hit and run article in the LA times

[ggusta]

http://graphics.latimes.com/la-bike-hit-and-runs/
Hit-and-runs take a rising toll on cyclists


By ARMAND EMAMDJOMEH, LAURA J. NELSON AND JOSEPH SERNA

NOV 29, 2014

 

[avanti]

http://graphics.latimes.com/la-bike-hit-and-runs/
Hit-and-runs take a rising toll on cyclists


By ARMAND EMAMDJOMEH, LAURA J. NELSON AND JOSEPH SERNA

NOV 29, 2014

I wish the media (and maybe law enforcement) would provide more details on bike-car/truck accidents. My observations are that most cyclists in accidents do not wear high visibility clothing, do not know traffic laws (ride on wrong side of street, or ride in the dark with no or poor lighting.

I also see cyclists with no brakes on their bikes (even pictures one in the article).

I suspect that some of the hit & run drivers are tied up using their cell phones and have no idea they just hit a cyclist.

 

[Granville57]

I can see both sides of this as well. As stated above, and as is expressed in the comments under the article itself, cyclist often wear idiotically non-reflective clothing and other equipment. Much of this I put on the doorstep of the industry itself. I've long maintained the belief that the industry is insane. Flat, matte finishes on bikes have become all the rage; protective gear in black or brown colors; winter clothing in dull and dark colors—and yet people buy and wear this stuff?

I see cyclists all the time doing themselves no favors by riding at night without any illumination. I see cyclists riding two-abreast on narrow roads, when there is a perfectly maintained bike path no more than five feet away. Traffic going both ways has to slow down to accommodate them, and everyone is put in danger. Just as significantly, they do severe damage to the relationship between drivers and cyclists by riding like jackasses. Get off the damn road! I think most of them, with matching BMC bike and full kit, consider themselves too cool for school, so they would never be caught dead on a bike path. Ironically, they just might be caught dead on the road in the pursuit of their inner-pro.

I see cyclists riding on the wrong side of the road. In the worst cases, it's a father or mother (or both) with one or two kids behind them. Absolutely boggles the mind. Sometimes I say something to them, sometimes I don't. I usually witness this when they're coming right towards me.

I've never been hit, but like most, I suppose, I've nearly been clipped on a few occasions. I don't doubt that it could happen to anyone at anytime, even with the best intentions and most thorough precautions. But cyclists often behave like morons on the road. Fact.

Of course drivers behave like morons as well. I can't get on the highway and drive 10 minutes without witnessing half a dozen people who should have their licenses suspended. I see it every, single day. With that in mind though, cyclist need to be even more vigilant and responsible.

 

[winkybiker]

I can see both sides of this as well. As stated above, and as is expressed in the comments under the article itself, cyclist often wear idiotically non-reflective clothing and other equipment. Much of this I put on the doorstep of the industry itself. I've long maintained the belief that the industry is insane. Flat, matte finishes on bikes have become all the rage; protective gear in black or brown colors; winter clothing in dull and dark colors—and yet people buy and wear this stuff?

I see cyclists all the time doing themselves no favors by riding at night without any illumination. I see cyclists riding two-abreast on narrow roads, when there is a perfectly maintained bike path no more than five feet away. Traffic going both ways has to slow down to accommodate them, and everyone is put in danger. Just as significantly, they do severe damage to the relationship between drivers and cyclists by riding like jackasses. Get off the damn road! I think most of them, with matching BMC bike and full kit, consider themselves too cool for school, so they would never be caught dead on a bike path. Ironically, they just might be caught dead on the road in the pursuit of their inner-pro.

I see cyclists riding on the wrong side of the road. In the worst cases, it's a father or mother (or both) with one or two kids behind them. Absolutely boggles the mind. Sometimes I say something to them, sometimes I don't. I usually witness this when they're coming right towards me.

I've never been hit, but like most, I suppose, I've nearly been clipped on a few occasions. I don't doubt that it could happen to anyone at anytime, even with the best intentions and most thorough precautions. But cyclists often behave like morons on the road. Fact.

