Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> being angry about cyclists just existing.

I don't like some cyclists because of their blatant and unsafe disregard for the rules.

It's not uncommon to see:

- Cyclists ignoring red lights

- Cyclists ignoring stop signs

- Cyclists riding on a busy sidewalk

- Cyclists yelling at pedestrians to move rather than stopping at an intersection as required

- Cyclists taking up the entire lane and not permitting cars to pass

- Cyclists going the wrong way down a one-way street

Some of the worst offenders are e-bike users, who can move very fast and in unexpected ways. It's no fun to have someone silently fly by you from behind, inches away, at 20mph while they are riding what's basically a motorcycle on the sidewalk.

I frequently walk in the city, and scooters/bicycles are far more of a hazard than cars. They often can't decide whether they want to be pedestrians or cars, and they often don't follow the rules for either, putting everyone (including themselves) at risk.



> Cyclists taking up the entire lane and not permitting cars to pass

This is explicitly permitted in most places and is often the only safe thing to do. In a situation like that, if you can't overtake such a bike (or car, or tractor) safely, you must wait until it is safe. The bike (or car or tractor) has the right to the entire lane.


> scooters/bicycles are far more of a hazard than cars

No they're not, because they carry an order of magnitude less kinetic energy.

> Cyclists taking up the entire lane and not permitting cars to pass

as they fucking should, this is the safest thing to do, you're in a metal box and if I let you pass you'll do it too fast and too close

> Cyclists ignoring red lights > Cyclists ignoring stop signs

In civilized places bikes are explicitly allowed to treat red lights as stop signs and stop signs as yields.


> > scooters/bicycles are far more of a hazard than cars

> No they're not, because they carry an order of magnitude less kinetic energy.

Yeah, go ahead and tell them that after they hit you on the sidewalk or going the wrong way down a one-way street.


It is not uncommon to see car drivers do all these things, including driving on the pavement/sidewalk.


I cannot remember ever seeing a car deliberately drive on the sidewalk. If you've seen this where you are, then I agree that the cars are clearly more dangerous.


Happens all the time the world over, cars regularly mount the pavement to pass other traffic, or just to take a sneaking shortcut - search on youtube if you have been lucky enough to miss this yourself.

First search result: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iuhblb_9qec


Your first search result made the news.

"mounting the pavement" temporarily isn't the same as driving on it for multiple metres.


I personally count a car driving any distance on a pavement something I don't want to see.

If you claim never to have seen that happen, then you must live in a hugely law abiding place. I live in a small town with a pretty old average age, and I see this regularly here. In London it was worse. Maybe as a cyclist you look out for these things more, or maybe you just get to see them more due to your positioning.


The point is they are not the same thing. Temporarily mounting the pavement at low speed to pass an obstacle isn't the same.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: