Hacker News Reader

Comment by callinyouin | Hacker News Reader

> "I hope you get hit!"

This, to me, signals the general attitude people have towards bicyclists in the US. The average person either doesn't care or, for some misguided reason or another, actively hates bicyclists. I've been yelled at by drivers for no apparent reason so many times I've lost count. I've had so many friends hit by cars. My partner was struck by a car last fall and broke her leg in two places. She's still recovering and frequently has to lie down for hours because her leg is so sore. Just the other day a friend of mine was struck and had to get stitches in her face.

I think the problem here is a mixture of infrastructure and attitude. The infrastructure side of things is usually what we talk about, which is obviously an important part of the discussion, but I don't think the problem with peoples' overall attitude towards bicycling gets enough attention. There are so many people out there who legitimately wish to harm bicyclists. Don't take my word for it, in 2016 a driver purposely murdered 5 bicyclists (in an area close to where I live, no less) with his vehicle and was sentenced in 2018[1]. Although most are likely accidents, there are other examples of drivers purposefully striking bicyclists with their vehicles if you look.

It's really sad, I think it's a symptom of something a lot more sinister happening to the hearts and minds of people in this country, and it's why I no longer ride my bike in the city anymore.

[1] https://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/2018/05/charles_pickett...

View on HN

> This, to me, signals the general attitude people have towards bicyclists in the US. The average person either doesn't care or, for some misguided reason or another, actively hates bicyclists. I've been yelled at by drivers for no apparent reason so many times I've lost count.

My experience as a pedestrian (I don't ride a bike on the street so I can't speak to that experience) mirrors this. More than once, I've been honked or yelled at for being in an actual, marked crosswalk, crossing the street. (Never mind all of the driver complaints about my use of legal, unmarked crosswalks.)

On a former commute, I regularly got off the bus at a bus stop immediately adjacent to a signaled crosswalk that several of us used. We regularly got honked at by drivers bringing their cars to a screeching halt as the light changed and, once on a holiday, when it was just me and my kid, a driver yelled "if you weren't so fucking poor you wouldn't have to ride the bus!"

> It's really sad, I think it's a symptom of something a lot more sinister happening to the hearts and minds of people in this country

Agreed, and I live in a city where ways of getting to work and around town that aren't a single-occupant vehicle are now in the cumulative majority yet the pushback has increased even more. People regularly write letters to the local paper about how they "openly" use the bus and bike lanes for their cars because "[screw] those entitled people."

I hold a driving license and, until recently, owned a car that I regularly used. This behavior ought to be unacceptable and more actively enforced against but I can only imagine the uproar if an even light "crackdown" happened.

> "if you weren't so fucking poor you wouldn't have to ride the bus!"

I honestly think this is a huge factor in violence against cyclists & pedestrians. Drivers think you're automatically beneath them in the societal pecking order if you're walking or biking, so they feel justified or entitled to victimize you.

People do similar shit to other people who they perceive to be poor, such as homeless, maids, delivery drivers, etc.

Yes, it's very interesting. I moved to a city (in the US) where driving a car is actually unnecessary, so I sold mine and ride a bike as my primary transportation. I am so happy to not have to deal with car ownership -- it's improved my life tremendously.

Although I haven't been subjected to any abuse about it, more than once I have had people make comments about when I'll be able to buy a car, as if finances are why I don't have one. The funny thing is that my income is in the top 5% of the area, and I have enough liquid cash right now to buy almost any car I want outright. I just don't want one.

People make weird assumptions.

Same boat, I could go buy a car in cash tomorrow but I don’t have a drivers license.

People react with incredulity when I tell them I don’t have a car.

I live a 15 minute walk from the center of town and work and the UK has reasonable bus service in most towns so why would I spend thousands on a car and hundreds a month to park a vehicle I never use outside my house.

I cycle for fitness and pleasure though and most car drivers are lovely but we do have the odd dickhead as well.

Do you have children? I've noticed having a family had impacted my cycling lifestyle tremendously.