Of course drivers behave like morons as well. I can't get on the highway and drive 10 minutes without witnessing half a dozen people who should have their licenses suspended. I see it every, single day. With that in mind though, cyclist need to be even more vigilant and responsible.

There aren't two sides to this. Cars and trucks kill bike riders. The opposite isn't true. Stop blaming the victim. The vast majority of car-bike collisions are the motorist's fault. 100% of hit and runs are the motorist's fault (at least the "run" bit).

Yes, cyclists can make themselves LESS LIKELY to be killed, but that doesn't mean that those who don't wear vest or helmet (for example) deserve to be killed for their supposed lack of care.

Motorists break the law close to 100% of the time. They pretty much all speed, all the time (unless hindered by a corner or other motorists). They all run every stop sign. There are very few exceptions to this. Virtually none in my observation. They all spend a fair chunk of their time distracted by phones, radios, passengers, kids, etc.

People saying that it is somehow the cyclists' responsibility to not be murdered makes me want to puke my guts up, sir.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Generally agree with Granville, but I wanted to say something about that.

I don't know the stat either, but once had a cycling attorney tell me the majority of cycling-car accidents are the fault of the motorist. However, as a cyclist having the law on your side doesn't do you much good if you're lying on the side of the road in a dying heap. So ride safely, and defensively folks.

Finally, that link points to hit and runs. And that's a startling map to see. Very alarming, and indeed a case where the motorist is in the wrong 100% of the time, as Winky says.

 

[GoodTimes]

Granville with some wise comments I think.

Respectfully to winky, I don't think it's blaming the victim to say that you should be wise and try to make it easier for the car drivers to not smash into you. There are circumstances where the car can be completely at fault, but where you could have avoided the whole scenario had you been wiser.

One example from my own life is regarding the route that I ride to work. There is the direct route, with 80 km/h speed limits, and no shoulder. People pass you a few inches away from your elbow, at 120 kph. Or, there is the indirect route. It adds about 10 minutes, but takes you on much safer roads. Is it wrong for me to ride on the direct route? Well, not exactly. But is it wise? I'd say not.

Or on a different note, I believe it should be legally required for cyclists who are out at night to have adequate illumination. It's required for cars, and if we want to share the road with cars, it should be required for bikes. Where I live, it's not legally required for a night-time cyclist to have any illumination, or reflectors. But, going out in the night, especially if it's rainy, without anything to make you more visible, is a death wish.

 

[winkybiker]

Granville with some wise comments I think.

Respectfully to winky, I don't think it's blaming the victim to say that you should be wise and try to make it easier for the car drivers to not smash into you. There are circumstances where the car can be completely at fault, but where you could have avoided the whole scenario had you been wiser.

One example from my own life is regarding the route that I ride to work. There is the direct route, with 80 km/h speed limits, and no shoulder. People pass you a few inches away from your elbow, at 120 kph. Or, there is the indirect route. It adds about 10 minutes, but takes you on much safer roads. Is it wrong for me to ride on the direct route? Well, not exactly. But is it wise? I'd say not.

On on a different note, I believe it should be legally required for cyclists who are out at night to have adequate illumination. It's required for cars, and if we want to share the road with cars, it should be required for bikes. Where I live, it's not legally required for a night-time cyclist to have any illumination, or reflectors. But, going out in the night, especially if it's rainy, without anything to make you more visible, is a death wish.

I take the most pleasant route to work. It is the one with the fewest cars. I do this for enjoyment as much as safety. Your point that the average overtaking speed is well in excess of the posted speed limit is well made, and in accordance with my observations. On one section of my commute through Stanley park, the posted limit is 30kmh. Cars overtake me doing twice that speed. They obviously consider it safe.

