Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

Ride For Your Life

Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

Ride For Your Life

Old 11-30-22, 06:17 PM
  #26  
jon c. 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 4,383
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1299 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 604 Times in 325 Posts
Originally Posted by Daniel4 View Post
I would think that legally, 'not see' the victim is an admission of guilt and negligence or carelessness.
Sure. And the penalty is generally a citation for failure to yield. Even in the case of a fatal accident. At least in the US.


from the earlier linked abstract:

Humans routinely miss important information that is ‘right in front of our eyes’, from overlooking typos in a paper to failing to see a cyclist in an intersection. Recent studies on these ‘Looked But Failed To See’ (LBFTS) errors point to a common mechanism underlying these failures, whether the missed item was an unexpected gorilla, the clearly defined target of a visual search, or that simple typo. We argue that normal blindness is the by-product of the limited-capacity prediction engine that is our visual system. The processes that evolved to allow us to move through the world with ease are virtually guaranteed to cause us to miss some significant stimuli, especially in important tasks like driving and medical image perception.

Worth considering. The research is nascent so not much is really known but there is at least a suggestion that these are actual processing errors in the brain.

But whatever you may believe the one thing we do know is pull outs happen frequently. And will continue. So you have to ride like they don't see you.
jon c. is online now  
Likes For jon c.:
Old 12-01-22, 06:58 AM
  #27  
Trakhak
Senior Member
 
Trakhak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 3,600
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1398 Post(s)
Liked 1,393 Times in 807 Posts
This thread dovetails nicely with the "assertiveness training" thread. JoeyBikes is right. You can insist on your rights as a cyclist and argue that drivers are idiots if doing so makes you feel better. And you'll get away with riding accordingly most of the time. Which lulls you into thinking that you can and should ride assertively all the time.

As cxwrench is fond of saying; wrong.

Old but good:

Trakhak is offline  
Old 12-01-22, 01:39 PM
  #28  
JoeyBike
20+mph Commuter
 
JoeyBike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New Orleans, LA USA
Posts: 7,154

Bikes: Surly LHT, a folding bike, and a beater.

Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1221 Post(s)
Liked 163 Times in 112 Posts
Originally Posted by 1989Pre View Post
I am willing to concede that the decision to "not see" a cycle with rider could be somewhat of a sub-conscious decision, but it nevertheless indicates a dangerous state of mental disturbance and incapacity.
Now you're THINKING!

Humans are imperfect beings, some FAR more imperfect than others. There is no "DECISION" not to see a cyclist. The human brain gets bored easily and goes off chasing butterflies in a pasture. Something as boring as driving a motor vehicle (except NASCAR or figure 8 track racing) puts many brains to sleep early and often. And few motorists are stunt car drivers who can react in fractions of a second anyway.

So, as you stated above, some motorists are in a dangerous state of mind and incapacity. If you THINK about this every time you go for a ride you will be much better off than assuming every motorist is paying strict "fighter pilot" attention to the road ahead of them. Their eyes may be on the road but their minds are laying out on the beach somewhere.

Enjoy your next ride!

Cheers.
JoeyBike is offline  
Old 12-01-22, 04:30 PM
  #29  
LV2TNDM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Northern CA
Posts: 647

Bikes: Cannondale tandems: '92 Road, '97 Mtn. Mongoose 10.9 Ti, Kelly Deluxe, Tommaso Chorus, Cdale MT2000, Schwinn Deluxe Cruiser, Torker Unicycle, among others.

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 229 Post(s)
Liked 161 Times in 101 Posts
If you're going to require this for cyclists, you should also include the same for pedestrians and children playing outside:

"Walking on your two feet has inherent dangers, and as the operator of my body I acknowledge that I know the risks of injury and death, and accept these risks before I take my first step."

"Playing outside has inherent dangers, and as a child playing outside I acknowledge that I know the risks of injury and death, and accept these risks before I pursue any activity outside."


And since drivers have been known to fly off the road and smash through houses, people sleeping should probably agree to the same assumption of risk:

"Sleeping in my bed in my room has inherent dangers, and as a person sleeping in my home, I acknowledge that I know the risks of injury and death, and accept these risks before I go to sleep."

Do you see where I'm going with this? I could compose a list like this a mile long. How far must we go to accommodate irresponsible, dangerous and homicidal drivers? How many steps must WE take to avoid being killed by people operating powerful, massive machinery irresponsibly?

I say put the onus on the DRIVERS! It is not MY responsibility to avoid the asses in their cars endangering us all. I shouldn't have to worry about a car flying through my wall as I sleep! It's THEIR responsibility to obey the law and respect the safety and lives of others. This isn't too much to ask! This is simply acting like civilized people!

Remember when we were all told "driving is not a right" when we got our licenses? Well, for all intents and purposes, it sure is! And your post only supports this.

Let's not go overboard here.
LV2TNDM is offline  
Old 12-01-22, 04:47 PM
  #30  
Daniel4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,335

Bikes: Sekine 1979 ten speed racer

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1405 Post(s)
Liked 549 Times in 373 Posts
Some people think that drivers are an independent and uncontrollable force of nature, like gravity, we have to live with, adapt to and accommodate.