Not the OP, but I have 7yo and 3yo kids and don't have a license. For as long as we lived in Europe (UK, Belgium and Czech Republic) I felt little need for it - bikes + child trailer served us well most of the time, and we took trains for longer journeys. Now that we moved to New Zealand I'm working on getting a license because while public transport is passable (but far from great) in Auckland, you really do need a car to get the most out of the rest of this beautiful country.

Fwiw, I bike to work in Cambridge and take my kids to school by bike on the way. It's by far the most consistent way to get to pickup on time. We bike through winter and wet weather.

Negatives? My wife doesn't feel comfortable riding the big bike with kids and there's only one bike with two seats. If the big bike goes into the shop, things get complicated but the same would go for a car-based commute.

This is likely part of it. Particularly for pedestrians. But for cyclists, I don't think that explains it.

It boils down to the fact that cyclists are unusual in most places in the US, and people are impatient and don't like dealing with things that are out of the ordinary.

But there's also just something dehumanizing about driving cars, which causes aggression. Road rage against other drivers is nearly as big of an issue as the issue of hatred towards cyclists.

Of course, even pedestrians get angry at slow walkers, but when they do so they aren't in command of multiple tons of metal that can move at high velocities.

The only place I would cycle regularly is the Netherlands, because of the infrastructure and the attitude of drivers.

In the US, I have heard that the statistics around biking to work every day is that the median lifespan is higher, but the variability is much higher.

I barely feel safe around other drivers when I'm in my own car, a marvel of technology designed to keep me safe.

> The only place I would cycle regularly is the Netherlands, because of the infrastructure and the attitude of drivers.

There are parts of the US where the infrastructure and attitude isn't so bad. Not as good as much of Europe, but good enough to make it OK. This is extremely variable, though. I've seen many parts of the nation where I wouldn't dare to bike.

Where I live, for instance, there is a law that requires a percentage of all road funds to be used for bicycle infrastructure. As a result, there is quite a lot of well maintained bike paths that are completely separate from the streets. About 2/3rd of my daily commute route is physically separated from road traffic -- to the point where the only time I even see a car is when they're going across an overpass of the bike path.

My favorite is when they're freaks about safety and try to be altruistic (ex: "where's your helmet?")...

...by slowing down, driving on your shoulder, and screaming at you.

Had someone do this at an exit to the freeway once. I had to stop and walk across.

I don't think people doing that are trying to be altruistic. They're trying to engage in harassment.

I would never yell at a bicyclist, and certainly would never hope one got hit. But I have to say, as an NYC pedestrian, I actively hate bicyclists.

They don't follow the rules of the road--at all. Red lights? Stop signs? Ignored. Pedestrians crossing in a crosswalk? Probably fine to whiz past them with 6 inches to spare.

I almost get hit by fast-moving bikes once or twice a year. A car has never even come close to hitting me in eight years. Not even those crazy taxi drivers.

I have no idea what possesses these people to blast through a red light, into a busy intersection, without slowing down or even looking, but they do it!

It has always seemed to me that bicyclists see something "different" about their mode of transportation that exempts them from most traffic laws. And the crazy thing is that they keep asking for more bike lanes.

(I'm not accusing you of being this way. But I think this may be the reason lots of people have a hatred of bicyclists. I know many people in the city who feel the same way I do.)

Part of the problem certainly is impedence mismatch-different flows in a shared path. The solution to this part is infrastructure.

We also greatly need better awareness and it goes all ways. When learning to ride a motorcycle I learned how bad a pedestrian I was.

Bikes and cars have very different situational awareness, mass, agility, stopping distance, etc. It would be very surprising if the optimal rules for both were exactly the same.

I feel the same way here in DC. Both as a pedestrian and as a driver. (For example, the other day my wife and I were trying to cross a street and nearly got hit by a bicyclist going the wrong way in the lane. Of course, I was looking for cars following the rules and didn’t think to look for a bicycle coming from the other direction.)

As a former NYC cyclist, I can say that your accusations are patently absurd. First, if cyclists blasted through red lights without looking we would all get hit by cars within a few intersections. Second, of course cars have come close to hitting you. It's New York. That's how they drive there. It is always jarring to hear what I anecdotally believe to be a minority of pedestrians who actually believe that cyclists are in any way, shape, or form more of a threat to their safety than motor vehicles. Luckily for us all, NYC is getting more and more friendly to cycling, though it still does have a long way to go.