And this is the point. Victim-blaming motorists often point to what they see as risk-taking behaviour from cyclists and identify it as the main issue. There is actually little evidence that so-called risky behaviour on the part of cyclists is a common factor in cycling fatalities. Mostly, cyclists, riding in accordance with the law simply get run down by negligent motorists. Motorists conveniently ignore their own risk taking activities. This is in spite of the overwhelming evidence that driving is the most dangerous thing we do on a day-to-day basis. There is no other thing we do that kills our families, our friends, ourselves and others with such alarming regularity.

Blaming the victims of vehicular homicide for their own demise is sickening.

(Oh, and lights are required on bikes by law in almost all places. My bike is lit like a Xmas tree.)

 

[GoodTimes]

I take the most pleasant route to work. It is the one with the fewest cars. I do this for enjoyment as much as safety. Your point that the average overtaking speed is well in excess of the posted speed limit is well made, and in accordance with my observations. On one section of my commute through Stanley park, the posted limit is 30kmh. Cars overtake me doing twice that speed. They obviously consider it safe.

And this is the point. Victim-blaming motorists often point to what they see as risk-taking behaviour from cyclists and identify it as the main issue. Their is actually little evidence that so-called risky behaviour on the part of cyclists is a common factor in cycling fatalities. Mostly, cyclists, riding in accordance with the law simply get run down by negligent motorists. Motorists conveniently ignore their own risk taking activities. This is in spite of the overwhelming evidence that driving is the most dangerous thing we do on a day-to-day basis. There is no other thing we do that kills our families, our friends, ourselves and others with such alarming regularity.

Blaming the victims of vehicular homicide for their own demise is sickening.

(Oh, and lights are required on bikes by law in almost all places. My bike is lit like a Xmas tree.)

Well, I hope you understand that we're pretty much on the same page. I'm not at all trying to, as you say, blame people for getting hit when they are not at fault for the accident. I am just encouraging us as a community to do what we can to make it as difficult as possible for bad and dangerous drivers to do us harm. And I agree entirely that driving is inherently very dangerous.

I'll give you a tid bit from my own life as an example from some years ago when I was a bit younger and a lot more reckless. One time I was flying down a busier 2 lane city street, and keeping right up with traffic. A woman pulled by to pass me as I was still accelerating after a traffic light. She didn't fully pass me, as I was going at pretty much the same pace and kept right along side her. We went about a block like that, before she turned right at an intersection (without signaling I should add). I didn't have a chance, and got hit. I managed to turn with her, and only got a glancing hit from the car, but I still went down pretty hard, and was pretty shaken up.

Was this my fault? Definitely not -- the cops made a report, took both of our contact info, and asked if I wanted to press charges (regretfully I didn't, but next time I would) or if my bike needed money to repair (fortunately it didn't and I still ride that bike today). But could it have been avoided? Well, in the name of defensive riding, now in that same scenario I would let her complete the pass and then ride behind her instead of beside her.

Something similar happened a few years later when a car changed into the right turn lane (meaning they needed to go through where I was riding, in between the main lane and the right turn lane). I was paying attention and saw it coming, and was already working to get out of the way before the lane change even started. I managed to get out of the way. That story ends with me giving the driver an ear full, rather than me on the ground.

But the thing with lights is quite a curiosity actually (my bike is well lit as well, I should add). I have a good friend who is a good cop. Where I live, any people on bikes in the middle of the night are very frequently crooks on the prowl for a little B&E or something similar. So, cops are likely to want to stop & question somebody who is on their bike in certain neighborhoods at 3 am. There is a limit on how much they can question you -- or more accurately, how much you need to tell them-- if you aren't breaking the law. So, all the rounders out on their bikes are sure to follow the letter of the law -- they all have bells on their bikes. No lights, but big shiny bells.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Finally, that link points to hit and runs. And that's a startling map to see. Very alarming, and indeed a case where the motorist is in the wrong 100% of the time, as Winky says.

