FBinNY 

There's no reason to get into personalities.

Basically there are two philosophies (among others) about cycling safety.

Many see advocacy as about changing the landscape (literally and figuratively) and changing the behavior of others to make the world safer for bicyclists. Others, including myself, are more focused on giving cyclists the tools and knowledge to improve their safety in the world as it exists.

Neither is more right or better, just two sides of a coin.

dynodonn 

I can see that you will not make it as an instructor in many of today's educational systems here in the US with that train of thought, as well in trying to get your point across to another cyclist. You'll generally get further using more amounts of honey and less of vinegar.

SmallFront

I think a combination is better in a lot of places (most big cities for instance).

But, with that said, education and general knowledge of how to behave in traffic will work anywhere at any time.

SmallFront

Haha! So you did feel personally singled out because I called that sort of behaviour stupid. And instead of making a real argument, you try to make the point that I should avoid offending someone, which seems more important than getting the message through.


I didn't know you were my pupil and I your teacher. I hadn't realised that, nor had I realised that saying obvious things like "driving at night with sunglasses on is stupid" could offend people to the extent that they would not take it to heart, and they therefore would be more prone to behave like that.

I guess that since you are offended you will remember that it is indeed dangerous to filter up next to a truck which is about to make a right turn.

But, hey, it's counterproductive calling outright dangerous behaviour stupid, when said danger can easily be avoided if you know how to.

I also find it hilarious that you think you are in a position to give me advice pertaining to education and instruction.

FBinNY 

dynodonn 

What I said is that you would not make it as an instructor in many of the US educational systems with the thought process and wording that you are using, and I still stand by that.

SmallFront

I honestly don't care if you "stand by" that hilarious assertion, while ignoring everything else - all because you were offended because I called a particular behaviour stupid.

genec

I noticed neither of your proposed philosophies "evangelizes" to non cyclists in an effort to encourage more people to bike... interesting.

FBinNY 

I was talking only about improving safety, not bicycle advocacy in general. However, advocacy also encompasses a wide spectrum. Some are most interested in preserving access and road rights, others in selling it to non-cyclists as sport or recreation, and others yet combining it into a big picture of "livable" cities, and/or a more sustainable world.

In any case, I don't consider myself a bicycle evangelist. My interest remains in preserving access to roads and trails, and making information available so people can make their own choices.

jputnam

Who said anything about blame? I'm talking about avoiding future accidents.

As a cyclist, you can anticipate and avoid many illegal acts by motorists. They'll be at fault if they kill you, but you'll still be dead.

The Motorcycle Safety Foundation has spent decades researching the contributing factors of accidents, developing researched-based countermeasures, and educating motorcycle riders on safer riding techniques, without ever trying to cast blame on the victims or excuse the motorists who hit them.

dynodonn 

Sure one can anticipate and avoid many illegal acts by motorists with proper education, but not all, and that is where more enforcement of laws, in motorists' case, in the event of a collision causing a death of a cyclist caused by a motorist's carelessness, rather than calling it a tragic "accident" as a number of law enforcement agencies and judicial systems have. The SFPD incident was similar to one herculean effort done by one of our local bicycle commuting groups in bringing one extremely careless motorist to face criminal charges for killing a cyclist who was experienced in anticipating and avoiding many illegal acts by motorists.

Number400

I see a trend in newer passenger cars, where the rear windows and back windows are getting smaller and higher. There was a time when you could see through almost all cars. I have no idea how these designs are considered safe. It seems as if modern cars have wider pillars, tinted windows, are jacked up in the rear and have smaller mirrors and it is very hard to see anything behind you while driving.

In my personal observances, I have seen drivers who won't or cannot even turn their heads enough to actually get a proper look at their blind spots.

I am encouraged with the now available automatic braking technology but will not put my faith in it either from behind the wheel or in front of it.