
authorities and society have towards cycling makes any difference? You
blame
America's poor stats on the cyclists themselves. They're either drunks or
fitness freaks riding on roads where they don't belong.

I'm just saying I'm wary of comparing apples and oranges. The numbers
are skewed by the fact that a huge number of people in Holland and
Germany use bikes in ways that are not that common in the US. They
ride them at a leisurely pace in a congested urban environment. If I
were to take a 100 mile ride on some random American country road I
don't think I'd be 3x as likely to be hit than if I were to take a 100
mile ride in Holland. They are probably reasonably similar in terms of
risk. But if you want to talk about safety per distance, in the US my
100 mile ride on a moderatly dangerous country road also has some
number of "safe" miles riddden by other cyclists putting around in
town. Maybe 100. In Holland my 100 mile ride in a moderatly dangerous
road would be offset by thousdands of safe miles ridden by others.
This isn't an argument for not having proper infrastructure, just
pointing out that the populations of bike users are vastly different.
And it's not just infrastructure that makes it that way.

Joseph

Quoted message said:

In Germany and The Netherlands the motoist almost always gets the
majority
of the blame in cycling accidents and pedestrian deaths. Instead of
encouraging car culture and motorist arrogance in those countries they
have
a master plan to reduce deaths among cyclists and peds. They have
different
infrastructure, i.e, cities designed for humans instead of cities
designed
for cars and so much more.

That doesn't change the fact that you tend to point to cyclists as the cause
of their own problems. The Krauts spend a lot of time in driving school
learning about what [censored] cyclists are so that they don't hit them. In
America the attitude is "That guy's a [censored] (a cyclist has done something
illegal or weird). I now have the right to hit him with my car."

You're part of that type of thinking.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Greens said:

"autopi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

i recently read something--i think it was linked off bikesnobnyc--
about cycling accidents in brooklyn, and the author claimed that in a
large majority of cases, it was the cyclist who was at fault.
certainly this corresponds to what i see on my commute--bikers riding
through busy intersections, going the wrong way down one-way streets,
stopping in the middle of a busy bike lane, etc.. does anyone have
information about this? are cyclists in the US more reckless than
counterparts in europe?

Quoted message said:

however, let it be said that in my experience, drivers in france are
much more courteous and competent at sharing the road than their
american brethren.

Quoted message said:

i also suspect part of the difference may come down to difference in
attitude. in some locales, cycling is understood as a normal means of
transport. in the US, only crazy people, kids and lycra-wearing
extremists (i.e., crazy people) ride bikes on the road. not that
people are intentionally running bikers off the road for this reason,
but it may mean drivers are less likely to keep in mind the need to
give adequate room to cyclists, look before opening doors or making a
turn, etc..

Cyclists in the USA have little reason to respect motorists, cops or the
law. All of them act as though cyclists are impeding their progress.
Cycling
is seen as something for children and people who've never grown up and
also
the aforementioned fitness fanatics. Infrastructure, law enforcement are
designed in such a way that they wordlessly shout, "Get off the road with
that stupid bicycle, you idiot! Get a car! Get a life! I'm late for my
nose
piercing! I gotta get my pit bull a new collar and the store closes in
five
minutes! I can't help it I'm late. I was all caught up in Dr. Phil's
show."

My cycling experience in the US is in NYC, Chicago, LA, and I've
ridden in Rockies in Colorado. All those places were vastly more
pleasant to ride in than the European cities I've ridden in: Paris,
London, Milan, Oslo, Amsterdam, Barcelona. Those European citeis were
just too crowded and the drivers drove much faster (when not sitting
in a jam) and put their cars WAY too close to me. Those drivers seemed
to know what they were doing, but it was my life they were gambling
with. In the US I was always given a much wider berth and the driving
scene is just much more relaxed. Out on country roads, I have been
most comfortable in Spain and Italy, despite how fast they drivers and
how many cars as they seem aware of me and the other road users. This
has nothing to do with infrastructure. Nor enforcement. In Paris I saw
a guy get hit on his bike right in front of a police officer who did
nothing other than watch as the driver and the rider argued a bit then
exchanged info.

Again, I'm not arguing against proper infrastructure, nor suggesting
that riding in some semi-suburban cities in the US is pleasant, I'm
just saying that the cyclist-motorist relationship isn't made by cops
or bike paths.

Joseph

WOOOOOOooooo! Thanks for the info, Mister World Traveler.

"Clive George" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Wayne Pein" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I believe that the "more cyclists the safer" scenario is a population,
rather than individual, based phenomenom and is likely attributable to
slow speed locations. The slower the motor vehicle typical speed due to
congestion the more likely cycling is attractive and the less likely are
collisions. The more congestion the more people also have to be aware of
their surroundings.