It's definitely not about visibility. L.A. has a long history of protecting drivers all the way from the Mayor's office, PD, through the Streets, to the mass transportation agency. It's a class issue in L.A. as bicyclists are thought of as "poor, probably on his way to work in the kitchen of a restaurant." Riding mass transit also has the same stigma with the added class hysteria, "It's not safe!! One of those poor people could kill you!!!".

IMO, like many cities, the Federal government was funding multi-use, so cities would take the money and implement access within their streets projects (in an effort to raise average car KM/h and volume) , but in only slightly less dangerous ways than nothing at all.

Now people are using what was put in and realizing how dangerous it is and taking some much needed action.

 

[winkybiker]

Well, I hope you understand that we're pretty much on the same page.
I'll give you a tid bit from my own life as an example from some years ago when I was a bit younger and a lot more reckless. One time I was flying down a busier 2 lane city street, and keeping right up with traffic. A woman pulled by to pass me as I was still accelerating after a traffic light. She didn't fully pass me, as I was going at pretty much the same pace and kept right along side her. We went about a block like that, before she turned right at an intersection (without signaling I should add). I didn't have a chance, and got hit. I managed to turn with her, and only got a glancing hit from the car, but I still went down pretty hard, and was pretty shaken up.

Ahhh, the right hook. I get this about once a week on my commute. As soon as a car comes alongside and is slowing, I expect them to turn into me so I slow and let them get in front. If necessary, I stop. Weird thing is that car also often stops, waiting for me to undertake it on the kerbside. I just wait, and wait......and wait. I'm not sure why that as they come up behind me, they would choose to pass me, just to immediately stop and wait for me to pass them on the kerbside. But it happens incredibly often. I think drivers are just somehow programmed somehow to overtake bikes as soon as they see them, no matter what.

 

[avanti]

http://graphics.latimes.com/la-bike-hit-and-runs/
Hit-and-runs take a rising toll on cyclists
....................

It is worse for pedestrians - click on the graph filter button.

While driving at night I see pedestrians crossing the road in front of me at night, under poor or no street lighting, wearing dark clothing and seemingly unaware of traffic.

 

[Granville57]

Yikes. A lot of discussion here since I last peeked in.

There aren't two sides to this. Cars and trucks kill bike riders. The opposite isn't true. Stop blaming the victim.
<snip>
People saying that it is somehow the cyclists' responsibility to not be murdered makes me want to puke my guts up, sir.

You're missing my point, as I knew someone would. (Not a personal attack, I completely understand your outrage.)

My point is:
None of those drivers who kill or maim cyclists are ever going to be reading this forum. But some of those cyclists who may occasionally ride like jackasses just might.

That was what motivated me to express my thoughts the way I did.

We lost one of our own, Craig1985, as the result of a tragic accident that, by all appearances, was completely unavoidable on his part. He was struck by a car, that had veered off course, while he was standing at a light. That could happen to any one of us. I fully acknowledge that.

I am not "blaming the victim," but this is a cycling forum, not the comments section of the New York Times. One of the main points that I was trying to convey was that the relationship between drivers and cyclists is often compromised by cyclists themselves.

Not long ago, I watched with total dismay as a group ride left my LBS. A few dozen cyclists simultaneously pulled onto a very congested street, right in the middle of rush hour. It was the type of road that I would generally avoid at all costs, due to the amount of traffic and its proximity to the highway. And yet there they were, in all their spended glory, instantly impeding the flow of traffic. Pure genius.

As I said, I don't pretend to have any influence over the mass of public drivers who barely even understand what a bicycle is used for. But if one, or two, or more cyclist reconsider their on-road behavior as a result of something I post here, then we are all bound to be just a bit safer.

 

[Granville57]

Yes, cyclists can make themselves LESS LIKELY to be killed, but that doesn't mean that those who don't wear vest or helmet (for example) deserve to be killed for their supposed lack of care.

Of course I never even suggested such a thing. Hyperventilating about this will add little to the discussion.

And for the record, I hardly EVER wear a helmet. I can't stand the damn things. Never wore one as a kid (nor did anyone when I was growing up), rarely wear one now.


