10 ms·

US Cities Are Becoming More Dangerous for Cyclists and Pedestrians

220 points by kirion25 8y ago

dsfyu404ed 8y ago
No (edit: quantitative, you'd think that stipulation would be obvious because we're on HN) mention of increase in popularity of cycling for one's commute (seems to be up year over year in my unscientific observation)? I even skimmed the linked articles and they also seem to only be counting deaths, not deaths per anything. That doesn't tell us anything useful. This entire article is hand-wavy. I'm sure if everyone who currently rides a bicycle to work went out and started commuting via skateboard tomorrow we'd have a heck of a lot more skateboard fatalities. Also worth mentioning that this is an op-ed so it is not subject to normal journalistic standards (however low they may sometimes be).
- bryanlarsen 8y ago
  Pedestrian deaths have increased by a lot more than cyclist deaths, I don't think the number of pedestrians has significantly changed.
- benwad 8y ago
  3rd paragraph: > More people are being killed because cities are encouraging residents to walk and bike, but their roads are still dominated by fast-moving vehicular traffic. As my research has shown, this shifting mix can be deadly.
- paganel 8y ago
  I think the increase in the number of pedestrian deaths is also caused by the increase in the number of SUVs/CUVs and an increase in the size of cars generally speaking. Bigger cars -> more pedestrian deaths looks like a decent enough "correlation is causation" for me.
- badfrog 8y ago
  > No mention of increase in popularity of cycling for one's commute It's right in the introduction: > As cities strive to improve the quality of life for their residents, many are working to promote walking and biking [...] > More people are being killed because cities are encouraging residents to walk and bike
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
smoke-alarm 8y ago
The article makes no mention of distracted and inattentive pedestrians. Cities today are safer than ever for pedestrians, with dedicated bike lines and improved street crossings. It far more likely that the sudden increase in deaths is due to the rise of handheld distractions. But that doesn't fit with the narrative.
joekrill 8y ago
Interestingly (and obviously anecdotal) I've found the opposite has been happening in Philadelphia. And the main driving (no pun intended) factor, I think, was the introduction of our bike share program (Indego). Drivers were so much more hostile to bicyclists before these were introduced. We now have more dedicated bike lanes, which helps immensely. We've introduced signs and indicators ("sharrows") that indicate to drivers that bicyclists have the right to use the lanes just as much as drivers. It's a noticeable difference from 10 years ago. I can't say for certain these other things would have happened without the introduction of the bike share program, but it seems to be what really changed things here.
- JimiofEden 8y ago
  Having lived in Philly for the last decade or so, I've noticed that it's never very dangerous to be a biker or a pedestrian here. I only know of two incidents where people I know have been struck, and usually in not too terrible ways. It especially helps that bike lanes are plentiful, most of the non-residential parts of the city are pretty damn easy to navigate, and within city limits people don't really drive too crazy. Sure you get the one off case where people are being assholes for the sake of being assholes, but for whatever reason you can't really get away from that no matter where you are. That being said, if you're in another car or anywhere near I76, then you better believe it's every man for himself, and may the traffic gods have mercy on you.
- techiferous 8y ago
  > Drivers were so much more hostile to bicyclists before these were introduced. I'm not sure that driver attitudes are the primary cause of cycling deaths. Lack of visibility might be one, though.
  - lkbm 8y ago
    In some places it might be. In most, it's probably distraction -- phones, eating, etc. -- or alcohol, but if those are less common and hostility is high, the latter could probably overtake. People will pass very fasts and very close when they're angry at the cyclist for being on the road and "in their way". I've actually had someone try to run me off the road before. (I've had plenty of people try to merge into where I was, but this was someone trying to do it because he wanted me on the sidewalk "where I belonged". We stopped and argued at a light right afterwards.) If that behavior were common, cycling would be vastly more dangerous. Maybe in Philadelphia it was.
maxsilver 8y ago
The safest infrastructure are ones that split pedestrian / bicyclist / motor traffic as much as possible, for obvious reasons. But that infrastructure has fallen out of favor as of late. "Complete streets" are the new fashion trend, and are significantly more dangerous, by combining these forms of traffic altogether and just sort of hoping it all works out. But, "complete" streets are super cheap, and give the illusion of improved infrastructure, so the trend will likely continue for the near future -- further increasing accidents as it does.
- wlesieutre 8y ago
  What, you don't like to share a narrow lane with no shoulder right up against a concrete barrier that you'd better not go over because the other side is a 20 foot drop down to train tracks? https://i.imgur.com/0cxvaJM.png https://i.imgur.com/0cxvaJM.png At least they put up a no parking sign. EDIT: Not to mention this photo shows the one and only bike symbol on the block. Given how worn off it is I assume most drivers have no idea this is the "bike route."
- junga 8y ago
  >The safest infrastructure are ones that split pedestrian / bicyclist / motor traffic as much as possible, for obvious reasons. Can you provide a source for this? (especially concerning the separation of bicyclists and motor traffic)
  - maxsilver 8y ago
    > Can you provide a source for this? (especially concerning the separation of bicyclists and motor traffic) https://rspcb.safety.fhwa.dot.gov/Dashboard/Default.aspx https://rspcb.safety.fhwa.dot.gov/Dashboard/Default.aspx USDOT routinely finds freeways to be the safest roadway for all involved each year (lowest number of ped/bike/car fatalities), since it separates traffic modes. Pedestrians and bicyclists go over/under/beside it on dedicated infrastructure, they are never on it. And similarly, cars are never on the dedicated ped/bike infrastructure, so collisions are effectively impossible from either side, due to physics.
  - cglace 8y ago
justinph 8y ago
This article fails to mention one of the biggest factors, which is the increased prevalence of SUVs and Trucks. These oversized vehicles have higher grilles and increased mass. The higher grille means injuries that on a car would have been a leg injury where the pedestrian ends up on the hood are abdominal injuries where the pedestrian can be pushed under the vehicle. The increased mass also means longer stopping distances. Source: https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2018/06/28/suvs-killing-americas-pedestrians/646139002/ https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2018/06/28/suvs-killi...
- gpvos 8y ago
  It does mention that "reducing the height of front bumpers" is needed.
- sandworm101 8y ago
  Mass is only one factor in stopping distances. Many SUVs have more tire than they need and can stop very quickly. And some tiny/efficient cars have very light tires/brakes that mean they cannot stop as fast as they should.
- notacoward 8y ago
  Also bigger blind spots. On the bigger trucks it's practically impossible to see over the right front fender, so any pedestrian or cyclist approaching from that entire quarter - not just at intersections but even more so at driveways - will be in mortal danger.
  - rconti 8y ago
    Not just trucks; cars, too. Crash safety standards have made them impossible to see out of. I have a small hatchback from 2000 that you can see out of amazingly well, compared to my wife's 2008 4 door hatchback which is harder to see out of. Higher tailgate, higher rear 3/4. Then I bought a 2016 hatchback which was harder, still to see out of. Now we have a 2018 sedan that's virtually impossible to see out of with the rear 3/4. Mirrors are great in traffic, but it's much more difficult to be confident that you're not about to run something over in a parking lot. This is why reverse cameras are mandatory - you can't see out of cars anymore.
xefer 8y ago