The recent London experience belies those claims. A massive increase in
cycling and at the same time IIRC car speeds went up since there was less
congestion.

I agree it's a population thing, and I think it's reasonably simply
attributable to people just being more used to being around cyclists.

cheers,
clive

Here's another stat for you. The more congestion and traffic there is, the
"more crazier the motorists gets" unless the law comes in and steps on it
frequently and regularly. Road rage is more common when people are bottled
up than when they're moving freely.

bdbafh said:

Wayne Pein said:

bdbafh said:

A situation that evoked a honk from a displeased motorist yesterday on
PA State Route 463 west just northwest of where the BicyclePA south
route heads to the north ...

Quoted message said:

A right turn lane splits off to the right with no additional lane
striping for bikes. I took the normal action of riding a few inches to
the right of the white stripe that separated the through lane from the
right turn lane. An angry, clueless motorist passes by closely,
honking. This evokes the normal display of a hand signal from me,
along with a "lets go, right now!" with me pointing to the shoulder.

Quoted message said:

Obviously the motorist made an unsafe pass. They didn't take me up on
the offer to discuss their infraction after dropping their weapon
(exiting the vehicle).

Quoted message said:

Perhaps I'll change my tactic there to just take the lane instead of
splitting the through lane and right turn lane, preventing such an
unsafe pass next time.

It sounds as if you were a through bicyclist but riding in the
right-turn-only lane. Such riding sends an ambiguous message and is not
in accordance with the rules of the road. You should use proper
destination positioning.

Wayne

The section of road was about a 3% climb.
I was traveling slower than prevailing traffic.
Had I been traveling the other direction (downhill) I would have taken
the lane.
I usually attempt to ride on the shoulder if at all possible, except
when traveling at speed or when I feel that its necessary to take the
lane.

I don't know what you mean by "take" the lane. Some people define it as
"use full lane," or it seems as if you define it as "use any lane."

The rules of the road dictate that vehicle users, ie bicyclists,
position themselves according to destination. Since you were in the
right turn only lane you appear to be making a right turn.

Wayne

Greens said:

"Wayne Pein" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It sounds as if you were a through bicyclist but riding in the
right-turn-only lane. Such riding sends an ambiguous message and is not in
accordance with the rules of the road. You should use proper destination
positioning.

Wayne

Do you mean that he should have been in the middle of the road in the lane
cars use to go straight as oppossed to the right lane where he feels safer
but is designated for right turns only by cars?

He should be in the through lane if he is going straight. The right turn
only lane is for right turns. If you want to send a clear message to
motorists, ride according to the rules of the road.

I think you're right, but

Quoted message said:

then again I've seen motorists so confused that they might just roll right
over me when the light turns green not out of avarice, but out of a desire
to be courteous to the drivers behind them who are equipped with loud horns
that they eagerly use. I'm serious. I bet there are people that would at
least nudge you out of the way with their bumpers if you don't move fast
enough.

Never has that happened to me in 20+ years of everyday riding.

Wayne

Clive George said:

"Wayne Pein" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I believe that the "more cyclists the safer" scenario is a population,
rather than individual, based phenomenom and is likely attributable to
slow speed locations. The slower the motor vehicle typical speed due
to congestion the more likely cycling is attractive and the less
likely are collisions. The more congestion the more people also have
to be aware of their surroundings.

The recent London experience belies those claims. A massive increase in
cycling and at the same time IIRC car speeds went up since there was
less congestion.

I agree it's a population thing, and I think it's reasonably simply
attributable to people just being more used to being around cyclists.

cheers,
clive

Since I don't live in London I am only guessing, but since London is a
big city it already had slow speeds. Increased speed due to less
congestion is likely relatively miniscule. The increase in cyclists was
due to the prohibitive cost of motoring.

Wayne

i'm not sure anyone here is disagreeing about anything--but i'm not
sure. certainly i agree that it is NOT true that increasing the # of
cyclists necessarily causes a decrease in # of injuries per cyclist.
as i understand it, that's what your example shows. of course it does
not show that this never happens, only that it does not always happen.

i am confused as to what it means to say that awareness is an
"individual" vs. a "population" thing?

i am also confused as to what people mean by "awareness." in jay's
first post, he seemed to be thinking of awareness as "consciousness of
whether there are 1, 2 ... n # of cyclists on the streets in a given
town at a given time." (i agree with clive that that misses the point
of awareness by a country mile; awareness i would have thought meant
that a given driver is more likely to think about looking over his
shoulder before swinging open his door, to not try to squeeze by a
cyclist when there isn't room, etc..) in his later post, jay is
talking about driver behavior--a very different thing.

and then wayne seems to agree with jay that awareness is not an
important factor in explaining auto-bike collisions, but then says
that he subscribes to the proposition that "the more cyclists the
safer"--which as i understand jay, is exactly what *he* rejects.

so basically it seems to me that no one is actually talking about the
same thing here, so it's hard to see if there's any point on which
anyone actually disagrees.