There's an entire thread about it where I've made my case, if anyone is interested (starting at post #108).
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=15741&page=11

 

[ebandit]

The helmet thing is a complete red-herring anyway.......wearing a helmet won't make a driver actually look for you on the road....nor will wearing a helmet stop a car piling into you at 50mph

...in fact there is some UK research that suggests wearing a helmet makes drivers give you less space not more

However...yes there are loads of twunts on the roads on two wheels as well as four

Mark L

 

[Granville57]

...in fact there is some UK research that suggests wearing a helmet makes drivers give you less space not more.

This is something that I have very much sensed myself. Perhaps I look "more like them" when I don't have a helmet on, or maybe I seem "less like Lance" (an image that the average dude in a pickup truck seems to despise).

Or maybe I just look more vulnerable to them. I really don't know. But I definitely have a sense of more respect, and space, from drivers when they can see my head. Could be my imagination, but I'm OK with that for the time being.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Really good discourse guys, about an important topic.

I'll give you a tid bit from my own life...

Perfect example of what I was talking about. The law may have been on your side, but was that wise riding? I think we've all done similar. Now, I ride like I'm invisible. I assume no driver can see me. And that's with lights, reflectors, bright clothing, etc.

L.A. has a long history of protecting drivers.

That has been my exact experience when there as well. The land of the automobile, and selfish, impatient drivers. Many of the cities on the US East coast are the same. Bike lanes don't exist, but aggressive drivers do. However, there are many rural areas with low traffic and safe roads at least. LA is just endless sprawl and expressways.

Granville57

I wear a helmet 99.9% of the time, but respect your right not to. It would not surprise me if I found a study that showed drivers give more room to those who do not. Interesting sub topic.

 

[Jspear]

Really good discourse guys, about an important topic.


Perfect example of what I was talking about. The law may have been on your side, but was that wise riding? I think we've all done similar. Now, I ride like I'm invisible. I assume no driver can see me. And that's with lights, reflectors, bright clothing, etc.


That has been my exact experience when there as well. The land of the automobile, and selfish, impatient drivers. Many of the cities on the US East coast are the same. Bike lanes don't exist, but aggressive drivers do. However, there are many rural areas with low traffic and safe roads at least. LA is just endless sprawl and expressways.


I wear a helmet 99.9% of the time, but respect your right not to. It would not surprise me if I found a study that showed drivers give more room to those who do not. Interesting sub topic.

This is very true - And to add to that, were I am (Northern VA), there isn't a very big cycling culture so cars often seem annoyed and/or shocked that I would be on the road. Sometimes in frustration they have yelled at me telling me it is illegal. As has been said here in different ways: the best thing to do is to assume they can't see you and it is up to you entirely to keep yourself safe. Your safety isn't in their minds at all hardly.

One thing I like about cyclingweekly.co.uk is all the car/cycling mishaps they report. Lots of video footage on there. I wish there was a way all the documented evidence could be made more public so people could see how stupid they look putting cyclist in danger.

 

[Granville57]

One thing I like about cyclingweekly.co.uk is all the car/cycling mishaps they report. Lots of video footage on there. I wish there was a way all the documented evidence could be made more public so people could see how stupid they look putting cyclist in danger.

I have to say though, many times I have watched helmet-cam videos provided by riders, only to think, Is this guy nuts? I simply can't believe the way some people ride. It often looks to me as they're trying to prove something every time they get on their bike.

I've often see the phrase, "Own the road," or something similar in regards to how a cyclist is supposed to take control of their space, or assert themselves in a lane. But I prefer Alpe's position of assuming invisibility for the most part—by which I mean that I exercise an abundance of caution in the belief that most drivers might not even be aware of my presence.