I noticed they mentioned the speed reduction "Boston, for example, has reduced the city speed limit from 30 miles per hour to 25 mph." Cambridge across the river followed suit soon afterward, but having lived there for decades I can't say I've noticed one iota of difference in the speed cars travel. 25 mph is still ridiculously fast in most of the tight neighborhood streets. Really the speed limit should be reduced even further to 20 mph and even 15 in some areas accompanied by much stricter enforcement. It's not uncommon to see cars hitting 40+ going down some of the straighter roads that emanate out of the major squares. I am a daily all-weather bike commuter and to be honest have not had a problem with cars. I don't really mind the concept of SOVs- we use one ourselves; it's just that they need to be much more tightly controlled at least in these neighborhoods.
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  The city wide speed limit was irrelevant in both cities to begin with because in 99.99% of places you couldn't get up to that speed or if you could it would be uncomfortable (narrow streets, poor visibility, etc). Conditions where one can even go 25+ for more than a couple hundred yards are rare and basically limited to main roads in low traffic conditions (i.e. late at night). These roads already had good bike lanes and the one cyclist riding in said lane at 1am is unlikely to be bothered by the one car that's also around going 30-40 in a separate lane (or I'm not at least).
  - jnty 8y ago
    In the UK, people against 20mph limits often oppose them while claiming that they're never able to get above that speed anyway. Why are they opposing it then? The answer is simple - it's not true and on many streets you're able to drive at 30 or over (if you disregard other people's safety). I would sincerely doubt this was any less the case in the US where traffic lanes even on 'tight' streets seem to be stupidly wide. Many drivers also seem perfectly happy to break the speed limit in their desperate rush to get the back of a queue or to a red traffic light. It's all very well having cars going at 40mph past you on a bike until the driver of one of them gets distracted or makes a simple mistake and hits you. Then you'll wish they were doing 20!
afpx 8y ago
I’ve noticed that many new road projects near me haven’t included pedestrian crossings. Or, when included, the pedestrian crossings have been poorly-designed. A view of a map of recent pedestrian deaths [1] seems to confirm this. Many of the deaths seem to be on major roadways that separate two densely populated areas. And, I’ve personally witnessed many more people crossing highways, lately (sometimes, even mothers with small children walking on the shoulder!) Unfortunately, as the authors research shows, many deaths are in low-income areas. I suspect that low-income people aren’t well-represented when these roadways are designed. And, in particular, two new interchanges near me (that also lack pedestrian crossings), were also known to be areas where many (generally low-income) pedestrians cross, but none of those residents were at any of the planning meetings. [1] http://www.governing.com/gov-data/transportation-infrastructure/pedestrian-traffic-fatalities-accidents-2008-2012-map.html http://www.governing.com/gov-data/transportation-infrastruct...
- UncleEntity 8y ago
  They're doing the opposite here, putting up dedicated stop lights at "troublesome" crosswalks because nobody, ever, stops for people in crosswalks. Well, aside from the 15mph crosswalks they have around schools where everyone stops because the police like to hide around those.
jbarberu 8y ago
Having recently moved to Florida from Sweden, I was shocked at how biker/pedestrian hostile it is here. I naively thought I'd be able to live a more active lifestyle because of the nicer weather, but instead I'm driving a car everywhere as I wouldn't feel safe on a bike. It seems to be a pretty vicious cycle of the infrastructure being hostile to biking so nobody does it, nobody is biking so the roads are optimized for driving. I've lived here for little over a year now and I've been _almost_ hit a couple of times while crossing the road at the crosswalk, and a few times at parking lots with drivers not looking back before reversing. I've also seen a dead cyclist in the intersection just outside my apartment complex :(
- sethhochberg 8y ago
  Florida is a perfect storm of retirees who should have had their licenses revoked years ago, car-centric exurban non-planning, big trucks as culture, and weather so hot and prone to unexpected storms that few people cycle for anything other than recreation and thus most riders are seen as ridiculous wannabe racers, or just some drunk who lost their drivers' license. Everything is spread out and connected by 6-lane divided highways with bike lanes "generously" thrown into the shoulder by FDOT, and everyone is distracted by their phones because they're bored because they spend enormous amounts of time sitting in traffic. I lived in Florida for most of my early life, was car-free for a lot of it, and don't miss riding there at all. The cycling community in Miami used to joke that in the rest of the country, you ride like you're invisible - but in South Florida, you ride like the drivers can see you and are actively trying to kill you. Stay safe.
  - dmonagha 8y ago
    Native and lived in Florida most of my life as well. Everything you just said was true. There was a guy in my hometown, very well known surfer who was killed by a speeding car simply while waiting to cross the street. We have ghost bikes everywhere as well.
    - toomuchtodo 8y ago
      Florida is rated the most dangerous state for pedestrians.
chasd00 8y ago
heh a couple summer's ago in Dallas i got hit by a police officer while crossing the street. Ironically, while he was on his cell phone. I had to do the whole ninja-roll thing over the hood and on to the pavement. Came out of it with only a sore wrist and a funny story for the conference call i was late to. a buddy of mine grabbed a guy and pulled him out of the way of a city bus. The guy had the light to cross and the bus was making a turn while watching for traffic and not people. My friend saved a life that day. while crossing a fairly busy street, again in Dallas, a girl about 10 feet in front of me got completely leveled by, yet again, a car turning right watching for traffic and not people. She was not ok. Dallas isn't that friendly to pedestrians
- nkrisc 8y ago
  Honestly I think right turns on red should be illegal at more intersections for this reason. At least busier ones. It's these cases where a right turner has to carefully watch for oncoming traffic that pedestrians are exactly opposite of where they're looking. God forbid you're trying to cross from the same side of the street as the right turner.
  - electricslpnsld 8y ago
    NYC outlaws rights on red unless otherwise posted and it makes life as a pedestrian so much better.
    - Wowfunhappy 8y ago
      It's a shame that NYC drivers never seem to follow this. I see even commercial vehicles like trucks regularly turn on red. Although, I suppose the situation would be even worse if it wasn't outlawed...
      - mdhen 8y ago
        This isn't true. I don't think I've ever seen anyone try a right on red in Manhattan and while I'm sure it happens occasionally in the boroughs I really don't ever see it. Not sure what you're talking about
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
baud147258 8y ago
Why the article doesn't mention of distracted and inattentive pedestrians? It might be possible that the sudden increase in deaths is due to the rise of handheld distractions. Also the same could be true of drivers and cyclist using their handheld.
- upofadown 8y ago
  It doesn't mention distracted and inattentive pedestrians because that is not an important factor. From the article: >Most pedestrians and bicyclists are killed or injured while they are obeying the law.
  - JoeAltmaier 8y ago
    It sure is important when death is on the line. It's no consolation telling St Peter "But I was within the law!" It's risky out there. Everybody, please keep your heads up!
    - jgys 8y ago
      Also don't dress too provocatively, or you'll be asking for it. ... Oh, wait, we're victim blaming about something else this time?
      - JoeAltmaier 8y ago
        Didn't go there. Just encouraging people to ride defensively. Righteous indignation doesn't pay any hospital bills.
      - magduf 8y ago
        It doesn't matter if you're right when you're dead.
        upofadown 8y ago
        But it does matter who is right when determining who is wrong...