Peter Cole said:

Jay Beattie said:

Now, if you are going from an area of zero bicycles or a couple of
bicycles to a lot, then there will be a traffic calming effect --
maybe. But the studies that I recall reading used city-wide numbers
without reference to bicycle populations in particular areas, which is
very important. Where you have any significant, existing population
of cyclists, doubling that population does not double driver awareness
or account for the reducion in injury statistics. That is simply a
function of populations and statistics. -- Jay Beattie.

Well there are a lot of variables intertwined, perhaps it's not possible
to (dis)prove the "eeek, there's a cyclist" theory. Perhaps I didn't
read the studies as closely or critically as you have, but it always
seemed to make an intuitive sense, not that intuition is always right.
I'll try to look at it further.

One could argue that because cyclists are relatively rare, their
uniqueness results in ambiguity and caution on the part of motorists.

Wayne

"Wayne Pein" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Since I don't live in London I am only guessing, but since London is a big
city it already had slow speeds. Increased speed due to less congestion is
likely relatively miniscule. The increase in cyclists was due to the
prohibitive cost of motoring.

The "Congestion Charge" had something to do with it - but another factor was
the 7/7 bombings, which scared people off public transport. This happened in
summer, so conditions were ideal for people to try cycling. And some of them
kept at it.

cheers,
clive

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Greens said:

"Wayne Pein" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

bdbafh wrote:

Quoted message said:

> A situation that evoked a honk from a displeased motorist yesterday on
> PA State Route 463 west just northwest of where the BicyclePA south
> route heads to the north ...

Quoted message said:

> A right turn lane splits off to the right with no additional lane
> striping for bikes. I took the normal action of riding a few inches to
> the right of the white stripe that separated the through lane from the
> right turn lane. An angry, clueless motorist passes by closely,
> honking. This evokes the normal display of a hand signal from me,
> along with a "lets go, right now!" with me pointing to the shoulder.

Quoted message said:

> Obviously the motorist made an unsafe pass. They didn't take me up on
> the offer to discuss their infraction after dropping their weapon
> (exiting the vehicle).

Quoted message said:

> Perhaps I'll change my tactic there to just take the lane instead of
> splitting the through lane and right turn lane, preventing such an
> unsafe pass next time.

Quoted message said:

It sounds as if you were a through bicyclist but riding in the
right-turn-only lane. Such riding sends an ambiguous message and is not
in
accordance with the rules of the road. You should use proper
destination
positioning.

Quoted message said:

Wayne

Do you mean that he should have been in the middle of the road in the
lane
cars use to go straight as oppossed to the right lane where he feels
safer
but is designated for right turns only by cars? I think you're right, but
then again I've seen motorists so confused that they might just roll
right
over me when the light turns green not out of avarice, but out of a
desire
to be courteous to the drivers behind them who are equipped with loud
horns
that they eagerly use. I'm serious. I bet there are people that would at
least nudge you out of the way with their bumpers if you don't move fast
enough.

I'm curious where you ride that has such an unpleasant atmosphere. I
meet with the occasional jerk out on the road, but for the most part
everywhere I've been, most people are ok. The numers of jerks and
incompetents varies widely of course, but they are still always in the
significant minority.

Joseph

New York

The majority of people are sane and polite. It only takes one insane driver
in a lifetime to turn you into a stastic or a vegetable and while there
aren't lunatics on every corner, there are more than enough lunatics to go
around.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Greens said:

"bdbafh" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sep 14, 6:33 am, "Greens" <[email hidden]> wrote:
> U.S. Bikers Less Safe Than European Counterparts

Quoted message said:

> In the United States, cyclists are 12 times more likely than people
> in
> cars to die en route to their destinations. On a per-kilometer and
> per-trip
> basis, U.S. cyclists are twice as likely to die on the road as German
> cyclists, and more than three times as likely as Dutch cyclists. While
> cycling fatalities in all of these countries have fallen in the last
> 25
> years, U.S. cycling deaths have declined largely because of a drop in
> cycling, while in the Netherlands and Germany investments in
> infrastructure
> that make cycling safer account for much of the decline.