> if cyclists blasted through red lights without looking we would all get hit by cars within a few intersections

It is left up to the drivers and pedestrians to get out of the bicyclists' way and avoid collisions.

> of course cars have come close to hitting you

Not in my personal experience. One example is what happens when there is a red light and I have the cross signal. If I see only cars I will begin crossing, because the cars typically have already started to slow down well before the light so I know they will stop. If I see a bike I will typically wait for it to pass. And sure enough, most of the time the bike will continue through the red light.

Another example is when the light is green, and there is traffic taking a left turn into a crosswalk which has the cross signal. Cars go so slow to the point that they stop several times before completing the turn. Bikes just make the turn at full or maybe half speed, and sometimes ring their bell. Scenarios like this are what have caused most of my near-collisions. There's no chance of seeing them coming.

> It is always jarring to hear what I anecdotally believe to be a minority of pedestrians who actually believe that cyclists are in any way, shape, or form more of a threat to their safety than motor vehicles.

It does seem that both sides of this issue believe the other side is living in a bubble. All I can say is what I see. Look around any intersection in NYC where there are red lights and stopped cars. If there are any bicyclists around, they will be the fastest moving objects you can see.

From what you wrote it sounds like you've heard this more than once. So have I!

This mirrors my experience over the past few years in Portland. I don't mind bikes, but as a pedestrian having cyclists fly through red lights almost running into me on numerous occasions, I lost a lot of my empathy for them.

One of the other more difficult things to come to terms with (both as a pedestrian and a driver in that city) is that bikes can transition from sidewalk to street basically whenever they want, and however they want. Most cyclists were very careful about this, but there were plenty of occasions where I watched a bike cut across traffic at full speed, hop up onto the sidewalk and expect the pedestrians to just move out of the way for them.

Obviously its still up to drivers to drive safely, and we have a LONG way to go in that category, but cyclists need to do their part as well.

For all your apology, you're still basically arguing that since a few cyclists flout the rules, we should actively make traffic more dangerous for them and encourage them to drive more.

For another perspective, my commute is a routine of watching cars break the law and endanger me with impunity. It's only superficially acknowledged by others and I have yet to see a cop pull over a car for committing an infraction against a bike.

So while I do obey the law as best I can, it should be easy to see why bikers would stop caring. The law is not enforced, even when a cyclist dies. So where's the merit in the law, if you're a cyclist?

"I almost get hit" – so, you don't get hit? Once or twice a year you get... startled?

In NYC in 2017, cars injured 10561 pedestrians and 4397 cyclists, and killed 106 pedestrians and 24 cyclists. Cyclists injured 315 pedestrians and killed one. http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bicycle-crash-data...

In NYC in 2016, cars injured 10775 pedestrians and 4592 cyclists, and killed 148 pedestrians and 18 cyclists. Cyclists injured 311 pedestrians and killed none at all. http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bicycle-crash-data...

So the "different" thing that bicyclists see about cycling is that it's much less hazardous to pedestrians.

Interesting that you chose to phrase it "cars injured...cyclists" and never "cyclists struck cars" as if it was never the cyclists fault.

Ok, I'll say it - bicyclists tend to annoy me. Obviously, I don't shout at them, or try to hit them, or make them think I'm trying to hit them. That's nuts. That seems like a problem separate for bike/car relations. I doubt someone who behaves that way in a car gets out of it and suddenly becomes a calm and reasonable person.

But here's my assessment of why bikes annoy me. Not argument that they should, just some introspection.

* They make me nervous. Cars are easy to see, have lots of momentum to overcome, and generally exist on a predictable well defined plane. Bikes are different. They can enter the car plane from places I don't expect and didn't even realize existed. They can make 90 degree turns on a dime (relative to my sedan) and can stop in inches. They don't generally obey traffic lights, stop signs, one ways, or any of the other rules that lend predictability to car behavior. They don't have brake lights or signals. And in a complex driving environment, they're tiny and often poorly lit. They also have no protection. Slow moving car crashes aka "fender benders" are expensive and annoying, but rarely dangerous. Similar accidents involving a bike can end lives. Having a bike near me makes me worried I'm going to hit it. I don't want to live with that so I give it huge space and pay it lots of attention. If I could drive on roads that didn't have bikes I'd prefer it.