gdubs 8y ago
I pretty much assume that unless I make eye contact with a driver and get some kind of acknowledgement, I don’t trust that they see me. By far the closest calls I’ve had are stop signs where someone in an SUV stops, doesn’t look right or left (or worse, doesn’t look up from their phone), and then just goes. I also hate “share the road” situations where the right thing to do is take up the whole lane; drivers are almost religiously against this concept. Even if it’s, like, 30 yards. So you’re stuck either taking the dangerous option of treating a rough, basically nonexistent shoulder as a “bike lane”, or dealing with road rage as you occupy the full lane. I can keep up pretty well with traffic, but even so people just get angry.
- chasd00 8y ago
  "I pretty much assume that unless I make eye contact with a driver and get some kind of acknowledgement, I don’t trust that they see me" so true. After one or two close calls I'm always on my toes watching for vehicles while walking regardless of crosswalks, lights, one-way streets, having the right of way etc. Even on a sidewalk i keep an eye on traffic.
- Stephen304 8y ago
  Regarding "sharrows", the alternative in my area to dealing with road rage is dealing with pedestrian rage, despite the sharrows being in a part of the city where cycling on the sidewalks is also allowed (and even preferred on certain sections of "shared road" where using the road could mean crossing traffic twice to go 30 yards).
- Shivetya 8y ago
  this is pretty much how you learn to operate when you have a motorcycle. you are not seen unless you make eye contact and even then don't trust them. works to make a safer drive in a car. now not to go full mean mode on cage drivers, we have our issues among riders too. I would say about every fifth new cyclist that wants to ride with us or friends; I admit to being a slacker; has to be schooled in not being a dick. No need to make the people who don't like bicycles like them less. Obey the rules, forgive, and ride.
- dfxm12 8y ago
ab71e5 8y ago
I moved from the Netherlands to Canada and still bike to a lot of places. While I of course expected the lack of infrastructure, I did not fully expect the amount of hate I would be getting. People here see you as some idiot who is playing with his toy while `serious` people are driving. They yell at you to get on the sidewalk, get off the road, that you don`t pay `road tax` (wtf), some homophobic shit. Canadians are so nice otherwise, but not on the road.
- danieljohnson 8y ago
  Canada is pretty big, what area/city?
  - modzu 8y ago
    have heard every one of those arguments, both in the city and in the countryside. here's another one: my neighbour complaining about my bike being locked to the outside of the house: "get a car like every other adult"
  - ab71e5 8y ago
    Toronto suburbs
    - iron0013 8y ago
      Ah, Ford Nation, say no more
- AMerrit 8y ago
  Yeah Canadian driving culture is surprisingly hostile. Even here in New Brunswick where people are stereotyped as slow old drivers that stop to let pedestrians to cross we had people openly posting on social media about wanting to crash into bikers when they put in new laws about giving bikes space on the road (put into place because of bikers getting hit.)
- freehunter 8y ago
  I've seen that in cities in the Midwest USA too. But in my area (not in a city) I have the opposite problem... people on the road are too nice, to the point where it is dangerous. There is bike trail I like to ride on and it only crosses one major road, but it's two lanes in each direction with a left turn lane. And I've had people stop on that road trying to wave me through, even though I have a stop sign and they don't. I am absolutely not crossing in traffic just because one person stopped, and I'm just waiting for the day when someone does that and causes a major accident. It's safe to say that people in North America just don't know how to react to bicycles all around.
mrhappyunhappy 8y ago
I worked at a personal injury law firm in LA and the number of calls we got daily regarding bicycle collisions was disturbing. I knew I would never ride a bike or a motorcycle in LA. It wasn’t a matter of if you got hit but when.
everdev 8y ago
In the Bay Area it's popular for cyclists to bike on narrow, winding, steep roads with no shoulder like Sand Hill Rd. or Highway 9 in the Santa Cruz Mountains. Regardless of how you feel about bikes the conditions are inherently unsafe for bikes and cars and there are multiple annual fatalities. I can't think of another form of exercise where a participant puts themselves and non-participants in legal danger.
- eat 8y ago
  s/exercise/transportation/
- ainiriand 8y ago
  While I totally understand your point, I think that the cyclists are not the ones putting themselves in danger. They have every right to use the road safely. The danger is caused by the divers. There are many reasons for this but the most common is not taking sufficient separation from the cyclist when passing them. Here in Spain is 1.5m but you don't usually see many cars so close.
  - everdev 8y ago
    Biking on a windy road with no shoulder is like swimming in a harbor. If you turn a blind corner and there's an oncoming car and a bike in your lane you need exceptional reflexes to avoid and accident. Most roads were designed for cars not bikes. I'm all for bike Lanes, but there should be a minimum speed limit on roads too. It's similarly not safe to be going 5mph on a 35mph road.
    - nradov 8y ago
      When going around a blind corner you have to reduce speed enough to be able to stop quickly or avoid any obstacles. This is just basic defensive driving. It's not about bikes; deer, fallen tree branches, and stalled cars are common on those roads.
      - brewdad 8y ago
upofadown 8y ago
I have personally noticed some unintended consequences due to modern auto design. The more steeply sloped windshields for better aerodynamics mean that in most cases a pedestrian can no longer see where the driver is looking. All they see is a reflection of the bright sky. The greater tendency to have smoked windows to the sides and rear just makes things worse. The flatter angle of the front A-pillars also increases the size of the blind spot[1]. A-pillars have to provide rollover protection these days and as a result have to be somewhat wider to produce the required strength. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_blind_spot#Effects_of_A-pillar_angle_on_visibility https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_blind_spot#Effects_of_...
- lostlogin 8y ago
  It’s much harder to know where the car you are driving ends too. With bonnets that slope away at an increasing gradient you can’t tell. In older cars you could see the front of the vehicle you were driving. I also find my view obstructed by the wide A pillars, particularly on winding roads.
kgwxd 8y ago
I don't understand why anyone ever though walkways, bikeways and driveways should intersect without strict rights-of-way, or run parallel without actual barriers between them. In low traffic areas, fine, practicality wins, but the 8-lane roads from a decade ago have turned into 8-lanes with motorcycle lanes between them (sometimes only imaginary, but still legally real), bike lanes (sometimes not as the outer-most lane), and mid-street pedestrian crosswalks that have very confusing, seemingly optional, signaling. People sucked at driving under far simpler conditions. They still suck just as bad and new obstacles and distractions keep being introduced. Strict separation is the only sane option.
- benrbray 8y ago
  What I find absolutely INSANE about American traffic signals is that they're built on the assumption that drivers will turn-on-red while the pedestrian walk signal is active. This causes so many unnecessary conflicts. At best, you get a nasty look from an impatient right-turner who has to slam their brakes to avoid hitting you. At worst, you get killed for obeying a traffic signal. Similar with left turning. Why don't all high-volume roads have dedicated left turn arrows? If a driver misjudges the speed of the next car, you can bet they'll choose to follow through with the turn and hit a pedestrian rather than getting hit by a car going through a green light.
SEJeff 8y ago
Chicago is a super bike friendly city: https://www.bicycling.com/culture/a23676188/best-bike-cities-2018/ https://www.bicycling.com/culture/a23676188/best-bike-cities... Source: I live in Chicago and ride a bicycle when it is nice out.
- monksy 8y ago
