Hacker News Reader

Comment by falcolas | Hacker News Reader

As a former bicyclist, and a current motorcyclist and "cager", let me give one piece of advice that has kept me alive to this day. Your safety and protection is entirely up to you. No government, painted lines or traffic cones are going to save you on the road. When you're on the road, the only thing that matters is "the right of weight".

If you're hit by a car, and you're not in a protective cage of steel, it's not going to matter if the other person was in the right or the wrong. You're still dead.

If anything, these traffic cones are a dangerous placebo; making cyclists feel safer than they actually are in their interactions with cars. Want to actually be safe from cars when on the road? Ride in a cage of steel. Want to survive on two wheels? Ride as if every person in a car is intentionally trying to kill you.

Yeah, it's probably overly pessamistic; no, it's not fair. But I'm alive and uninjured.

View on HN

The cones aren't a placebo, they actually alter driver behavior. It's important when challenging an idea not to exaggerate its flaws. No practical number of orange cones will physically protect cyclists in a collision, but the psychological impact of well-designed infrastructure can have substantially better outcomes, which is why some places are much safer for cyclists than others.

That said, not all bike infrastructure is equal. Some of the new "protected" lanes in Seattle, for instance, are quite dangerous and I prefer to remain in general traffic.

You're right that cyclists should ride as if everyone driving a car is trying to kill them. But one effective way to do that, if designed well, is to actually separate car drivers from cyclists. Even an artificial separation can save lives, if it's done right.

One more bone to pick: making cyclists feel safer isn't necessarily dangerous. One of the reasons cycling is unsafe is because so few people do it, and one of the reasons so few do it is because they fear for their safety. There are even people who suggest that helmets are in aggregate counterproductive to bike safety for this reason (and I think they have a point, but I wear a helmet for other obvious reasons). Better perceived safety leading to more cyclists on the road will almost certainly result in better real safety outcomes.

> Yeah, it's probably overly pessamistic; no, it's not fair. But I'm alive and uninjured.

Don't you think that's a little bit of survivorship bias? I'm sure there are plenty of cyclist who have been killed who 100% agreed and rode in that way, but they obviously can't speak on the matter.

Of course it is dangerous and potentially lethal when you get hit by a car, but how can you suggest that it's not beneficial to have measures in place that at least attempt to protect cyclist. It makes cyclist 'feel' safer, because it is in fact safer. Look at countries like the Netherlands that have excellent cycling lanes and safety measures. It makes drivers more aware that there are cyclist around them, and urges them to be more cognizant of their surroundings.

Would additional space for bikes hurt bikers? I think it depends. If there is enough room to add better bike lanes without affecting car traffic negatively, the it will probably help. But if cars are forced into smaller spaces, I think more cars "in a hurry" will disregard the lines in favor of a clear road. Sure, they will be in the wrong, but it won't help the dead cyclists any.

And places like SF, with their already bad car traffic and limited land? They would definitely fall in the latter case in my book.

> but it won't help the dead cyclists any

Perhaps if more bicyclists wore GoPros as a normal part of their travels (or more CCTV were pointed at bike paths), the legal system will reduce the number of violations and thus deaths.

Rider skill is a huge factor that receives almost no attention. I constantly see shockingly poor cycling skills, because most cyclists have received little or no training. Those riders are a hazard to themselves and to other road users. They don't know how to position themselves on the road, they make poor observations and signals, their basic bike handling skills are inadequate.

If you're going to ride on the roads, you need to know how to do it safely. I don't know what the situation is in the rest of the world, but here in the UK we have a national network of accredited trainers; courses are often free or very inexpensive, subsidised by employers or the local government. If cycle skills training isn't available in your area, write to your representative and ask why.

http://bikeability.org.uk/

> If you're hit by a car, and you're not in a protective cage of steel, it's not going to matter if the other person was in the right or the wrong. You're still dead.

I get the point you're trying to make, but you're papering over some big trends.

If the car that hits you is going 20 MPH, you've got a 5% chance of being dead. At 40 MPH, you're looking at more like a 85% chance.

Ride defensively - sure, but remember that those government painted lines and rules and street design help influence behavior that could very easily save your life.

A huge proportion of accidents happen when the cyclist is hit from behind. You think you're alive because of your defensive riding alone? You're also alive because you were never plowed into by a distracted driver that one day, a situation you would have very little control over.

There's more of a spectrum than simply being alive or dead. What are you going to do with a broken femur or pelvis?

As for being hit from behind, as a motorcyclist this is one of my greatest fears - consider how often cars get rear-ended! As such, I actually feel that at traffic lights it is safer to lane split, as this also helps me get in front of the cars once the light goes green.

I agree that mindset is safer, but defensive riding and defensive infrastructure are not mutually exclusive concepts. Both save lives.

From the individual perspective this makes sense and a mindset everybody should have. Collectively, when you add these sorts of things up it has a measurable impact on reducing the total number of injured cyclists.

> Your safety and protection is entirely up to you.

This is just not true. There are ways to persuade cyclists and drivers to behave more safely without saying things that are obviously untrue.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com