Quoted message said:

> http://www.thebicyclebum.com/

Quoted message said:

note: I didn't read the fine article.

Quoted message said:

A situation that evoked a honk from a displeased motorist yesterday on
PA State Route 463 west just northwest of where the BicyclePA south
route heads to the north ...

Quoted message said:

A right turn lane splits off to the right with no additional lane
striping for bikes. I took the normal action of riding a few inches to
the right of the white stripe that separated the through lane from the
right turn lane. An angry, clueless motorist passes by closely,
honking. This evokes the normal display of a hand signal from me,
along with a "lets go, right now!" with me pointing to the shoulder.

Quoted message said:

Obviously the motorist made an unsafe pass. They didn't take me up on
the offer to discuss their infraction after dropping their weapon
(exiting the vehicle).

Quoted message said:

Perhaps I'll change my tactic there to just take the lane instead of
splitting the through lane and right turn lane, preventing such an
unsafe pass next time.

Quoted message said:

-bdbafh

Yea. They're very arrogant and sure of themselves while they're in their
protective cages. And of course it's easier to keep a heavy firearm in a
car
than it is on a bike so don't be so eager to catch them.

But a handgun shoved into some lycra shorts if VERY noticable. I rode
a few times in Brooklyn with a guy from the West Indies who rode
around armed. Folks are few and far between who would have dared give
this guy any [censored]!

Joseph

True. but in reality it's hard to hit someone on foot with a handgun while
you're on foot. It'd be much harder to hit someone in car while you're
riding a bike or just got knocked off a bike. It's purpose is to give a
false sense of security. The driver can circle around and stealthily come up
from behind with his handgun and pick you off easily if he has a passenger
to do the job. Or just hit you with the car.

Even if you are successful in shooting a motorist, you'll have to explain
yourself to the law and the law frowns on retribution and shooting at people
on populated streets, especially when the shot are just trying to drive
away. If you get away, you're now wanted and assumed guilty of something. Do
you really want to ride your bike through that neighborhood again? (it might
work in NYC but not my neighborhood. I'm just not anonymous enough here.)
What you need is a big gun and a international teleporter.

Per Greens:

Quoted message said:

In Germany and The Netherlands the motoist almost always gets the majority...

Anybody seen any numbers on the relative percentage of drivers
talking on cell phones, text messaging, and/or doing email while
driving in the USA vs other countries?
--
PeteCresswell

Per Greens:

Quoted message said:

they wordlessly shout, "Get off the road with
that stupid bicycle, you idiot! Get a car! Get a life! I'm late for my nose
piercing! I gotta get my pit bull a new collar and the store closes in five
minutes! I can't help it I'm late. I was all caught up in Dr. Phil's show."

The one that almost nailed me a couple years back was obviously
hurrying because she was late for an appearance on Jerry
Springer.
--
PeteCresswell

Greens said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Greens said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> On Sep 14, 12:33 pm, "Greens" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>> U.S. Bikers Less Safe Than European Counterparts

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> In the United States, cyclists are 12 times more likely than people
>> in
>> cars to die en route to their destinations. On a per-kilometer and
>> per-trip
>> basis, U.S. cyclists are twice as likely to die on the road as German
>> cyclists, and more than three times as likely as Dutch cyclists. While
>> cycling fatalities in all of these countries have fallen in the last
>> 25
>> years, U.S. cycling deaths have declined largely because of a drop in
>> cycling, while in the Netherlands and Germany investments in
>> infrastructure
>> that make cycling safer account for much of the decline.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> http://www.thebicyclebum.com/

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> I'm not saying cycling in the US is safe or anything, but comparing
> these countries is like apples and oranges. Holland is as big as New
> Jersey but has twice as many people with lots of congested urban areas
> jammed full of folks on bikes. Lots of "normal" people too taking
> short trips down to the baker, etc. Germany is perhaps a better
> comparison, but still isn't really comparable.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> In the US it seems to me bike users are either winos on their way to
> the liquour store the wrong way at night, or fitness cyclists out on
> relatively long rides on roads with fast car traffic. These are both
> more dangerous than putting along basically on the sidewalk in a
> congested urban area like millions do in Holland. I'm sure this skews
> the numbers at least some.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Joseph

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In other words you don't think the entirely different attitude that
authorities and society have towards cycling makes any difference? You
blame
America's poor stats on the cyclists themselves. They're either drunks or
fitness freaks riding on roads where they don't belong.