I often hear about the horrendous conditions that riders are faced with in the U.K. Here's a video that was posted in order to demsontrate reckless driver behavior. And it does show that! But I also can't ignore the fact that rider is hardly doing himself any favors throughout the rest of the video.
Personally, I would NEVER attempt to ride my bike in such an environment. The roads depicted here just do not appear to be compatible with cycling. I would be forced to either find a different route, or use another means of transportation. Sorry, but this just looks crazy to me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1itCTjbtKsw
(Some course language)

Yes, the driver is being completely irresponsible. But those roads just don't appear to be safe by any stretch of the imagination. And many cyclists seem to want it both ways: They want to be given all the space and respect of any other car, but also want the freedom to ride independently of any constraints, as this guy does when cruising in between vehicles. Is that fair? Is my question even fair?


I was made aware of that footage from CyclingTips, with the following info:

THE BENEFIT OF FILMING YOUR COMMUTE

Scottish cyclist Dave Brennan has used footage from helmet- and bike-mounted cameras to secure two convictions for dangerous drivers in the past seven years and, according to The Scotsman, has another five cases pending.

Here’s the video from the latest case, in which the driver was fined and given demerit points for careless driving.

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2014/12/rocacorba-daily-367/

 

[GoodTimes]

...
I've often see the phrase, "Own the road," or something similar in regards to how a cyclist is supposed to take control of their space, or assert themselves in a lane. But I prefer Alpe's position of assuming invisibility for the most part—by which I mean that I exercise an abundance of caution in the belief that most drivers might not even be aware of my presence.
...

This brings up an interesting point actually... there is a section of my commute on a busy road that is fairly narrow. It's about 2 km like this, broken up by sectors that are wider. For recreational riding, this is one of the most heavily ridden roads in town, as it is the best way to get west of the city. The road is just wide enough that 2 cars and 1 cyclist should be able to fit. But, in the case where the oncoming car is in the leftmost side of it's lane, there is not very much room in the lane for both a bike and a car.

I used to ride this portion as far right as possible, and take up as little road as possible. This allows cars to pass freely. But, a driver would rather crash into a cyclist than suffer a head-on collision, so occasionally a car would pass waaaay too close, since there just wasnt room given the situation of the oncoming traffic.

Now, I ride about 30 cm out from the curb. This is just far enough that there is no way a car can pass you while there is oncoming traffic, but not so far that it's difficult for them to pass when there is not oncoming traffic. Also, it gives me some buffer, and allows me to pull right if I sense that I'm going to get hit by some dare devil.

Yes, the driver is being completely irresponsible. But those roads just don't appear to be safe by any stretch of the imagination. And many cyclists seem to want it both ways: They want to be given all the space and respect of any other car, but also want the freedom to ride independently of any constraints, as this guy does when cruising in between vehicles. Is that fair? Is my question even fair?

Do as you would be done by... I want cars to treat me with respect, and so I treat cars with respect. For example, depending on the situation, I think it is not appropriate to pull up to the front of the line when you're at a red light. If there's a bike lane, or a wider shoulder, such that you don't hold up cars, fine--go ahead. But if the cars you passed at the traffic light will now have to wait for you and be unable to pass, then I think that's inappropriate.

 

[aphronesis]

I used to ride this portion as far right as possible, and take up as little road as possible. This allows cars to pass freely. But, a driver would rather crash into a cyclist than suffer a head-on collision, so occasionally a car would pass waaaay too close, since there just wasnt room given the situation of the oncoming traffic.

Now, I ride about 30 cm out from the curb. This is just far enough that there is no way a car can pass you while there is oncoming traffic, but not so far that it's difficult for them to pass when there is not oncoming traffic. Also, it gives me some buffer, and allows me to pull right if I sense that I'm going to get hit by some dare devil.


Do as you would be done by... I want cars to treat me with respect, and so I treat cars with respect. For example, depending on the situation, I think it is not appropriate to pull up to the front of the line when you're at a red light. If there's a bike lane, or a wider shoulder, such that you don't hold up cars, fine--go ahead. But if the cars you passed at the traffic light will now have to wait for you and be unable to pass, then I think that's inappropriate.