  However, most of the bikers are terrible and enforcement of safety and traffic laws on them is non-existent.
cletus 8y ago
Weird. This article doesn't mention what (IMHO) is one of the biggest factors impacting pedestrian and cyclist safety: the ability in almost all of the US to turn right at red lights. I live in NYC where this is illegal in the five boroughs. Weirdly I've met more than a few people who live here who didn't know this. You will come across drivers who don't know this too occasionally who'll give you attitude if you walk when you have right of way. I've visited the Bay Area a lot and honestly I'm terrified of being a pedestrian or cyclist there. When a car hits a red light and wants to turn right the driver will naturally just look left for oncoming traffic. In doing so they'll not be able to see pedestrian coming from the right who might need to cross the road there and they seem more oblivious to cyclists coming from the left. Couple that with roads that are typically much wider and you feel like you're taking your life in your hands every time you cross the road. In Palo Alto there's a crosswalk across El Camino where it's 6 lanes (IIRC). Not in a million years could you convince me to use it. You just don't know how drivers are going to react. Will they see you? Will they stop for you? Who knows? It's better to cross where there isn't one so you can predict car movement. I don't know how the US ended up with this turning right at a red light rule. I haven't personally been in another country where this is the case. But I can't think of a more anti-pedestrian and anti-cyclist rule than this.
- pcsanwald 8y ago
  I would upvote this by 1000 if I could. I lived in the bay area for 2 years, and one way streets + right on red is a recipe for disaster for pedestrians because drivers will never look to their right. Interestingly, people in SF rarely jaywalk, and I wonder if it's related to this.
  - joshe 8y ago
    I love jaywalking in SF just for this reason. I'm usually crossing in the middle of a block. I can see all the cars and I know where they are going. Plus I wait for lights much less often.
    - cletus 8y ago
      Yep, same. I believe there's been studies on these kinds of things, like the insanity of jaywalking laws as pedestrians tend to be safest when they cross streets when they don't have right of way as they're far more likely to be aware of their surroundings and cautious, particularly when the stakes for the pedestrian are much higher than the driver (ie an accident will tend to end worse for the pedestrian than the car or the driver).
bloomca 8y ago
Well, in the US cars _always_ have the right of way (technically, it is illegal, but who cares, drivers think they are entitled to it). So, nobody stops for you at pedestrian crossings, unless you already are walking on it (and you can even feel their frustration), everybody pulls ahead on the pedestrian crossings at intersections, thus making it dangerous for people, who have to slide around. And the turn on right, yes, mentioned here before – same thing, people pull forward too much, plus don't wait for people to cross fully (again, illegal). Looking at all of it, I am curious why can't they put police behind crosswalks and just fine everybody with such behaviour? Drivers will learn their lessons really quickly (everybody understands fines and money), and this should improve situation drastically.
- closetohome 8y ago
  > Well, in the US Parts of the US. Where I live if you pause near the edge of a sidewalk for too long cars will just start screeching to a stop and waving for you to cross. To the point that it's a problem.
towaway1138 8y ago
I recently moved to a city with "excellent" bicycle infrastructure. Contrary to what I might have imagined, this seems to make things more dangerous for all. The extra lanes, markings, lights, and signs increase distraction, making it harder to concentrate on what actually matters--people. In addition, almost no bicyclists actually drive lawfully here. It's typical to see them going the wrong way down streets, blowing stop signs, red lights, and crosswalks. And often when a rather nice bike lane is at hand, they'll choose to ride down the sidewalk instead, endangering pedestrians. I'm not sure what the answer is, but as a pedestrian, I fear bicyclists more than cars.
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  "It's typical to see them going the wrong way down streets, blowing stop signs, red lights, and crosswalks." That bothers me too. I ride a bike myself but a lot of bikers ride like complete idiots. My favorite is riding at night without lights and reflective equipment.
  - amanaplanacanal 8y ago
    I see this too, but I will say that by far the great majority are doing it right. The ones doing it wrong are definitely more memorable, though.
    - towaway1138 8y ago
      It's so rare here that I actually call it out to my wife when I see a properly lit bicyclist at night.
elhudy 8y ago
I don't care what the law says or what anybody thinks; if there is an empty sidewalk I'm going to bike on it rather than put myself at risk on the road.
antisthenes 8y ago
The best tell of the US bike infrastructure being a joke is that local governments have the audacity to put some paint on a 45MPH road, and call it a bike lane. No separation, no barrier, just cars whizzing by at 45+, next to a cyclist going 15. And the bike lanes sometimes suddenly disappear, making bikers dismount or merge into fast traffic. No, thanks. I'll take the sidewalk that's empty 90% of the time. Even in rare places where signs say "bikes may use full lane", I've been near ran over by cars angrily speeding past me.
pdovy 8y ago
There's a great, if a bit cheesy video from FortNine [1] on why motorcyclists can be basically invisible to even cautious drivers due to the way our brain processes information, and I think the same thing would apply for bicyclists. When I'm on my bike (of either type) I assume nobody sees me and act accordingly. For cyclists and pedestrians to really be safe we need to design our road infrastructure to counteract those issues from the start. I visited Copenhagen a few years ago and biked everywhere, and it was a real eye opener how safe and easy it was compared with my home in Chicago. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x94PGgYKHQ0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x94PGgYKHQ0
dr_dshiv 8y ago
The Netherlands dealt with this decades ago with a "stop murdering our children" movement. It worked. It should be replicated. https://usa.streetsblog.org/2013/02/20/the-origins-of-hollands-stop-murdering-children-street-safety-movement/ https://usa.streetsblog.org/2013/02/20/the-origins-of-hollan...
jdlyga 8y ago
Manhattan definitely has this problem. It's a pedestrian city where most people walk and take the subway everywhere. Meanwhile, there's a ton of cars everywhere, mostly Ubers and people driving through to get to New Jersey, that act like the whole island is their personal highway. It's super dangerous, like putting a gun range in the middle of a playground.
simplyluke 8y ago
The article only gives a passing mention to distracted driving but I really think it's what's driving the dramatic increases over the past decade much more so than vehicle design or social attitudes. Around 6 months ago I started driving a truck, offering a much higher vantage, sitting in traffic I'd say > 60% of people are actively on their phones at any given time. It's an epidemic and I'm not sure what the fix is - maybe treating it more like DUIs? The city of Austin just had a bus driver kill a cyclist a few weeks ago who was later found to have been texting and driving a city bus. We know that drivers on phones rely primarily on their peripheral vision to spot other vehicles, but it's very easy for a pedestrian or cyclist to slip through that.
killjoywashere 8y ago
I was the co-captain of my college cycling team. I still find certain open roads in Southern California reasonable, but I find myself more and more concerned about the other traffic on the road. I am a physician in no small part because I got hit by a car while riding my bike, and my surgeon was exceptionally gracious, letting me scrub in on surgeries during my convalescence.* ------ * Unrelated footnote: This was before HIPAA. I very much wonder if my kids would be afforded the same opportunity today.
FloNeu 8y ago
More dangerous... god, better not set a foot into this country again :)
tonymet 8y ago
Walking terrifies me. I'm not exaggerating. I do hours of high risk activities every week, and nothing terrifies me more than walking.

