Please explain exactly what you mean by “full blown road dictators”, and clearly detail how it is different from “use the road in a completely legal manner in ways trying to keep yourself and others from getting run over by the many car drivers with a sense of entitlement to the road”.
I almost never see cyclists ride in a legal manner. They’re motorized vehicles when its convenient to them and pedestrians when its not. They split lanes, blow through red lights, and they loooooove to go out in big groups and take over the road
They’re motorized vehicles when its convenient to them and pedestrians when its not
Almost like…they’re neither? What you describe here is perfectly legal.
They split lanes
Legal
blow through red lights
Imagine thinking cars don’t 🤣
and they loooooove to go out in big groups
Not remotely against the rules
and take over the road
Please define. Because as someone who has spent many hours in a car, I’ve been prevented from going at the speed I would like to go by other cars far more than bikes. And my life has been put in danger by cars, not by bikes.
The simple fact is that though @makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml claims it’s cyclists being “dictators” and you claim they “take over the road”, the reality is quite the reverse. When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression. And no demographic in our society (excluding socioeconomic and racial discussions) is more privileged than drivers.
Splitting lanes is not legal in the vast majority of the United States but idk where you’re from. It’s very very rare for me to see a car blow through a red light outright. Both cyclists and drivers should be punished for doing so.
I dont have a problem with bikes. I think there should be huge amounts of protected bike lanes so they can have their own lanes, and i think a lot of streets should be declared off-limits to motorized traffic and only allow pedestrians. But I also think that a lot of people who ride bicycles on public roads are some of the biggest assholes out there
Splitting lanes is not legal in the vast majority of the United States but idk where you’re from
Where I am it’s explicitly allowed for motorbikes (at a maximum speed of 30 km/h), thanks to a relatively recent law change. Pushbikes are a different story. There’s no law explicitly allowing it, and this has led to some people (even people in positions of perceived authority, such as the social media team of the Department of Transport and Main Roads) to suggest that it’s not legal for bikes. But the reality is that it is legal, as a necessary side-effect of the fact that cars are allowed to overtake bikes without leaving the same lane. Basically, bikes are allowed to share a lane with another vehicle, and this has the effect of also allowing a bike to come up through congested traffic.
It’s very very rare for me to see a car blow through a red light outright
I find this rather hard to believe. First, remember that an amber light does not mean “be careful” or “get ready, you might have to stop soon”. It means stop right now, if it’s safe. How often have you seen drivers actually do that? I’ve had so many times where, as a driver, I saw the amber and found myself in that awkward position where I didn’t know whether it was appropriate to keep going or to stop, and eventually decided to go through; a situation where it is obviously going to be the case that anyone behind me should stop, because I was on the borderline, so anyone behind me must be well over the other side of the line. And yet, so many times not only has the car behind me gone through, the car behind them did too. And that’s before we even get into the daily cases where they don’t even start to enter the intersection until after it has turned red. I’ve got a mate who rides a motorbike and posts helmet-cam footage on Facebook at least weekly, and every one of his compilations includes at least one case of a driver who runs a fully red light.
For cyclists, recall that there are some places in your own country that explicitly allow cyclists to go through a red light if it’s safe. Not everywhere does (nowhere in Australia, to my knowledge), but those places that allow it do it for a reason. Evidence shows that it makes cyclists safer. Not all lawbreaking is equal, and the evidence pretty clearly tells us that when cyclists break the law, it tends to be for far better reasons than the reasons drivers break the law, even though the rate of lawbreaking is the same.
They’re saying that cars are bigger and stronger than bikes, which makes them able to bully cars, which makes them feel entitled to do so. Because they then feel entitled to the road, they start calling cyclists “dictators” when they are merely using the road.
It’s a shockingly accurate description of behaviour that cyclists face on a daily basis, with drivers threatening their lives for no reason more than that the drivers feel entitled to do so.
Yes. Cars are the bullies and the dictators. But as the famous saying goes, “when you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression”. Drivers like @makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml are pretending that cyclists are the ones being “dictators”, merely for existing, because they perceive that existence as a personal slight against them. Drivers feel entitled, and when that entitlement faces even the slightest pushback, they accuse the others of being dictators.
