The parent in no way suggested blaming victims (and your fake-quote is a bit of straw-man hyperbole). He merely suggested that the supposed victims here should take a little extra responsibility for their safety and increase their vigilance.

I'm still the victim if, say, I'm walking in shady part of town at night, looking at my phone instead of paying attention, and I get mugged. But just because I'm the victim in this scenario, it doesn't mean I can't or shouldn't do more to protect myself from a bad outcome.

Would you rather be more vigilant, or increase your chances of a hospital visit? I'm talking about the reality of the situation here, not the ideal world where everyone on the road behaves like we think they should.

I'm going to suggest that when you "take a little extra responsibility for their safety" you fight for protection, like bike lanes, more vigorous enforcement of laws, and equal rights compared to other vehicle operators.

It's a very American attitude to say things like "don't visit that part of town, it's a bad neighbourhood". What about things like "that part of town is in rough shape, we should work to revitalize it" or "I shouldn't have to live in fear when walking down the street, what can we do to mitigate that fear".

Changing attitudes and the environment that produces them takes time.

"Cycling should not be a life-or-death activity" is it though, just like driving a car is.

If you're in a car and you get hit by a car you have much stronger legal protection than if you're mowed down by a car when not in one.

Pedestrian? Cyclist? $50 fine.

That you face stiffer penalties for pirating a DVD or smoking a joint speaks to how broken the legal framework is.

In the end, life is strictly a death activity.