Basically no one is ever willing to wait for anyone else, as OP's reasoning shows pretty adamantly.
Of course they're grossly incorrect.
It used to be like that around 2000s, things have vastly improved here though.
Have you ever tried Barcelona or New York or Paris or Krakow or Milan or, god forbid it, Naples?
Prejudices are fun, but usually they are grossly incorrect.
Also as I've said, I drive very little (less than 2.000km/year) and cyclists in Rome are still from Rome. they are not Martians so their mentality must be the same of everybody else don't you think?
if romans are bad drivers, isn't it safe to assume they are also bad cyclists?
The only time in my life when I felt people were out to get me was in Italy. They drove like absolute maniacs. And I was on a big motorbike, not a bicycle going at 10 kmph. The road was wide, too (outside a city), with very light traffic, but for some reason they really couldn't be bothered to move over to the other lane when overtaking. Weren't going particularly faster, either.
---
[0] I'm not saying Paris is great, mind. I'd even say that in the last few years it has deteriorated a lot: whenever a light turns red, at least one person is guaranteed to run it.
Of course, you're French!
In Aosta!
You usually forget how shitty your country has been.
https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tentative_de_rattachement_de...
> Cars must leave at least 1.5 metres room when passing bicycles - while revised guidance also says "it can be safer" for cyclists to ride two abreast.
But cyclists will always complain, because they don't talk about reality. they talk about their perceptions because they are scared and need to blame someone.
Cyclist also make the worst drivers I know, because they really can't stop thinking they are the victims.
if they do not kill you, they are not.
or maybe if you are scared of other road users and need a "safe space" you aren't a good road user.
just maybe
> if a driver is driving so close that they couldn't react to a cyclist falling, they are a bad
welcome to the reality.
I'm not driving too close to you, you are zig-zaging in the middle of the street and you wear noise canceling headphones and no rearview mirror and no stop signal when you brake.
Thanks, but no thanks, I'm passing you, I don't trust your abilities, sorry.
let's not pretend that the majority of cyclists are Tour de France participants, they are usually terrible.
The good ones do not complain and they are those passing you left and right because are very confident and know what they are doing.
I'm also simply trying to not be responsible of your injuries if you injure yourself.
By the law I have to stop and check on you and stay there until.an ambulance or the police arrives. It usually takes hours.
Most people think they are good drivers and its "the others" that are bad, regularly driving and behaving in a way that leaves little to no contingency. You can't control the environment. You can't control other road users. So if you are 'squeezing' then you are reducing your contingency, making it more dangerous for you and everyone else, and leaving yourself much more susceptible to negative events. So yes, a bad driver.
Most cyclists think they can ride a bike and it's the cars.
How is that different?
The main issue is don't harm.other road users, you don't do that?
Fine with me
I've never been in an accident that was my fault in my career as a driver, than now spans 3 decades.
The only accidents I've been were:
- a bike hit me laterally because the rider was going too fast on a wet road, panicked and hit the front brake. He almost killed himself and ruined my day.
- a moped took a turn too fast and hit me straight on the drivers door. When the father of the rider arrived he apologized saying his son "is a bloody idiot" (my adaptation of his Italian words, which are probably NSFW)
- I stopped at a stop sign and two teens on a motorbike hit me on the back because they were running too close to me. They also attacked me for braking, I showed them the stop sign, I threatened to call the police, they calmed down and gave me some money asking me to not make it official or their parent would be furoious at them. it wasn't their first time.
people are people, people make mistakes, people who think cars are dangerous for bikes usually aren't aware how shitty as cyclists they are, I'm sure they are bad drivers too.
Riding is dangerous, do it at your own risk, but nobody is really trying to kill you, because you are not that important.
Be careful and you'll live.
Wanna be safe on a bike?
Don't use it! Walk!
have you noticed that in motor sports at 300km/h nobody dies while every year in professional bike competitions someone dies or injure himself badly?
Because bikes are dangerous.
The consequences of riding a bike badly are much lower. 10kg bike vs 1500kg car? ~14mph cyclist vs ~30mph+ car?
> I've never been in an accident that was my fault in my career as a driver, than now spans 3 decades.
That doesn't say _anything_ about whether your driving caused an adverse reaction from other road users. Merely that there was nothing severe enough to legally mark you as 'at fault'.
> people are people, people make mistakes, people who think cars are dangerous for bikes usually aren't aware how shitty as cyclists they are, I'm sure they are bad drivers too.