I didn’t make the original statement, which sounds more like hyperbole than specific, legal, actions.
From experience I can tell you that I have personally encountered cyclists disobeying the law and endangering my safety more than any other non-car transport.
See, I was an endurance rider for most of my life. Meaning I spent long hours, 3-4 days a week on trails, on horseback, moving at speed.
On these trails, cyclists are required to stop and move to the side when they hear or see an equestrian.
The number of times they did this, over 20 years as an equestrian? 4.
The number of times they didn’t? Dozens, possibly over a hundred.
The number of times it caused a wreck and people got hurt? 3.
Cyclists whine about horse poop and having to stop, but WE maintained those trails, they did nothing other than whine and cause accidents.
I’m sure there’s some of you that are not complete tools, but there’s a reason you are despised by all other users of trail systems.
I can’t speak for horses. I’ve only once in my life encountered people on horses while on a bike. It’s an exceedingly unusual scenario.
I can tell you that, as a matter of fact (not anecdote), drivers and cyclists break the law at roughly the same rate. But that in crashes between cars and bikes, the car is the responsible party in 80% of cases. And that studies have established that when cyclists break the law, it is overwhelmingly done in the interest of their own safety, while drivers break the law in the interest of perceived convenience.
I only realised after writing the above that that you mentioned “trails”. Sounds like you’re talking about mountain biking. I can’t speak to that, I’m almost exclusively a roadie, using the bike either as a means of transport or for exercise/training on the road. Saying “you” doesn’t really work here. The amount of overlap between mountain bikers and road bikers is surprisingly small.
Please explain exactly what you mean by “full blown road dictators”, and clearly detail how it is different from “use the road in a completely legal manner in ways trying to keep yourself and others from getting run over by the many car drivers with a sense of entitlement to the road”.
I almost never see cyclists ride in a legal manner. They’re motorized vehicles when its convenient to them and pedestrians when its not. They split lanes, blow through red lights, and they loooooove to go out in big groups and take over the road
Almost like…they’re neither? What you describe here is perfectly legal.
Legal
Imagine thinking cars don’t 🤣
Not remotely against the rules
Please define. Because as someone who has spent many hours in a car, I’ve been prevented from going at the speed I would like to go by other cars far more than bikes. And my life has been put in danger by cars, not by bikes.
The simple fact is that data tells us cyclists and drivers break the law at roughly the same rate at worst. (Incidentally, one study from a place with better infrastructure shows that when good infrastructure is in place, cyclists break the law considerably less often than drivers.) Studies also show that cyclists break the law to keep themselves safe (this has been backed up by multiple studies). When drivers break the law, it’s because they think it’s more convenient not to bother.
The simple fact is that though @makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml claims it’s cyclists being “dictators” and you claim they “take over the road”, the reality is quite the reverse. When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression. And no demographic in our society (excluding socioeconomic and racial discussions) is more privileged than drivers.
Splitting lanes is not legal in the vast majority of the United States but idk where you’re from. It’s very very rare for me to see a car blow through a red light outright. Both cyclists and drivers should be punished for doing so.
I dont have a problem with bikes. I think there should be huge amounts of protected bike lanes so they can have their own lanes, and i think a lot of streets should be declared off-limits to motorized traffic and only allow pedestrians. But I also think that a lot of people who ride bicycles on public roads are some of the biggest assholes out there
Where I am it’s explicitly allowed for motorbikes (at a maximum speed of 30 km/h), thanks to a relatively recent law change. Pushbikes are a different story. There’s no law explicitly allowing it, and this has led to some people (even people in positions of perceived authority, such as the social media team of the Department of Transport and Main Roads) to suggest that it’s not legal for bikes. But the reality is that it is legal, as a necessary side-effect of the fact that cars are allowed to overtake bikes without leaving the same lane. Basically, bikes are allowed to share a lane with another vehicle, and this has the effect of also allowing a bike to come up through congested traffic.
