Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > > >

Vehicular Cycling (VC) No other subject has polarized the A&S members like VC has. Here's a place to share, debate, and educate.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-10-07, 09:13 AM   #1
skanking biker
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Madison, WI
Bikes:
Posts: 2,209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I wonder if these people SHOULD have had cyclist inferiority syndrome

...Because, after all, the fear of being mowed down from behind in broad daylight whilst riding properly is so "irrational" only a lunatic would have such fear.


http://www.kansascity.com/115/story/225988.html
skanking biker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 09:52 AM   #2
AGGRO
Mistadobalina
 
AGGRO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Clairemont
Bikes: Trek Hilo
Posts: 572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Read some of those comments. Scary that there are people behind the wheel that think like that.
AGGRO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 09:52 AM   #3
larryfeltonj
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Atlanta GA
Bikes: Raleigh Supercourse, Peugeot Iseran, Raleigh Twenty
Posts: 528
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The details of the article don't make it clear to me exactly what happened. They may have been hit from behind, but the article really doesn't say. Perhaps if there's followup information after the police report is filed someone could post it here.

Two things: It's tragic. But since there are so few details in the article it isn't an indication of anything much with respect to cycling safety.
larryfeltonj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 10:06 AM   #4
ghettocruiser
Former Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: dropmachine.com
Bikes:
Posts: 4,062
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by larryfeltonj View Post
The details of the article don't make it clear to me exactly what happened. They may have been hit from behind, but the article really doesn't say. Perhaps if there's followup information after the police report is filed someone could post it here.

Two things: It's tragic. But since there are so few details in the article it isn't an indication of anything much with respect to cycling safety.
"According to Grandview police, the driver of the pickup truck, a 48-year-old Grandview resident, also was northbound and struck the victims from behind. Police have been talking with the driver to try to determine what caused the accident.

Police reports indicate the victims were properly in the right lane of the roadway and there is no indication, according to Grandview police, that the driver of the truck was under the influence of alcohol or drugs when the accident occurred. "


http://www.lsjournal.com/articles/20...s/01deaths.txt
ghettocruiser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 10:48 AM   #5
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,691
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 290 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGGRO View Post
Read some of those comments. Scary that there are people behind the wheel that think like that.
It's simple... the car ads and the design of the roads lead folks to think that they own the roads.

It's time for Slow Down America campaigns... it's long past time for law enforcement to enforce speed laws. It's time for motorists to Take a Second Look. Quit depending on a glance to ensure the road or way is clear.

Don't just look once, Take a Second Look.

Slow Down, Drive Friendly, and Share the Road.

The life you save could be your own.

Sure perhaps the cyclists could have done something to make themselves more visible... but there are many more motorists than cyclists, and many more motorists deaths than cyclist deaths... motorists are their own worst enemy.

Slow Down, Drive Friendly, and Share the Road.
genec is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 10:51 AM   #6
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,691
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 290 Post(s)
Regarding cyclist inferiority syndrome... remember Forester doesn't even recommend using a mirror.
genec is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 11:09 AM   #7
joejack951
Senior Member
 
joejack951's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wilmington, DE
Bikes: 1984 Trek 660, 2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i (RIP), 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1, 2014 Islabikes CNOC 14 (son's)
Posts: 10,097
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
The article says "right side of the right lane." Here's a link to a Google map image of the area. Looks like either a shoulder or a very wide outside lane. Doesn't seem like these cyclists were anywhere near the normal path of a motor vehicle.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=e...&t=h&z=18&om=1
joejack951 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 11:13 AM   #8
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RIP, Larry, RIP, Sierra.

tragic. I agree with Gene, it is time for america to step up responsible driving campaigns.

jowjack, I have no idea what you infer by your comment, but your 'analysis' doesn't jive much with your recommendations on other threads where, in wide outside lanes, bicyclists have no overarching need to be claiming the lane, instead following the rules of the road and riding right.

Rest in peace, Larry and Sierra.

Last edited by Bekologist; 08-10-07 at 11:20 AM.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 11:22 AM   #9
joejack951
Senior Member
 
joejack951's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wilmington, DE
Bikes: 1984 Trek 660, 2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i (RIP), 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1, 2014 Islabikes CNOC 14 (son's)
Posts: 10,097
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
jowjack, your 'analysis' doesn't jive much with your recommendations on other threads where, in wide outside lanes, bicyclists have no overarching need to be claiming the lane, instead following the rules of the road and riding right.
And you are right, in general cyclists can right to the ride in between intersections without having much to worry about. Just like you tout staying on the shoulder on rural highways. However, I don't believe I've ever posted that staying to the far right in a WOL is something I recommend. The problem is with inattentive motorists and their tendency to drift coupled with their tendency to not be paying attention to what's not directly in front of them. However, in this forum, making suggestions for how cyclists might avoid this fate will get you mocked endlessly by members such as yourself.