Cars _are_ dangerous. Cars cut across cyclists path (hence why the UK highway code received clarification/updates this year). Cars pass without enough space and clip cyclists (which you just seem to completely ignore and think it's "safe enough" and "the bloody safe-space demanding cyclists' fault").
> Riding is dangerous, do it at your own risk, but nobody is really trying to kill you, because you are not that important.
Riding, in general, isn't dangerous. For the average cyclist who is using it for commuting, and _maybe_ getting up to ~20kmh? Other than slick road surfaces from spilled oil or deep rain puddles or ice, there's not much that would cause random danger.
> have you noticed that in motor sports at 300km/h nobody dies while every year in professional bike competitions someone dies or injure himself badly? Because bikes are dangerous.
Road racing, where the racers are travelling in bunches of 40 cyclists at average speeds of 30mph, deliberately taking risks to try to win, is _nothing at all_ like typical road use for a commuting cyclist. You seem determined to strawman cyclists, and think that cyclists should just accept dangerous roads. You seem utterly unwilling to accept that car drivers can be a significant danger.
I accept that there can be bad cyclists. I shake my head if I see one jump a traffic light. How much of your perception of cyclists is just because you _expect_ car drivers to be bad, and whatever way they behave is just 'typical' so doesnt stand out to you...but when you see a cyclist it's obviously different, so much more memorable? In the UK there were more than 150,000 road traffic accidents in 2019. In Italy, around 190,000. That suggests to me there is a lot of bad driving.
My general position is that most road users (not just cars) are incredibly entitled and so we should figure out ways (such as the Netherlands' road design) that make everyone's life better, rather than just accepting things are shit and saying "suck it up and find a safe space".
> let's not pretend that the majority of cyclists are Tour de France participants, they are usually terrible.
Let's not pretend that the majority of drivers are Formula 1 participants, they are usually terrible.
It’s not cyclists who feel the need to bring a climate-controlled metal protection bubble onto the road with them.
Fear of other road users is in part what is fueling the SUV boom.
what foes that even mean?
do you live in the woods and only feed yourself with carcasses?
> Fear of other road users is in part what is fueling the SUV boom.
maybe in America
here it's micro cars that are booming
because after all SUV are stupid cars for stupid rich people with small dicks
Your implication is that cyclists who don’t want to be close-passed are wimps who shouldn’t be on the road. You used the term “safe space”, which is usually pejorative. My point is that those cyclists are braver than the drivers who wouldn’t be on the road without a protective, climate-controlled bubble (their vehicle).
>> if a driver is driving so close that they couldn't react to a cyclist falling, they are a bad
> welcome to the reality.
So you are admitting that they are bad drivers, and thats just reality? Ok. I'm saying we should face reality and give ourselves space to fuck up with less consequence.
Again, you seem very confident in your _own_ abilities. I don't know them. I just know that very few drivers ever consider _themselves_ to be at fault. Overconfidence.
I am comfortable weaving in and out of busy traffic. I can hold 20mph+ comfortably. I ride both for commuting and recreation, and have done 40mph+ on my bike. That doesn't stop me being able to see that other drivers are bad, and even if I know what I'm doing, can hope for society to be better.
I'm also the kind of driver that when you trip from your bike because you are on death on wheels vehicle, stops and helps you
And when you burn. ared light, brakes
and when you miscalculate a turn and go wide, leaves you room, because I an actually looking around me when I drive, you aren't, because you don't care.
maybe I should stop doing all that, I guess a couple of weeks with a broken leg teach a lot of lessons to people like you.
You are in control of your car no?
if you die riding something that runs on two minuscule strips of rubber that requires movement to stay in equilibrium and has no protection whatsoever for the rider, that usually don't even protect themselves because "who cares", why should be other people's fault?
if a driver is driving so close that they couldn't react to a cyclist falling, they are a bad driver.
You should drive within safe limits. If you cannot brake in the distance between you and the car in front, you are _too close_. If you squeeze to overtake, you are too close. Potholes exist. Wind exists. In the UK, the (edit) guidance is that you should pass a cyclist with as much a gap as you would pass a car (1m). The suggestion is 1.5m at 30mph (~50kmh). In other words, you should basically be in the other lane, as you would be if overtaking a car.
YES, driving slowly can cause accidents as drivers are impatient, but in most roads, waiting 10s for a clear passing spot isnt going to drastically change your journey time
...and if more people cycle, that means less people are in vehicles, so you have _more_ space on the road and less congestion. cars are very space-inefficient
(edit: formatting)