

In response to: " Is it okay to kill cyclists" - fumar
http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2013/11/shafted-again.html

======
jonchang
This is a somewhat extreme overreaction to a level-headed opinion piece in the
New York Times that has a linkbait headline, as is typical of journalism these
days. I encourage you to read the full article and judge for yourself.

[http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/10/opinion/sunday/is-it-ok-
to...](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/10/opinion/sunday/is-it-ok-to-kill-
cyclists.html?pagewanted=all)

~~~
__--__
To be fair, it's the Bike Snob. Hysterical Overreaction is his writing style
and has been for years.

------
zevyoura
> When I'm in Midtown or some other place where I'm "sharing the road" (that's
> cute) and thousands of two-ton 350 horsepower motor vehicles are bearing
> down on me because they're driven by people whose only priority is getting
> to the Midtown Tunnel or the 59th Street bridge as quickly as possible, you
> can be damn well sure I'll do whatever the hell I need to do in order to get
> a head start on these homicidal mutherfuckers, and that includes running the
> light if I deem it safer to do so

I'm not a regular cyclist, so maybe I'm just confused, but under what
circumstances would it be safer to run a red light? "Get a head start" implies
to me that they're starting to cross the intersection while cross traffic
still has the right of way, which seems far more dangerous.

~~~
stolio
Traffic lights are designed to group cars together, but if you're willing to
run (all of) them you get to ride in between the packs of cars where you only
have to worry about cross-traffic at intersection and the occasional
pedestrian. It's so much nicer for everybody involved, I can't get up to speed
like a car can at a red light so if I wait there suddenly I'll have a line of
cars behind me who may make questionable passes at the first opportunity. I
think anything that reduces my proximity to 2-ton hunks of metal on the street
is a good thing.

In some states it's legal for cyclists to treat stop lights as stop signs and
stop signs as yield signs because A) it's so much easier for us to stop B) we
can hear our surroundings so we generally have a good idea if an intersection
is safe to cross _before_ getting visual confirmation and C) the amount of
danger we expose others to is small compared to vehicles (person + 30 lbs.
bike vs. person + 3,500 lbs. car)

~~~
dman
As a pedestrian in Manhattan it's really hard for me to model in my head what
a person on a bicycle going to do. What is the protocol for cyclists and red
lights - are they supposed to stop like other vehicles? Do people crossing the
street with a walk sign have right of way? Can they take free left turns if no
cars are at the intersection?

~~~
stolio
I don't live in as big a city as Manhattan so I can't really say, I've seen
videos of some insane bike riding in NYC. Can't believe how some of them ride.

I do think cyclists sometimes fail to give pedestrians the respect they
deserve, we have to remember that pedestrian's relationship with us mirrors
our relationship with cars _. I personally try not to come within 5 feet of
pedestrians, unless they 're standing in a bike lane or something like that.

_ in the sense that we're bigger and faster, but the extent of the danger
isn't even close

------
cup
This goes beyond cyclist / motorist behaviour. If you really prove deeply you
can extract a classical attitude and behaviour seen between a semi-homogeneous
majority class and its minority coutnerpart.

By that I mean, in this case we have motorists upset at cylists because they
feel that cyclists in some way conflict with their beliefs / way of life (that
I can drive on the road with other automobiles and not worry about cyclists or
that my behaviour may harm others). I suspect though that at the heart of the
matter motorists are upset because it exposes just how poor some people are
when it comes to driving and how driving isnt a right nor a privlidge but a
skill which requires practice and training.

I mean the same thing can be seen in other conflicts between major groups and
minorities. Cars and motorcycles. Post colonial naturalised citizens vs.
indigenous people. Middle class vs. Poor. Police vs. 'inner city youth'.

I mean is the issue really that cyclists might do something wrong or that
cyclists expose just how bad drivers are at driving and how arrogant
individuals try to blame others for their mistakes under the guise of 'being
impartial'?

Im rambling now but theres a point in there somewhere.

~~~
jinushaun
On the flip side, it also exposes how shitty assholes a lot of cyclists are.
I've been involved in enough group bike rides to know that most of the time,
the cyclist started it. Asshole cyclists are probably also asshole drivers and
asshole pedestrians.