220 points by kirion25 8y ago

No (edit: quantitative, you'd think that stipulation would be obvious because we're on HN) mention of increase in popularity of cycling for one's commute (seems to be up year over year in my unscientific observation)? I even skimmed the linked articles and they also seem to only be counting deaths, not deaths per anything. That doesn't tell us anything useful. This entire article is hand-wavy. I'm sure if everyone who currently rides a bicycle to work went out and started commuting via skateboard tomorrow we'd have a heck of a lot more skateboard fatalities. Also worth mentioning that this is an op-ed so it is not subject to normal journalistic standards (however low they may sometimes be).

bryanlarsen 8y ago
Pedestrian deaths have increased by a lot more than cyclist deaths, I don't think the number of pedestrians has significantly changed.
benwad 8y ago
3rd paragraph: > More people are being killed because cities are encouraging residents to walk and bike, but their roads are still dominated by fast-moving vehicular traffic. As my research has shown, this shifting mix can be deadly.
paganel 8y ago
I think the increase in the number of pedestrian deaths is also caused by the increase in the number of SUVs/CUVs and an increase in the size of cars generally speaking. Bigger cars -> more pedestrian deaths looks like a decent enough "correlation is causation" for me.
badfrog 8y ago
> No mention of increase in popularity of cycling for one's commute It's right in the introduction: > As cities strive to improve the quality of life for their residents, many are working to promote walking and biking [...] > More people are being killed because cities are encouraging residents to walk and bike