* Civic disagreement. The arguments in favor of making roads more bike friendly are generally: more healthy, more space efficient, more environmentally friendly. I agree on healthy and environmentally friendly. Though, it does seem odd when someone tells me biking is super healthy and super dangerous in the same sentence, but I cede the point. Space efficient? Yes and no. It is more space efficient for people whose options are bike vs car to ride a bike, but there's tons of people that doesn't apply to - people who live far away, people who need to haul things, people who have health issues, people who are too young etc. Also, lots of people don't want to bike in heat, rain, snow, etc. Also, not everyone has a place to change and shower when they get to work. The shower issue and the distance issue disproportionately impact people who are less well off. I get that biking can be part of the solution, but man does it get over hyped.

* Guilt/jealousy. I really enjoy biking! If I'm in my car and you're on your bike - I'm pretty sure you're having more fun than I am, and that makes me jealous. Then I start asking myself why I'm not biking, and sometimes the answer makes me feel guilty. Neither of those emotions often get followed up with - let's arrange it so I can experience more of this.

> Having a bike near me makes me worried I'm going to hit it. I don't want to live with that so I give it huge space and pay it lots of attention.

As a four season bike commuter (8km each way) and sole wage earner for my single/low-car family, I wish more drivers had this attitude. It sucks that you feel bad and see this as a hardship, but I can assure you that it's far better for the people bicycles with whom you share the road.

> If I could drive on roads that didn't have bikes I'd prefer it.

Thank goodness then for interchange access highways, a car-only environment just for you and other like-minded people. :)

I am a cycle commuter since I am ~10. I grew up on the countryside and because my parents couldn't bring me to school every day and the walking distance to the next bus stop was too far I ended up taking the bike every day and it sort of became a habit. Now I live in a city where I take the bike because on my daily route it is ~10 minutes faster than the metro.

A few points: You mentioned that cyclists make you nervous, which I understand. When I drive the car, I am watching for cyclists too. But because I am cycling I know very well what to watch for – and to be honest, if some suicidal lunatic shows up in the wrong moment, there is nothing you can do except checking carefully anyways. This is a problem of the cities, where many cyclists are people without a drivers license, and they behave as such. Beeing in traffic is about communicating, and it is hard to communicate if you don't even know if there is somebody to communicate with.

So the problem is exactly where cyclists and motorists intersect. Because cyclists often cannot put themselves into a motorists mind and vice versa.

One solutions that doesn't involve educating either side is building infrastructure that makes the intersecting spaces of cyclists and motorists as controlled and perceptually simple as possible. If you ever had the chance to drive a car and a bike in Denmark or the Netherlands, you will notice how less stressful it is to move in public, because they really put thought into lifting that stress from the users of the infrastructure. This means investing into cycling infrastructure is good, as long as you see the whole thing and not just slap some bicycle lane somewhere besides a parking street. If this is done right, everybody can benefit, especially from less cognitive overload.

>Space efficient? Yes and no. It is more space efficient for people whose options are bike vs car to ride a bike

Those people would be in cars or on busses if the infrastructure made the commute only feasible by vehicle. Bikes are denser than cars. Moving commuters to denser forms of travel increases the bandwidth of the pipes they're on. Meaning more space for you, too.

Even though the active risks appear greater, statistically it's still safer to ride a bike than to be in a car (plenty of localized exceptions, of course).

One of the best ways to increase the safety for everyone, and to make drivers less nervous, is just to slow the cars down. Speed is a major factor in crashes, injuries, and fatalities. If the cars and bikes are traveling at similar speeds, they are able to co-operate much more in their use of the road.

Traffic calming works wonders, that's how the Netherlands for example moved from a car-centric road system similar to the USA to the bike-heaven it is today, just a slow, steady stream of infrastructure changes to slow down drivers and improve the safety of people riding bikes.

e-bikes are also changing the game when it comes to cycling longer distances. They are still far, far cheaper than owning a car. I always find it strange when economically disadvantaged people are brought up as a reason to favor cars, they are the people that can least afford them.