If humans are far from perfect, then why are driver licences so easy to obtain and why aren't traffic enforcement stricter? If humans are far from perfect, then shouldn't it be that only the best should be on the road operating such dangerous machines?

Which boils down to the question again, why is bad driving an acceptable norm that the rest of us have to accommodate and adapt?
Daniel4 is offline  
Old 12-02-22, 12:11 PM
  #31  
JoeyBike
20+mph Commuter
 
JoeyBike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New Orleans, LA USA
Posts: 7,154

Bikes: Surly LHT, a folding bike, and a beater.

Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1221 Post(s)
Liked 163 Times in 112 Posts
Originally Posted by Daniel4 View Post
Which boils down to the question again, why is bad driving an acceptable norm that the rest of us have to accommodate and adapt?
It's called Democracy. Most voters, by far, are motorists. Many of them unqualified to operate high speed machinery IMO.

Last edited by JoeyBike; 12-02-22 at 12:36 PM.
JoeyBike is offline  
Old 12-02-22, 12:22 PM
  #32  
JoeyBike
20+mph Commuter
 
JoeyBike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New Orleans, LA USA
Posts: 7,154

Bikes: Surly LHT, a folding bike, and a beater.

Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1221 Post(s)
Liked 163 Times in 112 Posts
Originally Posted by LV2TNDM View Post
If you're going to require this for cyclists, you should also include the same for pedestrians and children playing outside:

"Walking on your two feet [ IN A HIGHWAY TRAVEL LANE ] has inherent dangers, and as the operator of my body I acknowledge that I know the risks of injury and death, and accept these risks before I take my first step [ IN A HIGHWAY TRAVEL LANE ]."

"Playing outside [ IN A HIGHWAY TRAVEL LANE ] has inherent dangers, and as a child playing outside I acknowledge that I know the risks of injury and death, and accept these risks before I pursue any activity outside [ IN A HIGHWAY TRAVEL LANE ]."


"Sleeping in my bed [ IN A HIGHWAY TRAVEL LANE ] has inherent dangers, and as a person sleeping [ IN A HIGHWAY TRAVEL LANE ], I acknowledge that I know the risks of injury and death, and accept these risks before I go to sleep [ IN A HIGHWAY TRAVEL LANE ]."
Nice Straw Man argument.

I fixed it for you in [RED] text. I'm fairly certain that riding a bike in your bedroom is relatively safe. It's when you line yourself up at 15mph with the hood ornaments of steel leviathans traveling 35+ mph or faster that we get into trouble. Sure a meteorite could hit me in my office right now, but not likely.

I especially like your "Playing Outside" straw man! Yes, playing outside IN TRAFFIC has inherent dangers. If your toddlers/children play outside IN TRAFFIC, perhaps someone better suited should be raising them? Cyclists by nature appear to be "playing in traffic" to many motorists. Your hobby is in their way as they conduct their "business". This mindset sure doesn't promote safe passes.

( And BTW...if you are cycling at 10-15 mph on a highway with speed limits 55-70 mph, the speed differential between bike and car is similar to sleeping in the travel lane. To a Tacoma traveling at 55+ mph, you are a stationary object. Would you park a lawn chair on the fog line of a 60+mph highway and take a nap? Why not? That's basically what's happening anyway. Just wear your high visibility neon kit! You'll be just fine )

Last edited by JoeyBike; 12-03-22 at 11:12 AM.
JoeyBike is offline  
Old 12-03-22, 05:28 AM
  #33  
hevysrf
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 86
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked 50 Times in 20 Posts
Originally Posted by Daniel4 View Post
You seem to have absolved motorists from any responsibility.

Nowhere in your post includes anything that says motorists have to have awareness how dangerous they are and how they pose risks to not only vulnerable road users but also to other drivers and occupants inside buildings when they smash their vehicles into them.

When motorists take safe driving seriously, the risks and dangers everyone else experiences drop dramatically.

It's my responsibility to understand that everyone driving an automobile is distracted to some extent, that's reality. The danger to riders will only increase as infotainment and driverless capability increase.
hevysrf is offline  
Old 12-03-22, 06:04 AM
  #34  
1989Pre
Standard Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Brunswick, Maine
Posts: 3,284

Bikes: 1948 P. Barnard & Son, 1962 Rudge Sports, 1963 Freddie Grubb Routier, 1980 Manufrance Hirondelle, 1983 F. Moser Sprint, 1989 Raleigh Technium Pre, 2001 Raleigh M80

Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 893 Post(s)
Liked 237 Times in 150 Posts
Originally Posted by jon c. View Post
We argue that normal blindness is the by-product of the limited-capacity prediction engine that is our visual system.
I realize this is a quote from someone else, not you, but I would like to replace the term "normal blindness" with the term "selective blindness".
1989Pre is offline  
Old 01-05-23, 05:24 AM
  #35  
GiAllen
Newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2022
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Great article, thanks!
GiAllen is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.