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

smoke-alarm 8y ago

The article makes no mention of distracted and inattentive pedestrians. Cities today are safer than ever for pedestrians, with dedicated bike lines and improved street crossings. It far more likely that the sudden increase in deaths is due to the rise of handheld distractions. But that doesn't fit with the narrative.

joekrill 8y ago

Interestingly (and obviously anecdotal) I've found the opposite has been happening in Philadelphia. And the main driving (no pun intended) factor, I think, was the introduction of our bike share program (Indego). Drivers were so much more hostile to bicyclists before these were introduced. We now have more dedicated bike lanes, which helps immensely. We've introduced signs and indicators ("sharrows") that indicate to drivers that bicyclists have the right to use the lanes just as much as drivers. It's a noticeable difference from 10 years ago. I can't say for certain these other things would have happened without the introduction of the bike share program, but it seems to be what really changed things here.

JimiofEden 8y ago
Having lived in Philly for the last decade or so, I've noticed that it's never very dangerous to be a biker or a pedestrian here. I only know of two incidents where people I know have been struck, and usually in not too terrible ways. It especially helps that bike lanes are plentiful, most of the non-residential parts of the city are pretty damn easy to navigate, and within city limits people don't really drive too crazy. Sure you get the one off case where people are being assholes for the sake of being assholes, but for whatever reason you can't really get away from that no matter where you are. That being said, if you're in another car or anywhere near I76, then you better believe it's every man for himself, and may the traffic gods have mercy on you.
techiferous 8y ago
> Drivers were so much more hostile to bicyclists before these were introduced. I'm not sure that driver attitudes are the primary cause of cycling deaths. Lack of visibility might be one, though.
- lkbm 8y ago
  In some places it might be. In most, it's probably distraction -- phones, eating, etc. -- or alcohol, but if those are less common and hostility is high, the latter could probably overtake. People will pass very fasts and very close when they're angry at the cyclist for being on the road and "in their way". I've actually had someone try to run me off the road before. (I've had plenty of people try to merge into where I was, but this was someone trying to do it because he wanted me on the sidewalk "where I belonged". We stopped and argued at a light right afterwards.) If that behavior were common, cycling would be vastly more dangerous. Maybe in Philadelphia it was.

maxsilver 8y ago

The safest infrastructure are ones that split pedestrian / bicyclist / motor traffic as much as possible, for obvious reasons. But that infrastructure has fallen out of favor as of late. "Complete streets" are the new fashion trend, and are significantly more dangerous, by combining these forms of traffic altogether and just sort of hoping it all works out. But, "complete" streets are super cheap, and give the illusion of improved infrastructure, so the trend will likely continue for the near future -- further increasing accidents as it does.

wlesieutre 8y ago
What, you don't like to share a narrow lane with no shoulder right up against a concrete barrier that you'd better not go over because the other side is a 20 foot drop down to train tracks? https://i.imgur.com/0cxvaJM.png https://i.imgur.com/0cxvaJM.png At least they put up a no parking sign. EDIT: Not to mention this photo shows the one and only bike symbol on the block. Given how worn off it is I assume most drivers have no idea this is the "bike route."
junga 8y ago
>The safest infrastructure are ones that split pedestrian / bicyclist / motor traffic as much as possible, for obvious reasons. Can you provide a source for this? (especially concerning the separation of bicyclists and motor traffic)
- maxsilver 8y ago
  > Can you provide a source for this? (especially concerning the separation of bicyclists and motor traffic) https://rspcb.safety.fhwa.dot.gov/Dashboard/Default.aspx https://rspcb.safety.fhwa.dot.gov/Dashboard/Default.aspx USDOT routinely finds freeways to be the safest roadway for all involved each year (lowest number of ped/bike/car fatalities), since it separates traffic modes. Pedestrians and bicyclists go over/under/beside it on dedicated infrastructure, they are never on it. And similarly, cars are never on the dedicated ped/bike infrastructure, so collisions are effectively impossible from either side, due to physics.
- cglace 8y ago

justinph 8y ago

This article fails to mention one of the biggest factors, which is the increased prevalence of SUVs and Trucks. These oversized vehicles have higher grilles and increased mass. The higher grille means injuries that on a car would have been a leg injury where the pedestrian ends up on the hood are abdominal injuries where the pedestrian can be pushed under the vehicle. The increased mass also means longer stopping distances. Source: https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2018/06/28/suvs-killing-americas-pedestrians/646139002/ https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2018/06/28/suvs-killi...

gpvos 8y ago
It does mention that "reducing the height of front bumpers" is needed.
sandworm101 8y ago
Mass is only one factor in stopping distances. Many SUVs have more tire than they need and can stop very quickly. And some tiny/efficient cars have very light tires/brakes that mean they cannot stop as fast as they should.
notacoward 8y ago
Also bigger blind spots. On the bigger trucks it's practically impossible to see over the right front fender, so any pedestrian or cyclist approaching from that entire quarter - not just at intersections but even more so at driveways - will be in mortal danger.
- rconti 8y ago
  Not just trucks; cars, too. Crash safety standards have made them impossible to see out of. I have a small hatchback from 2000 that you can see out of amazingly well, compared to my wife's 2008 4 door hatchback which is harder to see out of. Higher tailgate, higher rear 3/4. Then I bought a 2016 hatchback which was harder, still to see out of. Now we have a 2018 sedan that's virtually impossible to see out of with the rear 3/4. Mirrors are great in traffic, but it's much more difficult to be confident that you're not about to run something over in a parking lot. This is why reverse cameras are mandatory - you can't see out of cars anymore.