> generally exist on a predictable well defined plane

Protected bike lanes/paths mostly solves this problem.

Cyclists aren't unpredictable because they want to be, it's because the system is not set up well for bikes at all. Sometimes it's actively hostile to bikes.

> Space efficient? Yes and no. It is more space efficient for people whose options are bike vs car to ride a bike, but there's tons of people that doesn't apply to - people who live far away, people who need to haul things, people who have health issues, people who are too young etc.

There's multiple problems to unpack here:

* You'd be surprised how accessible biking actually is, with good infrastructure. There's hardly anyone in Munich that falls under the "too young to bike" bracket, I see even three year olds on their balance bikes around, and of course it's common for parents to have toddlers on their bikes. Plenty of elderly people too. And with electric bikes and handicap-friendly bikes around, people who can bike comprise the overwhelming majority.

* There's still some fraction who cannot bike, true, but the same is true of stairs, and yet this doesn't make us stop building stairs. We just also build ramps and elevators. Nobody's suggesting replacing all car lanes with bike lanes.

* If you replace car lanes with bike lanes for those who can bike, the people who cannot can simply...continue driving, because many people who would otherwise be in car lanes taking up space have shifted over to a more space-efficient mode. In theory, this can actually free up space in the remaining car lanes.

Some roads around me are positively lethal on a bike, I sometimes jump off and walk across because it’s not worth the risk to me or anyone else, annoying but worth it.

I consider this one of the big advantages to riding a bike: I can dismount and become a pedestrian almost instantly!

Bit harder for me as I ride with clipless pedals so I waddle like a duck when using cycling shoes.

I think next time I'll look at MTB style where the clip is recessed so you can walk normally off the bike.

Makes sense. I tried using cycling shoes, but I found them really inconvenient and annoying, so I just use regular pedals & shoes. Still clipless, though.

> They can enter the car plane from places I don't expect and didn't even realize existed

That's a problem with cyclists who don't follow the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles. When I cycle, I will check my mirror and signal prior to changing lanes. I'll only make left turns from the left lane and right turns from the right lane. I won't pass right turning cars on the right or left turning cars on the left.

> and can stop in inches

Not really. The contact patch is much smaller and most of the weight shifts to the front under hard braking. Cars, with their suspensions and ABS systems can stop as fast or even faster than a cyclist with excellent bike handling skills. The average cyclist will take longer to come to a stop from the same speed when compared to a motorist.

> They don't generally obey traffic lights, stop signs, one ways, or any of the other rules that lend predictability to car behavior.

That's a problem with the cyclists. There are cyclists who do obey the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles.

> They don't have brake lights or signals

You can get them aftermarket and good ones at that if you're willing to spend the money. It's unfortunate that headlamps and taillamps are not mandated as standard equipment on bicycles. You can thank the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) which advocated for an all reflector standard over a combination standard of reflectors and lights.

> They also have no protection.

Car drivers don't have much protection relative to tractor-trailers and buses, yet people drive their cars amongst those much heavier vehicles all the time.

> That's a problem with cyclists who don't follow the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles.

Yes. As someone who bicycles as my primary transportation, I get really angry with other bicyclists who don't follow the rules. A couple of times I've even shouted "you're why drivers hate bikes!"

Here's the thing -- where I live, the police used to enforce traffic laws against bikes to the same degree as against cars. It wasn't unusual to see a bike pulled over and getting a ticket -- but the majority of bicyclists were very well behaved, and there was little animosity from drivers.

At some point, that changed and cops started ignoring bicyclists who broke traffic laws. Now, you see bad bicyclists all the time, and the level of animosity from cars is noticeably increasing.

I wish the cops would go back to the enforcing the laws.

On average I get more annoyed with other cyclists than drivers, no turn signals, running traffic lights, riding without lights at night in dark clothing on a black bike, curb jumping, riding on busy pavements, not signalling turns etc.

I’m fully in favour of the police cracking down on cyclists for not following the rules.

Cars, with their suspensions and ABS systems can stop as fast or even faster than a cyclist with excellent bike handling skills. The average cyclist will take longer to come to a stop from the same speed when compared to a motorist.