The guy who hit these cyclists had no malicious intent, just like other motorists who have done the same thing have had no ill will towards cyclists. That's why all the legislation in the world won't prevent this from happening again. That's why advocating ways of avoiding this fate is important in some small respect (given it's rarity).
joejack951 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 11:25 AM   #10
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
sorry to bring this up in a thread about cyclist death threads, but now you suggest bicyclists ride in the middle of wide lanes and do the HH powerweave to and fro in front of all oncoming traffic, instead of holding a relatively consistent lane position, only moving left when necessary to avoid upcoming obstructions and intersection conflicts?

joe....you've invested into HH's 'inadverdant drift' sophistry hook, line and sinker.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 11:30 AM   #11
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Rest in peace, Larry, Rest in peace, Sierra. I hope your passings were relatively painless. sorry to be arguing in a moment more appropriate for mourning.

A tragedy.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 11:33 AM   #12
joejack951
Senior Member
 
joejack951's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wilmington, DE
Bikes: 1984 Trek 660, 2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i (RIP), 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1, 2014 Islabikes CNOC 14 (son's)
Posts: 10,097
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
sorry to bring this up in a thread about cyclist death threads, but now you suggest bicyclists ride in the middle of wide lanes and do the HH powerweave to and fro in front of all oncoming traffic, instead of holding a relatively consistent lane position, only moving left when necessary to avoid upcoming obstructions and intersection conflicts?

joe....you've invested into HH's 'inadverdant drift' sophistry hook, line and sinker.
What else do you propose that would make a significant difference in the chances that any single cyclist will get inadvertently drifted into? I'll wait as long as you'd like to take for an answer.
joejack951 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 11:39 AM   #13
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
daytime visible blinkies, high vis clothing. bike lanes are one part of the solution, banning hand held electronics while driving is another.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 11:59 AM   #14
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,691
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 290 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by joejack951 View Post
And you are right, in general cyclists can right to the ride in between intersections without having much to worry about. Just like you tout staying on the shoulder on rural highways. However, I don't believe I've ever posted that staying to the far right in a WOL is something I recommend. The problem is with inattentive motorists and their tendency to drift coupled with their tendency to not be paying attention to what's not directly in front of them. However, in this forum, making suggestions for how cyclists might avoid this fate will get you mocked endlessly by members such as yourself.

The guy who hit these cyclists had no malicious intent, just like other motorists who have done the same thing have had no ill will towards cyclists. That's why all the legislation in the world won't prevent this from happening again. That's why advocating ways of avoiding this fate is important in some small respect (given it's rarity).
Part of the problem is not getting the whole picture because of driving too fast for the conditions. As motorists drive faster, a "tunnel vision" effect takes place, which requires scanning the roadway from side to side. Race car drivers do this and so do more experienced (rare) motorists, but the average joe tends to focus on the dashed line or the vehicle in front... or even the line on the side, which is one reason why that inattention blindness occurs. The drifting occurs due to focusing on something like the markers or side of the road. The sad fact is that many motorists drive only just barely well enough to avoid daily near misses... and as far as the general public is concerned, that is good enough.

However good enough may not really be good enough, as illustrated by the number of motorist deaths that occur each year. But somehow those deaths are considered "acceptable" by the general public.

Better driver education could help... but it is not considered politically acceptable. Better roads could help, but there is not enough funding for infrastructure (as evidenced by bridge failures). The alternative at this point seems to be passive restraint systems for drivers and passengers... and these do save lives... provided one is inside the car. And since the cost is picked up directly by the vehicle user... this absolves the government from providing better general solutions, just mandates and guidlines.

Eventually this "passive restraint approach" will lead to autonomous drive vehicles... maybe not in my lifetime, but the studies are going on now, and some time in the not too distant future the "self parking" technology we see today will lead to the self driving cars of the future.

Cars will not go away... some technology will be harnessed to allow vehicles of some sort to be used in spite of the decline of availablity of fossil fuel. Cars will become "smarter." That trend is well on the way.
genec is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 12:01 PM   #15
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,691
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 290 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
daytime visible blinkies, high vis clothing. bike lanes are one part of the solution, banning hand held electronics while driving is another.
All these things are great, but still depend on fallible humans. None of the above is going to help if a motorist falls asleep at the wheel or choses to drink and drive.
genec is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 12:03 PM   #16
ghettocruiser
Former Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: dropmachine.com
Bikes:
Posts: 4,062
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by joejack951 View Post
Looks like either a shoulder or a very wide outside lane. Doesn't seem like these cyclists were anywhere near the normal path of a motor vehicle.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=e...&t=h&z=18&om=1
We are sorry, but we don't have imagery at that zoom level for this region.