xefer 8y ago

I noticed they mentioned the speed reduction "Boston, for example, has reduced the city speed limit from 30 miles per hour to 25 mph." Cambridge across the river followed suit soon afterward, but having lived there for decades I can't say I've noticed one iota of difference in the speed cars travel. 25 mph is still ridiculously fast in most of the tight neighborhood streets. Really the speed limit should be reduced even further to 20 mph and even 15 in some areas accompanied by much stricter enforcement. It's not uncommon to see cars hitting 40+ going down some of the straighter roads that emanate out of the major squares. I am a daily all-weather bike commuter and to be honest have not had a problem with cars. I don't really mind the concept of SOVs- we use one ourselves; it's just that they need to be much more tightly controlled at least in these neighborhoods.

dsfyu404ed 8y ago
The city wide speed limit was irrelevant in both cities to begin with because in 99.99% of places you couldn't get up to that speed or if you could it would be uncomfortable (narrow streets, poor visibility, etc). Conditions where one can even go 25+ for more than a couple hundred yards are rare and basically limited to main roads in low traffic conditions (i.e. late at night). These roads already had good bike lanes and the one cyclist riding in said lane at 1am is unlikely to be bothered by the one car that's also around going 30-40 in a separate lane (or I'm not at least).
- jnty 8y ago
  In the UK, people against 20mph limits often oppose them while claiming that they're never able to get above that speed anyway. Why are they opposing it then? The answer is simple - it's not true and on many streets you're able to drive at 30 or over (if you disregard other people's safety). I would sincerely doubt this was any less the case in the US where traffic lanes even on 'tight' streets seem to be stupidly wide. Many drivers also seem perfectly happy to break the speed limit in their desperate rush to get the back of a queue or to a red traffic light. It's all very well having cars going at 40mph past you on a bike until the driver of one of them gets distracted or makes a simple mistake and hits you. Then you'll wish they were doing 20!

afpx 8y ago

I’ve noticed that many new road projects near me haven’t included pedestrian crossings. Or, when included, the pedestrian crossings have been poorly-designed. A view of a map of recent pedestrian deaths [1] seems to confirm this. Many of the deaths seem to be on major roadways that separate two densely populated areas. And, I’ve personally witnessed many more people crossing highways, lately (sometimes, even mothers with small children walking on the shoulder!) Unfortunately, as the authors research shows, many deaths are in low-income areas. I suspect that low-income people aren’t well-represented when these roadways are designed. And, in particular, two new interchanges near me (that also lack pedestrian crossings), were also known to be areas where many (generally low-income) pedestrians cross, but none of those residents were at any of the planning meetings. [1] http://www.governing.com/gov-data/transportation-infrastructure/pedestrian-traffic-fatalities-accidents-2008-2012-map.html http://www.governing.com/gov-data/transportation-infrastruct...

UncleEntity 8y ago
They're doing the opposite here, putting up dedicated stop lights at "troublesome" crosswalks because nobody, ever, stops for people in crosswalks. Well, aside from the 15mph crosswalks they have around schools where everyone stops because the police like to hide around those.

jbarberu 8y ago

Having recently moved to Florida from Sweden, I was shocked at how biker/pedestrian hostile it is here. I naively thought I'd be able to live a more active lifestyle because of the nicer weather, but instead I'm driving a car everywhere as I wouldn't feel safe on a bike. It seems to be a pretty vicious cycle of the infrastructure being hostile to biking so nobody does it, nobody is biking so the roads are optimized for driving. I've lived here for little over a year now and I've been _almost_ hit a couple of times while crossing the road at the crosswalk, and a few times at parking lots with drivers not looking back before reversing. I've also seen a dead cyclist in the intersection just outside my apartment complex :(

sethhochberg 8y ago
Florida is a perfect storm of retirees who should have had their licenses revoked years ago, car-centric exurban non-planning, big trucks as culture, and weather so hot and prone to unexpected storms that few people cycle for anything other than recreation and thus most riders are seen as ridiculous wannabe racers, or just some drunk who lost their drivers' license. Everything is spread out and connected by 6-lane divided highways with bike lanes "generously" thrown into the shoulder by FDOT, and everyone is distracted by their phones because they're bored because they spend enormous amounts of time sitting in traffic. I lived in Florida for most of my early life, was car-free for a lot of it, and don't miss riding there at all. The cycling community in Miami used to joke that in the rest of the country, you ride like you're invisible - but in South Florida, you ride like the drivers can see you and are actively trying to kill you. Stay safe.
- dmonagha 8y ago
  Native and lived in Florida most of my life as well. Everything you just said was true. There was a guy in my hometown, very well known surfer who was killed by a speeding car simply while waiting to cross the street. We have ghost bikes everywhere as well.
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    Florida is rated the most dangerous state for pedestrians.

chasd00 8y ago

heh a couple summer's ago in Dallas i got hit by a police officer while crossing the street. Ironically, while he was on his cell phone. I had to do the whole ninja-roll thing over the hood and on to the pavement. Came out of it with only a sore wrist and a funny story for the conference call i was late to. a buddy of mine grabbed a guy and pulled him out of the way of a city bus. The guy had the light to cross and the bus was making a turn while watching for traffic and not people. My friend saved a life that day. while crossing a fairly busy street, again in Dallas, a girl about 10 feet in front of me got completely leveled by, yet again, a car turning right watching for traffic and not people. She was not ok. Dallas isn't that friendly to pedestrians

nkrisc 8y ago
Honestly I think right turns on red should be illegal at more intersections for this reason. At least busier ones. It's these cases where a right turner has to carefully watch for oncoming traffic that pedestrians are exactly opposite of where they're looking. God forbid you're trying to cross from the same side of the street as the right turner.
- electricslpnsld 8y ago
  NYC outlaws rights on red unless otherwise posted and it makes life as a pedestrian so much better.
  - Wowfunhappy 8y ago
    It's a shame that NYC drivers never seem to follow this. I see even commercial vehicles like trucks regularly turn on red. Although, I suppose the situation would be even worse if it wasn't outlawed...
    - mdhen 8y ago
      This isn't true. I don't think I've ever seen anyone try a right on red in Manhattan and while I'm sure it happens occasionally in the boroughs I really don't ever see it. Not sure what you're talking about