I don't have "excellent skills", but I personally have stopped a bike that was moving ~12 MPH quickly enough to not hit a child who jumped out from between parked cars. In a car, I would have killed her. I didn't stay on the bike, and it picked up some scuffs from the pavement, but then again child still alive.

> They make me nervous.

I understand this. I try to make sure I don't make drivers overly nervous in two main ways.

I try to adhere to the first rule of the road (applies equally to cars, bikes, pedestrians, etc.): never do anything unexpected.

The second is that, when I'm biking on the street and have to move toward the center of the road (to go around parked cars, for instance), I'll actually stop and let any cars behind me go ahead. As soon as I put my foot on the ground, cars know they have nothing to fear from me.

> never do anything unexpected

> I'll actually stop and let any cars behind me go ahead. As soon as I put my foot on the ground, cars know they have nothing to fear from me.

Contradiction!

Whatever's wrong with signalling, pausing to see if the driver's going to obey the highway code, or accelerate to overtake, and then moving into the road?

I don't think it's a contradiction, really. I'm engaging in precisely the same behavior as cars do when they're parking behind another car.

What I'm not doing is coming to a stop in front of vehicles that are expecting to keep moving. And I do signal.

All that said, I did state that I try to do nothing unexpected. It's not always possible (and I also don't always know what others on the road are expecting).

> Whatever's wrong with signalling[...]

Nothing, and that's what I do if it's not possible to safely pull over and allow the cars to go by. But I also know from personal experience that drivers really hate it if they have to slow down because a bike is in front of them, so I'm trying to keep them happy.

>Space efficient? Yes and no. It is more space efficient for people whose options are bike vs car to ride a bike, but there's tons of people that doesn't apply to

And those people can continue using roads. Nobody is asking for a nationwide ban of all cars. We just want to make bicycles a safe option. That means less cars on the road, which is better for everybody.

I suspect this is where some of the bike-hatred comes from. People are afraid that somebody is trying to take their car away from them.

Outside of the small percentage of fanatics that you find in any group, I don't know any bicyclists who want to take people's cars away.

I know that I don't. I don't even think less of people who drive. I just want to be able to use the transportation methods that suits me best, just like they do.

I think you've got it backwards, cars aren't easy to see, they're hard to see out of. There is no blindspot for a cyclist or pedestrian.

My guess is that the driver had been yelled at by a biker in the past. I've seen bikers chew out drivers, or yell profanities many times in SF. They sometimes/usually have a good reason to do so, but that kind of behavior just breeds contempt and animosity between the two groups.

I think that's reasonable and sometimes find myself in that group. Instead of yelling what do you think the is the best way to handle a driver intentionally running you off the road?

Take out their valve cores once they park? :)

I wouldn't hesitate to note their license plate # and report them to the police. It may not help, but it might -- particularly if more than one person reports the same car over time.

Yeah, sometimes they have. Once riding around a bike near Powell street in SF in a bike lane with 10 mph limit. A car approached me from behind. Initially it was probably at 40 mph but it slowed down as it came near me. But it was scary as hell as you have inherent assumptions when you are in a bike lane.

It's easier to change infrastructure to be pro-cycling than it is to change the culture. I'll take mindful drivers over protected bike lanes, any day. The only protected lane in my town (Madison) is one that goes against traffic. Drivers here are generally aware and accommodating when it comes to cyclists. I feel safer biking here (snow and all) than any other city I've lived in.

Man, that lane gave me the willies, first time I rode on it. ;-) But I agree about Madison. One other thing I've noticed is that here's also much less of a car culture. For instance it seems that people are outraged if their work commute is more than 10 minutes. And you don't see as many of the giant cars, SUV's, pickup trucks, etc.

One thing that may help is that a number of large employers are all concentrated near the center of town: Government offices, the university, and the hospitals. This makes it desirable to live within the city limits, but also to look for alternatives to the relatively expensive and inconvenient parking lots.

> One other thing I've noticed is that here's also much less of a car culture.

I think a big factor is the lack of freeways in downtown Madison (not sure if this was intentional or a byproduct of the isthmus + Capitol Square). A lot of people attribute Vancouver's success with alternative transportation to a 1960's decision against urban freeways. Without the option of a freeway, incentives and cultural attitudes are more aligned toward biking, busing, etc.

