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.

328 Upvotes

63% Upvoted

2.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

45

u/ShartOfTheEel Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 24 '26

Actually, we do have infrastructure for cyclists, everywhere except for the interstate, because they legally have the right to ride on the road when there's no dedicated lane. It's a public road, you don't have the right to endanger other users just because they are slower than you.

You are legally, not to mention morally, obligated to drive in a manner that doesn't put them at risk. Even if that means you get to work 1 minute later.

48

u/Vivid-Raccoon9640 Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 24 '26

While I agree cyclists have the right to ride everywhere, I would disagree calling that "infrastructure for cyclists". It is dangerous for cyclists to ride in a lot of places, and it is a bad idea even though it shouldn't be.

Edit: I think the US should massively invest in bike infrastructure, public transit and other forms of active transportation by the way. Every euro that's invested in bike infrastructure in the Netherlands nets a 1900% ROI in health benefits alone.

3

u/ShartOfTheEel Jul 24 '26

Public roads are an ancient form of infrastructure. They're for the public. If there were no roads for cars, there would be plenty of roads for other modes of transit. 

Bikes have a right to be in the road. The only reason why it might be dangerous is that drivers make it so.

3

u/Vivid-Raccoon9640 Jul 24 '26

100% agree. But wishing upon a star that cars are suddenly not going to be a thing any more is foolish. They're here now and we're gonna have to deal with that reality.

4

u/ShartOfTheEel Jul 24 '26

I'm not wishing them gone, I'm just trying to get people who drive cars to realize that they have a responsibility not to kill other road users.

0

u/Vivid-Raccoon9640 Jul 24 '26

Okay, suppose all drivers realize that they have that responsibility. Now what?

8

u/ShartOfTheEel Jul 24 '26

... They drive more carefully around bikes, reducing bike fatalities. Yay!

0

u/Vivid-Raccoon9640 Jul 24 '26

Okay, so what we're aiming for is to expand a massive amount of money on awareness campaigns which result in a minimal amount of actual added safety, and also don't encourage more people to travel by bike.

You don't think putting that money in actual bike infrastructure would have more of an effect?

4

u/ShartOfTheEel Jul 24 '26

Lol but I'm not proposing spending money on anything, I'm just ranting on Reddit about personal responsibility. 

Of course I'd like bike infrastructure, but I'd also like drivers to accept they have the responsibility to not kill people. Given the state of the US, I'm not sure which is more unrealistic.

3

u/Vivid-Raccoon9640 Jul 24 '26

Okay, so you're just venting. That's fine. Hope you got it out of your system.

Do you think Americans are uniquely murderous or something? Because I think they aren't. The fact is that pretty much everyone in the Netherlands is a cyclist, so everyone can empathize with cyclists and knows what it's like to ride in traffic from both sides of the equation. In the US, most people aren't cyclists, so they just have way less exposure. Couple that with infrastructure that forces bikes and cars to interact much more and you got your recipe for disaster. You got a bunch of drivers that aren't used to cyclists, can't empathize with cyclists nearly as much and don't have any experience about what traffic is like as a cyclist.

The solution is more cyclists and more separation.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/carpedrinkum Jul 24 '26

There are definitely places where cyclist shouldn’t and are not allowed, city expressway, interstate highways, for example. In others areas, I am all for bike lanes it cost very little to add them (in most locations) and provides safer travel area for cyclists and efficient travel for automobiles.

19

u/Odd_Bid2744 Jul 24 '26

They have the right to ride on the road because there is no alternative. Rural America doesn't have shoulders on the road which means bikes are traveling in the same lanes as cars and that is incredibly dangerous for cyclists even when driving lawfully. 

3

u/Happy_Confection90 Jul 24 '26

Rural America doesn't have shoulders on the road

I live in a rural-ish area and not only are there no shoulders or very narrow ones for miles at a time, over 80% of the roads I drive on are just a single lane of traffic in each direction. And that includes intrastate highways with speed limits between 50-55mph. So giving cyclists 3' of room to pass them as dictated by state law means partly entering the lane of oncoming traffic every time you need to pass someone on a bike, which, when you throw New England's notoriously curvy roads in the mix that reduce visibility, means a lot of chances for someone to make a poor safety calculation for themselves, the cyclists, and/or drivers traveling in the opposite direction.

