jon c. 

Sure. And the penalty is generally a citation for failure to yield. Even in the case of a fatal accident. At least in the US.


from the earlier linked abstract:

Humans routinely miss important information that is ‘right in front of our eyes’, from overlooking typos in a paper to failing to see a cyclist in an intersection. Recent studies on these ‘Looked But Failed To See’ (LBFTS) errors point to a common mechanism underlying these failures, whether the missed item was an unexpected gorilla, the clearly defined target of a visual search, or that simple typo. We argue that normal blindness is the by-product of the limited-capacity prediction engine that is our visual system. The processes that evolved to allow us to move through the world with ease are virtually guaranteed to cause us to miss some significant stimuli, especially in important tasks like driving and medical image perception.

Worth considering. The research is nascent so not much is really known but there is at least a suggestion that these are actual processing errors in the brain.

But whatever you may believe the one thing we do know is pull outs happen frequently. And will continue. So you have to ride like they don't see you.

Trakhak

This thread dovetails nicely with the "assertiveness training" thread. JoeyBikes is right. You can insist on your rights as a cyclist and argue that drivers are idiots if doing so makes you feel better. And you'll get away with riding accordingly most of the time. Which lulls you into thinking that you can and should ride assertively all the time.

As cxwrench is fond of saying; wrong.

Old but good:

JoeyBike

Now you're THINKING!

Humans are imperfect beings, some FAR more imperfect than others. There is no "DECISION" not to see a cyclist. The human brain gets bored easily and goes off chasing butterflies in a pasture. Something as boring as driving a motor vehicle (except NASCAR or figure 8 track racing) puts many brains to sleep early and often. And few motorists are stunt car drivers who can react in fractions of a second anyway.

So, as you stated above, some motorists are in a dangerous state of mind and incapacity. If you THINK about this every time you go for a ride you will be much better off than assuming every motorist is paying strict "fighter pilot" attention to the road ahead of them. Their eyes may be on the road but their minds are laying out on the beach somewhere.

Enjoy your next ride!

Cheers.

LV2TNDM

If you're going to require this for cyclists, you should also include the same for pedestrians and children playing outside:

"Walking on your two feet has inherent dangers, and as the operator of my body I acknowledge that I know the risks of injury and death, and accept these risks before I take my first step."

"Playing outside has inherent dangers, and as a child playing outside I acknowledge that I know the risks of injury and death, and accept these risks before I pursue any activity outside."

And since drivers have been known to fly off the road and smash through houses, people sleeping should probably agree to the same assumption of risk:

"Sleeping in my bed in my room has inherent dangers, and as a person sleeping in my home, I acknowledge that I know the risks of injury and death, and accept these risks before I go to sleep."

Do you see where I'm going with this? I could compose a list like this a mile long. How far must we go to accommodate irresponsible, dangerous and homicidal drivers? How many steps must WE take to avoid being killed by people operating powerful, massive machinery irresponsibly?

I say put the onus on the DRIVERS! It is not MY responsibility to avoid the asses in their cars endangering us all. I shouldn't have to worry about a car flying through my wall as I sleep! It's THEIR responsibility to obey the law and respect the safety and lives of others. This isn't too much to ask! This is simply acting like civilized people!

Remember when we were all told "driving is not a right" when we got our licenses? Well, for all intents and purposes, it sure is! And your post only supports this.

Let's not go overboard here.

Daniel4

Some people think that drivers are an independent and uncontrollable force of nature, like gravity, we have to live with, adapt to and accommodate.

If humans are far from perfect, then why are driver licences so easy to obtain and why aren't traffic enforcement stricter? If humans are far from perfect, then shouldn't it be that only the best should be on the road operating such dangerous machines?

Which boils down to the question again, why is bad driving an acceptable norm that the rest of us have to accommodate and adapt?

JoeyBike

It's called Democracy. Most voters, by far, are motorists. Many of them unqualified to operate high speed machinery IMO.

JoeyBike

Nice Straw Man argument.

I fixed it for you in [RED] text. I'm fairly certain that riding a bike in your bedroom is relatively safe. It's when you line yourself up at 15mph with the hood ornaments of steel leviathans traveling 35+ mph or faster that we get into trouble. Sure a meteorite could hit me in my office right now, but not likely.

I especially like your "Playing Outside" straw man! Yes, playing outside IN TRAFFIC has inherent dangers. If your toddlers/children play outside IN TRAFFIC, perhaps someone better suited should be raising them? Cyclists by nature appear to be "playing in traffic" to many motorists. Your hobby is in their way as they conduct their "business". This mindset sure doesn't promote safe passes.

( And BTW...if you are cycling at 10-15 mph on a highway with speed limits 55-70 mph, the speed differential between bike and car is similar to sleeping in the travel lane. To a Tacoma traveling at 55+ mph, you are a stationary object. Would you park a lawn chair on the fog line of a 60+mph highway and take a nap? Why not? That's basically what's happening anyway. Just wear your high visibility neon kit! You'll be just fine )

hevysrf

It's my responsibility to understand that everyone driving an automobile is distracted to some extent, that's reality. The danger to riders will only increase as infotainment and driverless capability increase.

1989Pre

I realize this is a quote from someone else, not you, but I would like to replace the term "normal blindness" with the term "selective blindness".

GiAllen

Great article, thanks!