I’m not sure how broadly this generalizes. Having lived in 7 different regions in the US I would say 4 were cycling-friendly and 3 were cycling-hostile.

I live in Kalamazoo and know people both who survived and were killed in that attack. At least our community responded positively with new passing distance laws and broad community support.

ETA: I should mention that I got hit and run on my bicycle by a drunk driver years before the mass murder. My friends tracked down the driver, the police took statements, viewed the damage to the car exactly as I described it, driver matched the description my riding partner and I gave, and the prosecutor still declined to press charges. It wasn't a no-harm-no-foul thing either, I was pretty severely injured. Still pretty sore about that.

I biked to work for several years. I see both sides somewhat. Cyclists are their own worst enemies, as many are a bunch of idiots that flaunt traffic laws, put pedestrians at risk and behave poorly.

Engineering practices don’t account for cyclists well. That’s getting better where i live, but more need to be done there as well as educating folks on what to do in difficult car/bike/pedestrian scenarios.

> This, to me, signals the general attitude people have towards bicyclists in the US.

Maybe, but if you have ever tried to get around in Cambridge, MA, you would understand that it is a disaster for everybody.

Pedestrians walk into intersections when they shouldn't and block traffic, sometimes indefinitely. Bicyclists ignore signs, lights, people, etc. and cut off cars randomly. And cars have to shove their way through the mess or they will never get anywhere.

Cambridge traffic is simply dreadful. Go read Neal Stephenson's "Zodiac" for a taste.

Why is anyone driving in Cambridge? This reminds me of a relative who insisted on renting a car in Bali. Just... why?

Note: I have driven in Cambridge, and will do again, when there is a compelling reason to do so. Commuting during rush hour is not a compelling reason.

> Why is anyone driving in Cambridge?

Mostly because they have somewhere to be on a schedule.

I've lived in Cambridge for ~20 years. For about 1/4 of that time, I walked to my office in Kendall about half the time and drove the other half. Bus service was completely impractical and trying to take the subway one stop took vastly longer than walking or driving.

The other 3/4 of the time, I had a job outside Cambridge -> driving to/from work everyday -> driving in/across/around parts of Cambridge everyday.

Now, with kids in elementary school (start time 8:15 sharp, pickup 2:25 sharp), we drive to/from school 8-10x a week. Before they were in school, to/from daycare (can't dropoff before 8:30; must pickup by 5:30 sharp; can't push a stroller on a bike) and work meant plenty of car trips as well. Before kids, to/from work and then to after-work team sports often meant needing to drive as well. Public transport in Cambridge, except directly red line T stop to T stop, is not for those who are on any kind of schedule. The bus service is a disaster, IMO.

> and it's why I no longer ride my bike in the city anymore

So is your response to just drive a car then? That's a most-poignant tragedy of the commons.

This tension is fundamental.

You have two parties who feel entitled to the road, while few parameters exist around how they share the road. Naturally anything a cyclist does that interferes with the driver ends up irritating him/her and vice versa.

Protected bike lanes go a long way to solving this problem. We need rules around how we interoperate.

It should be noted that the perpetrator in the murder case you referenced was on methamphetamine, muscle relaxers, and pain medication at the time of the incident.

There truly is a lot of hostility for cyclists out there, and I think it would be wiser to cite cases that don't have complicating factors like this, such as:

* https://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/01/cyclist-sente...

* https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/31/why-so-hard-...

* https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2017/08/11/video-cyclist-survive...

* https://www.narcity.com/news/this-ontario-driver-has-been-ch...

* https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/7502828-181/chp-hit-and-r...

* https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/must-reads/video-motorist-...

* https://metro.co.uk/2019/03/22/smirking-driver-records-braki...

* https://www.dailybulletin.com/2018/11/03/police-bicyclist-ki...

* https://www.ldnews.com/story/news/local/2018/05/16/cyclist-h...

* https://ggwash.org/view/34715/driver-assaults-bicyclist-poli...

* https://cambridge.wickedlocal.com/news/20170505/police-drive...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com