Your first point is one maintained by civic officials and cycling advocates in both London and New York. I haven't really cycled in LA or adjacent rural areas since my teens, but I have ridden in New York since being an undergraduate in the 90s so in the spirit of stating basics for new riders and cycling politics in general, I'd offer a few more observations.

In terms of taking the road--if necessary--that's an absolute: it's far easier to control the situation and the worst that happens is you have drivers honking at you. I haven't done this in some years, but with the time to kill, I'll come to a dead stop in the middle of the road and dismount facing their car until they're shamed by other drivers and pedestrians. (Again, this won't quite fly in most parts of LA). Drivers in cars aren't (mostly) driving scared, there's no reason you should. Especially in today's digitized world: if they're that pressed to be someplace, they're doing something wrong and need to reassess their lives or traffic management in general. (Anecdotally, traffic in SF became steadily less aggressive during the tech boom in the 90s).

I'm also familiar with the studies on helmets and experienced (or perceived) that to be the case during the time I did acquiesce to familial pressure and wore one for awhile. The one crash where I might have benefited from a helmet might also have snapped my neck rather than leaving a few repairable contusions and a concussion, so it's an open debate.

In terms of city riding though: it's much safer than 10 or 20 years ago--or at least somewhat safer and far less hostile. But many cyclists don't help matters.

So, for those new, don't assume that because you're in a bike lane that anyone else actually recognizes its right to exist. Again, more do than even two or three years ago, but don't ride as if protected and safe within the rules of your road.

Don't ride in lateral groups unless you're on a full dedicated street in a park. Everything else is potentially hazardous for you and other cyclists. More generally it's selfish. So, by extension, don't even treat dedicated bike lanes as a living room with your friends and family--even if that's who you're riding with--people cycle for multiple reasons, not all of them yours.

As mentioned above, don't overtake or undertake a car in any intersection if they have the least opportunity to make a turn without signaling. Don't even pass one in a lane unless you've looked ahead and can see that there's no reason for them to suddenly change lanes on you. In terms of other cyclists, think exactly the same thing and if you're fresh and eager to show how fast you are, don't pass another cyclist in a congested area unless you've looked more than 20 feet in advance and can see that you're not about to hit a situation that brings you to a skidding halt with the other cyclist(s) now inconvenienced and more aggravated behind you.

More specifically in terms of traffic, this is not a video game, it's a real, physical, constantly changing dynamic: watch the cars in front of you as if you were driving: if they show the least hesitation or erratic tendency, presume that they're about to do something and leave room.

In many (US) cities, if hitting an intersection at speed where a car from the opposing direction wants to make a left hand turn in front of you, don't assume that making eye contact will keep them in place. More often than not, it's the opposite, they'll take that as permission to go--presumably because you only have to brake a bicycle.

In New York, yellow cabs are now generally more responsible than green cabs.

Unless making an organized and defensible political statement against the hugely wasteful monoculture of automobile designed cities and streets, do not ever ride the wrong way down a street--even if it's your home block: it's lazy, selfish and again, potentially hazardous to you and other cyclists.

If it's down to you, me and parked and speeding automobiles, I'll knock you over to take the hit I know, rather than be nailed from behind by a car while trying to give your stupid @ss maneuvering room. 999 times out of a 1000, I'll just control that space forcing you--illegally and idiotically--toward the oncoming traffic. At which point you'll dismount between parked cars, get on the sidewalk and cross the street. As you should.

Don't run lights against any car or pedestrian who has the right of way. It's detrimental to cyclists rights and antagonizes everyone. And these days there are enough doing it that you're also inconveniencing other cyclists. If you thought you were contributing to civic progress: that isn't

As others have stated, assume you are invisible, but more specifically, ride as if you were following the rules and distances and rhythms of the road: head check, signal as needed, however subtly, don't swing out around double parked vehicles (I watched a woman get hit head on by a delivery truck doing that).