Quoted message said:

I'm just saying I'm wary of comparing apples and oranges. The numbers
are skewed by the fact that a huge number of people in Holland and
Germany use bikes in ways that are not that common in the US. They
ride them at a leisurely pace in a congested urban environment. If I
were to take a 100 mile ride on some random American country road I
don't think I'd be 3x as likely to be hit than if I were to take a 100
mile ride in Holland. They are probably reasonably similar in terms of
risk. But if you want to talk about safety per distance, in the US my
100 mile ride on a moderatly dangerous country road also has some
number of "safe" miles riddden by other cyclists putting around in
town. Maybe 100. In Holland my 100 mile ride in a moderatly dangerous
road would be offset by thousdands of safe miles ridden by others.
This isn't an argument for not having proper infrastructure, just
pointing out that the populations of bike users are vastly different.
And it's not just infrastructure that makes it that way.

Quoted message said:

Joseph

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In Germany and The Netherlands the motoist almost always gets the
majority
of the blame in cycling accidents and pedestrian deaths. Instead of
encouraging car culture and motorist arrogance in those countries they
have
a master plan to reduce deaths among cyclists and peds. They have
different
infrastructure, i.e, cities designed for humans instead of cities
designed
for cars and so much more.

That doesn't change the fact that you tend to point to cyclists as the cause
of their own problems. The Krauts spend a lot of time in driving school
learning about what [censored] cyclists are so that they don't hit them. In
America the attitude is "That guy's a [censored] (a cyclist has done something
illegal or weird). I now have the right to hit him with my car."

You're part of that type of thinking.

I'm not saying at all that cyclist are the cause of their own
problems. Of course the way the motorsist drive has a huge effect on
how dangerous it is to ride a bike. I'm just saying that in the US
that most bike riding is of the dangerous sort, while in Europe there
is riding of the dangerous sort going on, as well as a huge amount of
non-dangerous riding, and this means that direct comparisons don't
give a clear picture of how safe or not it actually is.

Joseph

Greens said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Greens said:

"autopi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>i recently read something--i think it was linked off bikesnobnyc--
> about cycling accidents in brooklyn, and the author claimed that in a
> large majority of cases, it was the cyclist who was at fault.
> certainly this corresponds to what i see on my commute--bikers riding
> through busy intersections, going the wrong way down one-way streets,
> stopping in the middle of a busy bike lane, etc.. does anyone have
> information about this? are cyclists in the US more reckless than
> counterparts in europe?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> however, let it be said that in my experience, drivers in france are
> much more courteous and competent at sharing the road than their
> american brethren.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> i also suspect part of the difference may come down to difference in
> attitude. in some locales, cycling is understood as a normal means of
> transport. in the US, only crazy people, kids and lycra-wearing
> extremists (i.e., crazy people) ride bikes on the road. not that
> people are intentionally running bikers off the road for this reason,
> but it may mean drivers are less likely to keep in mind the need to
> give adequate room to cyclists, look before opening doors or making a
> turn, etc..

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Cyclists in the USA have little reason to respect motorists, cops or the
law. All of them act as though cyclists are impeding their progress.
Cycling
is seen as something for children and people who've never grown up and
also
the aforementioned fitness fanatics. Infrastructure, law enforcement are
designed in such a way that they wordlessly shout, "Get off the road with
that stupid bicycle, you idiot! Get a car! Get a life! I'm late for my
nose
piercing! I gotta get my pit bull a new collar and the store closes in
five
minutes! I can't help it I'm late. I was all caught up in Dr. Phil's
show."

Quoted message said:

My cycling experience in the US is in NYC, Chicago, LA, and I've
ridden in Rockies in Colorado. All those places were vastly more
pleasant to ride in than the European cities I've ridden in: Paris,
London, Milan, Oslo, Amsterdam, Barcelona. Those European citeis were
just too crowded and the drivers drove much faster (when not sitting
in a jam) and put their cars WAY too close to me. Those drivers seemed
to know what they were doing, but it was my life they were gambling
with. In the US I was always given a much wider berth and the driving
scene is just much more relaxed. Out on country roads, I have been
most comfortable in Spain and Italy, despite how fast they drivers and
how many cars as they seem aware of me and the other road users. This
has nothing to do with infrastructure. Nor enforcement. In Paris I saw
a guy get hit on his bike right in front of a police officer who did
nothing other than watch as the driver and the rider argued a bit then
exchanged info.

Quoted message said:

Again, I'm not arguing against proper infrastructure, nor suggesting
that riding in some semi-suburban cities in the US is pleasant, I'm
just saying that the cyclist-motorist relationship isn't made by cops
or bike paths.

Quoted message said:

Joseph

WOOOOOOooooo! Thanks for the info, Mister World Traveler.

You chose to mock, but direct experience is a valuable thing.

Joseph