Try zooming out for a broader look, or modify some other facts to fit your theories.
ghettocruiser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 12:12 PM   #17
joejack951
Senior Member
 
joejack951's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wilmington, DE
Bikes: 1984 Trek 660, 2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i (RIP), 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1, 2014 Islabikes CNOC 14 (son's)
Posts: 10,097
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghettocruiser View Post
We are sorry, but we don't have imagery at that zoom level for this region.

Try zooming out for a broader look, or modify some other facts to fit your theories.
"He said the wide lanes of the road make it safe for riders, as traffic should have plenty of room to drive around the bicyclists."

(From your link:http://www.lsjournal.com/articles/20...s/01deaths.txt)
joejack951 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 12:14 PM   #18
joejack951
Senior Member
 
joejack951's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wilmington, DE
Bikes: 1984 Trek 660, 2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i (RIP), 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1, 2014 Islabikes CNOC 14 (son's)
Posts: 10,097
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
daytime visible blinkies, high vis clothing. bike lanes are one part of the solution, banning hand held electronics while driving is another.
What about radios? Cheeseburgers? Cranky kids? Billboards?
joejack951 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 12:16 PM   #19
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
joe, you are making me sick.

RIP, Larry and Sierra.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 12:28 PM   #20
ghettocruiser
Former Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: dropmachine.com
Bikes:
Posts: 4,062
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by joejack951 View Post
"He said the wide lanes of the road make it safe for riders, as traffic should have plenty of room to drive around the bicyclists."
What does that have to do with the "normal path of a motor vehicle"? They were, based on the police reports, in the right-hand lane. Why are you assuming vehicles don't drive there? Can you see unswept debris in the right-hand lane in the google imagery?


This is all a re-tread of an old used-up argument anyways, because this study:

http://www.toronto.ca/transportation...ion_type10.pdf

Which I must have referenced a hundred times now, which found hit-from-behinds are more common downtown, where (gasp) roads are narrower.


Now, I realise this study is based on my town, not yours. But can you provide me with any other study dealing with motorist overtaking accidents that shows anything at all you've suggested.
ghettocruiser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 12:59 PM   #21
joejack951
Senior Member
 
joejack951's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wilmington, DE
Bikes: 1984 Trek 660, 2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i (RIP), 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1, 2014 Islabikes CNOC 14 (son's)
Posts: 10,097
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghettocruiser View Post
What does that have to do with the "normal path of a motor vehicle"? They were, based on the police reports, in the right-hand lane. Why are you assuming vehicles don't drive there? Can you see unswept debris in the right-hand lane in the google imagery?
Would you drive out there? Look at the other vehicles using the road. Are they driving that close to the edge of the road? What would cause this guy to decide to drive along the outside edge of the road, other than not paying attention to where he's going and drifting out there? If the road was as popular with cyclists as the article states, he probably knew that cyclists used that portion of the roadway so he'd very likely be avoiding it.

Not that it should have to be said, but...I AM NOT BLAMING THE CYCLISTS. This tragic collision was clearly the motorist's fault.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ghettocruiser View Post
This is all a re-tread of an old used-up argument anyways, because this study:

http://www.toronto.ca/transportation...ion_type10.pdf

Which I must have referenced a hundred times now, which found hit-from-behinds are more common downtown, where (gasp) roads are narrower.


Now, I realise this study is based on my town, not yours. But can you provide me with any other study dealing with motorist overtaking accidents that shows anything at all you've suggested.
Well, the study says this: Both parties were traveling the same direction. The motorist either brushed by or rear-ended the cyclist.

Do you have the breakdown for the actual rear ending accidents? If you remove the brush-bys, where do the hit-from-behind's now stand?
joejack951 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 01:07 PM   #22
skanking biker
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Madison, WI
Bikes:
Posts: 2,209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The point is that rear end collissions like this DO happen and the cyclist has no way of protecting himself/herself. There was that case in Wisconsin not to long ago when a drunk rear ended three cyclists and pushed them off a bridge. They had no chance.

