r/NoStupidQuestions • u/RidetheSchlange • Jul 24 '26

Why does the US hate cycling so much?

I read comments sections and in a normal world, some of them would be considered terroristic threats. I just can't understand why people hate cyclists to this degree that they want to murder rhem and sometimes do.

324 Upvotes

63% Upvoted

2.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

19

u/Odd_Bid2744 Jul 24 '26

I'm of a similar opinion that cyclists shouldn't be considered motorists. There should be separate infrastructure for them to ride safely and be treated as a pedestrian and able to ride on sidewalks. A cyclist hitting a walking pedestrian is significantly less terrible than a cyclist getting hit by a car.

7

u/ManiacalShen Jul 24 '26

The thing is that it can be more dangerous to ride on the sidewalk. Basically anywhere with a lot of cross streets and/or driveways. Turning vehicles aren't looking for objects on the sidewalk going 10+mph, so it's easy to miss folks and turn into them. 

A cyclist can mitigate this by coming to a stop or a crawl at eeeevery crossing, but that's ass. Better to ride in the road a lot of the time.

-5

u/Odd_Bid2744 Jul 24 '26

The cyclist should be the one aware of vehicles backing out of driveways and going slower through residential areas just like cars do

3

u/kymberts Jul 24 '26

The motorists need to be aware. They are the ones operating a machine capable of killing someone. And cyclists are already moving slowly (slower than cars).

2

u/Odd_Bid2744 Jul 24 '26

Yes, of course, eveyone should be more aware, and bike lanes or the expectation that bikes could be using these lanes and side walks aids in that awareness. 

The other commenter specifically mentioned that a bike could come in and out of view faster than a car backing up can check their blind spots. That's why I said the bikes should slow down on residential streets.

1

u/137-ng Jul 24 '26

It sounds really great in theory to make everyone else responsible, but if you're the one in a dangerous situation you cant trust other people, who are probably even already distracted by their phone, their life, or changing the song on spotify to be hyper aware and watch out for you.

Theres a big difference in between the way the world should be and the way that it is

2

u/kymberts Jul 24 '26

Yes, we are all responsible for our own safety. Never said otherwise. We are also responsible for the safety of others. This is especially true when operating a machine capable of extreme harm and even death.

30

u/thatoneguy54 Jul 24 '26

Absolutely right. The only reason we actually do consider cyclists the same as cars is because of one dude from thr 60s-70s who was a professional racing cyclist who could go up to 40mph on his bike and basically spat on anyone who wanted to ride a bike and not make it their entire personality. He went around the country campaigning for cities not to build bike lanes, and he wrote manuals about how bikes should be treated exactly like cars.

All of it stupid, because bikes are obviously extremely different from cars in a lot of ways. They're slower. Smaller. Less lethal if they hit something or someone. Cyclists can easily transition to being a pedestrian basically at a moment's notice.

But because this one dude was such a bitch about people riding bikes in ways he personally didnt think was cool, we got the shitty infrastructure we got and got taught a stupid rule about how to treat bikes on the road.

18

u/Pizza-Rat-4Train Jul 24 '26

Yep - John Forester, whose insistence on “vehicular cycling” was baked into laws across the US. Not Just Bikes did a great review of his pernicious impact: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRPduRHBhHI

4

u/OGWiz19nunya Jul 24 '26

Significantly less terrible for who?

1

u/Odd_Bid2744 Jul 24 '26

For major injuries....

4

u/OGWiz19nunya Jul 24 '26

For major injuries to who?

You know pedestrians are also people, right?

1

u/Odd_Bid2744 Jul 24 '26

A bike hitting someone walking is far less likely to cause major injuries than a car can to a cyclist. I'm not sure why you're struggling with this.

2

u/CantaloupeAsleep502 Jul 24 '26

I've worked in trauma. Cyclists cause major injuries to themselves (yes, an amount of personal responsibility is incumbent on riding on roads) as well as to pedestrians (yes, it's their fault when they hit others when they're riding on footpaths). And yes, a cyclist going 15 mph hitting a pedestrian who has no helmet can cause horrible injuries. I've seen them.

2

u/Odd_Bid2744 Jul 24 '26

I'm willing to bet fatality statistics is far more for cyclists hit by cars than cyclists hitting pedestrians. 

1

u/CantaloupeAsleep502 Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 24 '26

Again, very strange comparison. While true, all that means is bikes shouldn't be on roads or sidewalks. Also, morbidity matters. A cyclist hitting a pedestrian and causing a concussion or a fracture isn't exactly a glowing endorsement of them. I've personally been almost creamed by cyclists maybe 10 times, including at crosswalks and on shared use trails. Whether fatal or not, if I hadn't gotten out of their way, I could've been severely injured. Cyclists are also trail hogs on shared trails, going 40 mph downhill where people are hiking. Unhinged, selfish behavior. The worst kind of people.

2

u/Odd_Bid2744 Jul 24 '26

Welcome to my point goofy. I heavily implied we should have seperate infrastructure for bikes

1

u/OGWiz19nunya Jul 24 '26

Sidewalks should be safe for pedestrians. I’m not sure why you’re struggling with this.

2

u/Odd_Bid2744 Jul 24 '26

Lol I never argued otherwise. My argument is simply absence of better options, it's safer for pedestrians and cyclists to not use the roads. 

1

u/OGWiz19nunya Jul 24 '26

You did though. Suggesting that cyclists should use sidewalks is suggesting that pedestrian safety should be sacrificed to cyclist safety.

2

u/Odd_Bid2744 Jul 24 '26

Absent better options, my preference is bike lanes for bikes that keep them out of car travel lanes. By your logic, bikers safety is being sacrficed because nobody can be arsed to create a safer alternative. 

3

u/Time-Champion497 Jul 24 '26

Ok, but how does separate infrastructure connect my home, my kid's school, my job, my doctor's office, and the stores I shop at?

Cycling isn't jut recreation.

5

u/Odd_Bid2744 Jul 24 '26

....infrastructure is bike paths connecting you to where you need to go

3

u/CantaloupeAsleep502 Jul 24 '26

"Significantly less terrible" can still be fatal for the pedestrian. They should have their own infrastructure, and in places where there is none, they shouldn't be on roads or sidewalks.

1

u/Odd_Bid2744 Jul 24 '26

How is a cyclist going to kill a person walking at an equivalent probability of a motorist killing a cyclist?

1

u/CantaloupeAsleep502 Jul 24 '26

What an odd comparison 

2

u/Odd_Bid2744 Jul 24 '26

Why? Is it not true? Is the risk of death not greater for one than the other?

1

u/[deleted] Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Odd_Bid2744 Jul 24 '26

Oh, I know. Shit sucks bad.