People going to work typically take the most direct route there, which is usually the same road cars take rather than those trails. Thus you see people cycling on the same busy roads you're rushing to work on. That's an urban planning problem and one that I've spent lots of time trying to fix in my own community. In every case it's been held up by people who don't want to spend money on bikes and in one memorable case were worried about a traffic study that estimated an additional 30s worst case scenario for commute length increases.
As for the hill thing, cyclists are not obligated to have rear facing lights in any state I'm aware of, only forward facing. They need to have a rear retroreflector for visibility in most places. These come on all bikes by default and the only way to not have them is to intentionally remove them, which is uncommon. I assume they didn't since you didn't mention it, and I'm also going to assume the road doesn't have a bike lane since you mentioned a bike trail on some similar path instead. In that case, they're probably allowed to be there (though they should have forward facing lights and safety patches for their own sake).
Your responsibility as a driver is to drive at speed where you can identify and safely react to obstacles, including bikes. It sounds like that didn't happen here, but you're blaming someone else for the near miss.
In Florida, my state, they absolutely must:
- A bicycle operated between sunset and sunrise must be equipped with a lamp on the from exhibiting a white light visible from 500 feet to the front and both a red reflector and a lamp on the rear exhibiting a red light visible from 600 feet to the rear.
- A bicyclist who is not traveling at the same speed as other traffic must ride in the designated bike lane or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway.
See here:
https://www.flhsmv.gov/safety-center/driving-safety/bicycle-...
Edit also:
At least 24 states require bike lights during certain times of day or in limited visibility conditions, including: Arizona, California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, and Maine.
It sounds like you live in America in which case I assure you the bike trails you speak of are inadequate to the point that using them is probably less safe than not.
Where are you getting the "expected to go 55" wording from? That's not how laws are written. If you're referring to the speed limit, that's a limit, not a suggestion. Again, telling.
Yes it is the cars that are dangerous, a careless bicycle rider is not capable of harming you in your car in any way.
Cyclists who ride without lights after dark are irresponsible, I'll give you that.
One time I was going up a hill I've been up and down a million times, only to be shocked to find, after sundown, similar road with a BIKE TRAIL, some person riding their bicycle WITH NO LIGHTS, on a road where you're expected to go 45 (its actually 55 when I googled it!) or more, giving me little time to react, I have NEVER seen someone be so careless on this road, or even ride a bicycle on it, because its not a road for bicycles. So no, it's not just the cars that are dangerous, its the carelessness of bicycle riders that is equally dangerous.