Originally Posted by
JoeyBike
Yes, the cyclist has free choice. He is partly to blame for increasing the danger in his life but does have a right to expect other road users won't try to intentionally kill him or endanger him through impatient neglect. HOWEVER...he should EXPECT bad things to occasionally happen out there before making his decision to ride on any roadway. Then - not cry about it when things go south.
Just wondering: does "cry(ing) about it when things go south" include:
- attempting to have drivers who deliberately hit cyclists with their vehicles apprehended and prosecuted?
- attempting to have drivers who negligently hit cyclists with their vehicles apprehended and prosecuted?
- attempting to have drivers who assault cyclists with their vehicles apprehended and prosecuted?
- attempting to have drivers who otherwise violate motor vehicle codes (e.g. failing to yield right-of-way to cyclists; passing too closely {where laws exist**, etc.) fined?
If no, can you elaborate on what you mean by "cry(ing) about it"?
Note 1: it is understood that cyclists are just as responsible for following the laws as motorists, and are subject to enforcement when they violate the laws.
Note 2: it is understood that "accidents" exist - blame cannot be assigned for every automobile-cycle crash. For example: animal darts in front of cyclist causing him to swerve into path of auto. "Auto must pass with enough room to account for the unexpected." No. "Cyclist must instantaneously make correct choice as to whether to swerve or hit animal". No. This is an accident.
(Notes added to reduce the risk of straw-man arguments.)
--------------