Bicycles

[prog]

It may seem strange, given the reasons for it, but recent events have led me to read, write, and think more about bicycling, and I've decided that it's now not entirely unlikely that I will obtain a bike sometime in the nearish future.

An increasing number of friends have taken up cycling as an urban commute alternative over the last couple of years. And I used to do this same thing, way back in Florida, biking to school and around town every day, and I always enjoyed it. When I returned to New England for college (and all that came after) I just never thought of it again, even though I wouldn't start driving for another three years. Your guess is as good as mine. At any rate, I've lately become increasingly aware of all the time I spend walking, and as much as I love walking it'd be nice to be able to go a little faster when I wanted to.

I've started paying more attention to the (many!) cyclists I see every day as I walk around. I responded with skepticism when karlvonl commented earlier that most cyclists ignore traffic signals, but now the anecdotal evidence does seem to be mounting up. The majority of the cyclists I see seem to act as if they're just speedy pedestrians, looking both ways at intersections but then crossing at opportunity, no matter what color the light. I've never really noticed before, and I wonder if this is because most people expect cyclists to act thus.

For the life of me, I can't remember how I myself treated traffic signals back in high school. (I do recall that I rocked the manual turn signals something fierce, and this too is something I see many cyclists not bothering with around here.) I assume that all this stuff may be technically illegal but seldom enforced. The page on the topic at massbike.org basically takes the attutude "Aw, c'mon guys, you really should," and cites silly reasons for stopping (It gives you a chance to rest! If you blow through reds on your bike, you'll start doing it in your car!!).

Anyway, this isn't anything I'm gonna start tomorrow, but it's something interesting.

Comments

[nuns.livejournal.com]

Well, the example I cite is pretty self-evident. One is always less likely to be hit by a car when there are no moving cars present than when there are moving cars present. If you cross the intersection when no one is moving, you are safer than if you wait for the light and cross at the same time as a vehicle that is waiting for the same light.

I will say this to mediate my opinion about situational obedience to traffic law: At least in theory, traffic law IS designed to protect us (even if in some circumstances it fails catastrophically to do so). In cases where a cyclist decides to defy traffic regulations in the name of safety, in my opinion it becomes primarily the cyclist's responsibility if an accident does happen. That is, if when I assess a red light, I believe there is no one coming from any direction and I run the light, if I was wrong and I get hit by a bus I have no one to blame but myself.

Another example is one-way streets. It's pretty clear that my bike takes up the same amount of street no matter which direction I am heading in. If I am going in the approved direction, I am forced to hope that any cars sharing the street with me will see me. If I am riding the wrong way, I take the same amount of space (so I inconvenience no one), and now I can see any cars even in the unlikely event they don't see me. Two sets of vigilant eyes are more likely to prevent collisions than one set.

In this case, if I DO collide with an oncoming car, I consider it to be my fault, unless the driver was drunk or blindfolded or something equally unlikely. A more likely problem about which I would feel profound guilt, is if I ram into some unsuspecting pedestrian looked only in the direction from which traffic was expected, who then stepped in front of my bike.

I have no patience for cyclists (or anyone else) who run red lights without looking, or who run them despite the presence of competing traffic. I feel pretty strongly that in most circumstances, bikes should stay off the damn sidewalk.

In general, I think there are circumstances under which it's safer to deviate from traffic law, but in doing so, the cyclist assumes a much-increased burden of responsibility for any accidents that should happen during the deviation.

[radtea.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the long and considered responses. We disagree on the self-evidency of the situation you cite. As I see it, the contingency tree looks like this:

Situation 1) Cyclist runs red light after having made visual inspection and...
a) with probability P1a cyclist was right and all is well
b) with probability P1b cyclist was wrong and bad things happen due to collision with or avoidance by an unexpected car moving at relatively high speed

Situation 2) Cyclist waits at light and crosses while car is also crossing (or turning into cyclist's path.) There is some probability P2 that something bad will happen in this case.

It is not obvious to me that P1b is less than P2. There is no situation in reality where P1b goes to zero, so it is always a matter of comparing "cyclist blows through light with some probability of getting hit by a fast-moving car they don't know is there" vs "cyclist stops at light with some probability of getting hit by a slow-moving car they do know is there."

Ergo, in both cases there is always risk, and particularly given the respective speeds of the cars involved it seems to me self-evident that the overall risk of death or serious injury is higher in situation 1 than situation 2.

This is why I wondered about data--there could well be some out there, from red light cameras or something. When opposing conclusions seem equally obvious to intelligent people, the only way to decide the issue sensibly is to appeal to the evidence. We can wave our hands about the plausibility of different scenarios as long as we like and I think it unlikely either of us will convince the other of anything. Data, though, I could be convinced by.

I'm fortunate that where I live there is almost always the option of waiting until the intersection is clear of cars, and then crossing. I appreciate that in a busy urban area this won't in general be possible, though.

[nuns.livejournal.com]

Yes, I see what you mean. I think a large part of my position is based on a personal preference that if I am going to be injured, I would prefer it be MY fault.

I'm not aware of any data - in fact, I doubt there is any data, because too many of us consider our positions to be self-evident. Opinions are strong enough, and rationalizable enough (I made up the word rationalizable just now - for the moment I am pretty proud of it) to make research seem unnecessary. Of course, research is NOT unnecessary. I would love to see some data, if we could convince the relevant agencies to gather it.

Unfortunately, too many people in positions of power consider cyclists to be at best expendable and sometimes actually targets. Once in Pittsburgh (and to stave off the question, at the time I was actually conforming exactly to traffic law in that city), I was sideswiped by a bus. Pedestrians applauded the bus driver, because the general perception is that all cyclists deserve to be hit by buses. This perception hinders pretty much every aspect of traffic-relations as they intersect with cycling. Including, I suspect, the willingness to fund research.

[radtea.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I see where you're coming from. My experience as a cyclist hasn't been nearly so bad. I've had more bad experiences as a pedestrian than as a cyclist, although that's probably simply due to the higher mobility a bike gives you, so you can dodge out of the way of cars nosing out into intersections and the like.

On the red light thing, I found this article fascinating: he advises everything, up to and including lying your bike down on the sensor to activate a green light. But he never once suggests that you pedestrianize, which is what I always do in these situations, and which seems to me entirely reasonable.

I also think it's weird that the cyclists in the first picture are all clustered in the turning lane, rather than lined up in single file along the right edge of the through lane, where they belong. I guess in an environment where cyclists are harassed by drivers, they will tend to adopt avoidance strategies that implicitly cede the road to cars. Which sucks.

[radtea.livejournal.com]

Doesn't address the red light issue, but has some interesting data and results. That there is no sex difference in cycling risk is surprising. It's also interesting that riding on the sidewalk is high-risk compared to on the road.