I find this rather hard to believe. First, remember that an amber light does not mean “be careful” or “get ready, you might have to stop soon”. It means stop right now, if it’s safe. How often have you seen drivers actually do that? I’ve had so many times where, as a driver, I saw the amber and found myself in that awkward position where I didn’t know whether it was appropriate to keep going or to stop, and eventually decided to go through; a situation where it is obviously going to be the case that anyone behind me should stop, because I was on the borderline, so anyone behind me must be well over the other side of the line. And yet, so many times not only has the car behind me gone through, the car behind them did too. And that’s before we even get into the daily cases where they don’t even start to enter the intersection until after it has turned red. I’ve got a mate who rides a motorbike and posts helmet-cam footage on Facebook at least weekly, and every one of his compilations includes at least one case of a driver who runs a fully red light.
For cyclists, recall that there are some places in your own country that explicitly allow cyclists to go through a red light if it’s safe. Not everywhere does (nowhere in Australia, to my knowledge), but those places that allow it do it for a reason. Evidence shows that it makes cyclists safer. Not all lawbreaking is equal, and the evidence pretty clearly tells us that when cyclists break the law, it tends to be for far better reasons than the reasons drivers break the law, even though the rate of lawbreaking is the same.
Well you see, cars go faster and are stronger, so by being in the road you are a road dictator.
I honestly don’t understand what you’re trying to say, but then again I’m stoned out of my gourd.
Could you rephrase it so an idiot would understand?
They’re saying that cars are bigger and stronger than bikes, which makes them able to bully cars, which makes them feel entitled to do so. Because they then feel entitled to the road, they start calling cyclists “dictators” when they are merely using the road.
It’s a shockingly accurate description of behaviour that cyclists face on a daily basis, with drivers threatening their lives for no reason more than that the drivers feel entitled to do so.
I still don’t follow the logic… Wouldn’t the bigger vehicle be more able to bully the other?
Yes. Cars are the bullies and the dictators. But as the famous saying goes, “when you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression”. Drivers like @makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml are pretending that cyclists are the ones being “dictators”, merely for existing, because they perceive that existence as a personal slight against them. Drivers feel entitled, and when that entitlement faces even the slightest pushback, they accuse the others of being dictators.
I think that’s sarcasm
No, I think it’s something about dictating the speed but the cars can pass unless the bikers are deliberately blocking the drive by.
I don’t get it.
As a cyclist, I’d have to guess “riding two abreast when there’s a car behind you.”
Found the cyclist.
Would you like to try answering the questions?
I’m still waiting for an answer from @makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml.
I didn’t make the original statement, which sounds more like hyperbole than specific, legal, actions.
From experience I can tell you that I have personally encountered cyclists disobeying the law and endangering my safety more than any other non-car transport.
See, I was an endurance rider for most of my life. Meaning I spent long hours, 3-4 days a week on trails, on horseback, moving at speed.
On these trails, cyclists are required to stop and move to the side when they hear or see an equestrian.
The number of times they did this, over 20 years as an equestrian? 4.
The number of times they didn’t? Dozens, possibly over a hundred.
The number of times it caused a wreck and people got hurt? 3.
Cyclists whine about horse poop and having to stop, but WE maintained those trails, they did nothing other than whine and cause accidents.
I’m sure there’s some of you that are not complete tools, but there’s a reason you are despised by all other users of trail systems.
I can’t speak for horses. I’ve only once in my life encountered people on horses while on a bike. It’s an exceedingly unusual scenario.
I can tell you that, as a matter of fact (not anecdote), drivers and cyclists break the law at roughly the same rate. But that in crashes between cars and bikes, the car is the responsible party in 80% of cases. And that studies have established that when cyclists break the law, it is overwhelmingly done in the interest of their own safety, while drivers break the law in the interest of perceived convenience.
I only realised after writing the above that that you mentioned “trails”. Sounds like you’re talking about mountain biking. I can’t speak to that, I’m almost exclusively a roadie, using the bike either as a means of transport or for exercise/training on the road. Saying “you” doesn’t really work here. The amount of overlap between mountain bikers and road bikers is surprisingly small.