MY point is that it is not irrational to fear riding on high speed, well travelled roads, or to take safer alternatives when available.
skanking biker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 01:19 PM   #23
joejack951
Senior Member
 
joejack951's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wilmington, DE
Bikes: 1984 Trek 660, 2003 Specialized Hardrock, 2004 LOOK KG386i (RIP), 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1, 2014 Islabikes CNOC 14 (son's)
Posts: 10,097
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by skanking biker View Post
The point is that rear end collissions like this DO happen and the cyclist has no way of protecting himself/herself. There was that case in Wisconsin not to long ago when a drunk rear ended three cyclists and pushed them off a bridge. They had no chance.
I take issue with stating that there is no way cyclists can protect themselves. I think a cyclist can and should make the effort to make himself as noticeable to traffic approaching from behind as possible. I think driver distraction will be much less likely to occur when a motorist realizes that there are cyclists up ahead in the roadway.

The bridge incident is somewhat irrelevant in that the cyclists were hit on the sidewalk, basically taking the "rational" approach to crossing the bridge.

Quote:
Originally Posted by skanking biker View Post
MY point is that it is not irrational to fear riding on high speed, well travelled roads, or to take safer alternatives when available.
Who said that this was a high speed, well travelled road? From the sound of it, cyclists love this road. No one from the Bikeforums A&S forum is out there forcing these cyclists to use this road. Those cyclists obviously feel that this road is perfectly safe to cycle on. And I agree, but I would also ride it slightly differently than most would.
joejack951 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 01:30 PM   #24
ghettocruiser
Former Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: dropmachine.com
Bikes:
Posts: 4,062
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by joejack951 View Post
Would you drive out there? Look at the other vehicles using the road. Are they driving that close to the edge of the road? What would cause this guy to decide to drive along the outside edge of the road, other than not paying attention to where he's going and drifting out there? If the road was as popular with cyclists as the article states, he probably knew that cyclists used that portion of the roadway so he'd very likely be avoiding it.
Again, the google imagery doesn't even indicate where the edge of the road is. It could be a wide smooth shoulder, it could be gravel shoulder or broken glass.

And locally here, drivers use the right side of the wide right lane often, for instance with whenever the road curves right, even slightly, or there is an upcoming right turn.

And how is the fact that he "he probably knew that cyclists used that portion of the roadway so he'd very likely be avoiding it" reconcilable with the outcome here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by joejack951 View Post
Not that it should have to be said, but...I AM NOT BLAMING THE CYCLISTS. This tragic collision was clearly the motorist's fault.
Noted. I'm not suggesting otherwise. I'm am suggesting that your so-called corrective measures of riding in the middle of the road, (and illegally so in most places) is not going to help.


Quote:
Originally Posted by joejack951 View Post

Well, the study says this: Both parties were traveling the same direction. The motorist either brushed by or rear-ended the cyclist.

Do you have the breakdown for the actual rear ending accidents? If you remove the brush-bys, where do the hit-from-behind's now stand?
So in answer to my question then, NO, you have no other studies, nothing at all.

The Toronto study did not distinguish whether the cyclist was struck by the front, side panel, or rear-view mirror of the overtaking motor vehicle. I think that the study designers accurately decided that there was not enough information to pursue for this irrelevant line of inquiry.



Joe, here's the real deal. I more or less ride in the way *you* advocate, seriously. I am almost always on the travelled portion of the road unless there is overtaking traffic. I do this mostly for speed benefits, but I think that it does SOMETIMES help get overtaking driver's attention.

It's also nearly gotten me hit a few times in events I have mentioned in other threads


But it remains just an opinion that I have, and is not based on any fact or study. So I keep this types of theories to myself and don't try to present them as possible solutions to fatal collisions that I know almost nothing about.
ghettocruiser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-07, 01:32 PM   #25
sggoodri
Senior Member
 
sggoodri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Cary, NC
Bikes: 1983 Trek, 2001 Lemond, 2000 Gary Fisher
Posts: 3,073
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by skanking biker View Post
The point is that rear end collissions like this DO happen and the cyclist has no way of protecting himself/herself. There was that case in Wisconsin not to long ago when a drunk rear ended three cyclists and pushed them off a bridge. They had no chance.

MY point is that it is not irrational to fear riding on high speed, well travelled roads, or to take safer alternatives when available.
The irrational label fits better when the fear leads to taking greater risks of collision (e.g. riding against traffic) or not cycling at all when the danger is very low and cycling is considered desirable.

For instance, if I avoided driving over bridges because I was afraid they would collapse, and I insisted on only taking ferrys, people would think me irrational. But bridges do collapse. It's all about relative risk versus reward.

Pleasant low-traffic routes can be very rewarding, but so can getting to work faster. To each his own.
sggoodri is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:21 PM.