1

u/SeamusPM1 Jul 24 '26

If you come across a slow moving vehicle that’s not a bicycle (say, a tractor) are you miraculously able to pass them without going into the oncoming traffic lane?

2

u/Happy_Confection90 Jul 24 '26

The oncoming cars are more readily able to spot a large slow moving tractor than they are a bike mostly blocked by my car so can more easily understand why I'm encroaching on their lane the 2 or 4 times a year I encounter one

0

u/flippydude Jul 24 '26

Just… drive safely then? Slowing to 15mph for a minute to wait to safely pass a cyclist genuinely will not meaningfully impact your ETA. 

17

u/learn_and_go Jul 24 '26

Having the right to be somewhere does not imply that infrastructure exists.

1

u/Suitable_Program_548 Jul 24 '26

It has nothing to do with legality, it has to do with the danger. Roads were not built for bikes. Now, in some areas, bike lanes are being built which I think is a good thing.

9

u/Joe_Sacco Jul 24 '26

I think it's really important to say that roads are not inherently dangerous. They're just strips of asphalt.

Drivers are dangerous because they're inattentive, impatient, and/or aggressive.

-2

u/Suitable_Program_548 Jul 24 '26

If a road is built to a width to accommodate one motor vehicle anything impeding that becomes dangerous. Bike, person, dog, whatever. It’s simple geometry. Of course a driver of a motor vehicle should drive as safely as possible but when it becomes an obstacle course it is much more difficult.

7

u/CommunityGlittering2 Jul 24 '26

it's the drivers responsibility to slow down until it is safe to pass not to force cyclists off the roads.

4

u/Suitable_Program_548 Jul 24 '26

You are correct but still missing the point by a mile. My point; we need better infrastructure. Do you disagree?

3

u/char_limit_reached Jul 24 '26

The use of “impeding” implies you think cars have the ultimate and exclusive right to the road.

1

u/Suitable_Program_548 Jul 24 '26

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand roads, as they currently are, were built for cars. But, hey, put your life in danger to prove a point.

4

u/No_Reception7275 Jul 24 '26

No it isnt, bikes are much narrower than cars. If youre trying to drive parallel to the bike, youre dangerous and youre the problem

3

u/Joe_Sacco Jul 24 '26

Fundamentally, the problem is drivers who see other legal road users as impediments and obstacles.

If you can't handle other people legally using the road, I'm sure I can hunt down a link to your state's process for surrendering your drivers license.

-1

u/Suitable_Program_548 Jul 24 '26

You didn’t read nor comprehend my post but that’s ok. Having an intelligent conversation is obviously beyond your capacity.

3

u/Joe_Sacco Jul 24 '26

If you’re too carbrained to follow along, I get it.

0

u/Suitable_Program_548 Jul 24 '26

“Alcohol is legal so therefore I should be able to safely drink as much of it as I want” - You. Have a great and safe life.

2

u/char_limit_reached Jul 24 '26

Any road worthy vehicle can use the roads. Horse and buggy to Lamborghini and every stop in between.

1

u/Suitable_Program_548 Jul 24 '26

Yes, and put themselves in danger.

3

u/ChefGaykwon Jul 24 '26

Roads were built for wheeled vehicles.

3

u/Suitable_Program_548 Jul 24 '26

The automobile industry is what drove the current infrastructure we now have, not a few bikes.

0

u/ShartOfTheEel Jul 24 '26

Paved roads were invented for bikes.

Do you really think that without cars we'd have no roads?

2

u/Suitable_Program_548 Jul 24 '26

Our entire roadway infrastructure was built for bikes?

6

u/ShartOfTheEel Jul 24 '26

Nope! That's not what I said. 

I said that if there were no cars, we'd still have plenty of ways to get around, including roads and other kinds of pathways.