In general, don't be fearful or reckless, but rather aware of what poses a threat to you, but also how you impinge upon others and learn from other cyclists who clearly have better control of their bikes than you do. But also be savvy about controlling the road. In certain contexts, despite what's painted on the street, it's far safer to pull out just ahead of the crosswalk where you won't inconvenience pedestrians or be hit and/or abused by turning or merging cars. Similarly, in tight one way situations, it's often better to ride on the left side of the road as both drivers behind can see you and the odds of being doored--when it's too close to stay consistently clear--are likely less and generally easier to anticipate.

In terms of lights, I've worn them since living in London--which necessitates it at night, but also because people asked me to, politely, rather than resorting to mandate.

I use them in New York not only because I want to be seen in certain areas that I ride, but as an assertion of my right to be on the road, and to be as accountable as possible in any contested situation--give people as little room as possible to say they didn't see you or that you were riding recklessly.

As that goes, it should be obvious to anyone that if cyclists are required to register, be licensed and pay taxes, that it's unlikely to be immediately followed by the right to stop and roll through intersections that are empty. The more responsible you can be as a cyclist, the less likely it is to be regulated to the point of being worthless in an urban context.

Apologies to all those for whom most of this is obvious.

 

[wrinklyvet]

I looked at the videos made by the Scottish cyclist mentioned above http://cyclingtips.com.au/2014/12/rocacorba-daily-367/ and have experience of conditions in England rather than Scotland. Occasionally he is arguably in the wrong or is provocative and contributes to events.

He seems to be spoiling for a verbal fight with everyone whose driving he doesn't like. As a result some of them go further than they otherwise might have done. One of these days he will regret his foul language and will have only the satisfaction of a video of the punch on his nose and a successful prosecution.

It's desirable that cycling campaigners (and cyclists in general) should avoid unnecessary confrontation, for their own benefit and everyone else's.

 

[42x16ss]

I looked at the videos made by the Scottish cyclist mentioned above http://cyclingtips.com.au/2014/12/rocacorba-daily-367/ and have experience of conditions in England rather than Scotland. Occasionally he is arguably in the wrong or is provocative and contributes to events.

He seems to be spoiling for a verbal fight with everyone whose driving he doesn't like. As a result some of them go further than they otherwise might have done. One of these days he will regret his foul language and will have only the satisfaction of a video of the punch on his nose and a successful prosecution.

It's desirable that cycling campaigners (and cyclists in general) should avoid unnecessary confrontation, for their own benefit and everyone else's.

Sadly, all too often, the people who have the most issues are the most provocative on the roads and/or have the least experience. One of the best steps to win people over is to remember this - don't train in traffic.

All too often, I see people riding flat out in urban areas, mixing it with trucks, buses etc. If you are commuting, commute. If you are training, head out of town somewhere quiet and smash yourself.

 

[wrinklyvet]

If you are commuting, commute. If you are training, head out of town somewhere quiet and smash yourself.

You agree with me so I shouldn't quibble. To balance the simplicity of the statement, however, it's fair to point out that in the UK there are very few places to get away from all traffic. Defensive riding rather than provocative riding is what is needed.

It doesn't always work, of course. That's inevitable. We can only do our best.

 

[winkybiker]

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/seven-cyc...lty-to-dangerous-driving-20141204-120en6.html

This was the dip$h!+ that initially claimed to have blacked out. I predict a very soft sentence - non-custodial or suspended. A major influence on the magistrate's deliberation will be evidence that the cyclists were wearing lycra and therefore deserved to be hit.

 

[winkybiker]

..... it's fair to point out that in the UK there are very few places to get away from all traffic. Defensive riding rather than provocative riding is what is needed.

It doesn't always work, of course. That's inevitable. We can only do our best.

I lived in Bristol for a few years. The riding around there was spectacular. Loads of options without much traffic at all.

I agree on not being provocative. I now try to ride with a Zen-like calm. I'm much better at this than I was. Getting aggro just upsets everyone and really just makes things worse.