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

baud147258 8y ago

Why the article doesn't mention of distracted and inattentive pedestrians? It might be possible that the sudden increase in deaths is due to the rise of handheld distractions. Also the same could be true of drivers and cyclist using their handheld.

upofadown 8y ago
It doesn't mention distracted and inattentive pedestrians because that is not an important factor. From the article: >Most pedestrians and bicyclists are killed or injured while they are obeying the law.
- JoeAltmaier 8y ago
  It sure is important when death is on the line. It's no consolation telling St Peter "But I was within the law!" It's risky out there. Everybody, please keep your heads up!
  - jgys 8y ago
    Also don't dress too provocatively, or you'll be asking for it. ... Oh, wait, we're victim blaming about something else this time?
    - JoeAltmaier 8y ago
      Didn't go there. Just encouraging people to ride defensively. Righteous indignation doesn't pay any hospital bills.
    - magduf 8y ago
      It doesn't matter if you're right when you're dead.
      - upofadown 8y ago
        But it does matter who is right when determining who is wrong...

gdubs 8y ago

I pretty much assume that unless I make eye contact with a driver and get some kind of acknowledgement, I don’t trust that they see me. By far the closest calls I’ve had are stop signs where someone in an SUV stops, doesn’t look right or left (or worse, doesn’t look up from their phone), and then just goes. I also hate “share the road” situations where the right thing to do is take up the whole lane; drivers are almost religiously against this concept. Even if it’s, like, 30 yards. So you’re stuck either taking the dangerous option of treating a rough, basically nonexistent shoulder as a “bike lane”, or dealing with road rage as you occupy the full lane. I can keep up pretty well with traffic, but even so people just get angry.

chasd00 8y ago
"I pretty much assume that unless I make eye contact with a driver and get some kind of acknowledgement, I don’t trust that they see me" so true. After one or two close calls I'm always on my toes watching for vehicles while walking regardless of crosswalks, lights, one-way streets, having the right of way etc. Even on a sidewalk i keep an eye on traffic.
Stephen304 8y ago
Regarding "sharrows", the alternative in my area to dealing with road rage is dealing with pedestrian rage, despite the sharrows being in a part of the city where cycling on the sidewalks is also allowed (and even preferred on certain sections of "shared road" where using the road could mean crossing traffic twice to go 30 yards).
Shivetya 8y ago
this is pretty much how you learn to operate when you have a motorcycle. you are not seen unless you make eye contact and even then don't trust them. works to make a safer drive in a car. now not to go full mean mode on cage drivers, we have our issues among riders too. I would say about every fifth new cyclist that wants to ride with us or friends; I admit to being a slacker; has to be schooled in not being a dick. No need to make the people who don't like bicycles like them less. Obey the rules, forgive, and ride.
dfxm12 8y ago

ab71e5 8y ago

I moved from the Netherlands to Canada and still bike to a lot of places. While I of course expected the lack of infrastructure, I did not fully expect the amount of hate I would be getting. People here see you as some idiot who is playing with his toy while `serious` people are driving. They yell at you to get on the sidewalk, get off the road, that you don`t pay `road tax` (wtf), some homophobic shit. Canadians are so nice otherwise, but not on the road.

danieljohnson 8y ago
Canada is pretty big, what area/city?
- modzu 8y ago
  have heard every one of those arguments, both in the city and in the countryside. here's another one: my neighbour complaining about my bike being locked to the outside of the house: "get a car like every other adult"
- ab71e5 8y ago
  Toronto suburbs
  - iron0013 8y ago
    Ah, Ford Nation, say no more
AMerrit 8y ago
Yeah Canadian driving culture is surprisingly hostile. Even here in New Brunswick where people are stereotyped as slow old drivers that stop to let pedestrians to cross we had people openly posting on social media about wanting to crash into bikers when they put in new laws about giving bikes space on the road (put into place because of bikers getting hit.)
freehunter 8y ago
I've seen that in cities in the Midwest USA too. But in my area (not in a city) I have the opposite problem... people on the road are too nice, to the point where it is dangerous. There is bike trail I like to ride on and it only crosses one major road, but it's two lanes in each direction with a left turn lane. And I've had people stop on that road trying to wave me through, even though I have a stop sign and they don't. I am absolutely not crossing in traffic just because one person stopped, and I'm just waiting for the day when someone does that and causes a major accident. It's safe to say that people in North America just don't know how to react to bicycles all around.

mrhappyunhappy 8y ago

I worked at a personal injury law firm in LA and the number of calls we got daily regarding bicycle collisions was disturbing. I knew I would never ride a bike or a motorcycle in LA. It wasn’t a matter of if you got hit but when.

everdev 8y ago

In the Bay Area it's popular for cyclists to bike on narrow, winding, steep roads with no shoulder like Sand Hill Rd. or Highway 9 in the Santa Cruz Mountains. Regardless of how you feel about bikes the conditions are inherently unsafe for bikes and cars and there are multiple annual fatalities. I can't think of another form of exercise where a participant puts themselves and non-participants in legal danger.

eat 8y ago
s/exercise/transportation/
ainiriand 8y ago
While I totally understand your point, I think that the cyclists are not the ones putting themselves in danger. They have every right to use the road safely. The danger is caused by the divers. There are many reasons for this but the most common is not taking sufficient separation from the cyclist when passing them. Here in Spain is 1.5m but you don't usually see many cars so close.
- everdev 8y ago
  Biking on a windy road with no shoulder is like swimming in a harbor. If you turn a blind corner and there's an oncoming car and a bike in your lane you need exceptional reflexes to avoid and accident. Most roads were designed for cars not bikes. I'm all for bike Lanes, but there should be a minimum speed limit on roads too. It's similarly not safe to be going 5mph on a 35mph road.
  - nradov 8y ago
    When going around a blind corner you have to reduce speed enough to be able to stop quickly or avoid any obstacles. This is just basic defensive driving. It's not about bikes; deer, fallen tree branches, and stalled cars are common on those roads.
    - brewdad 8y ago

upofadown 8y ago

I have personally noticed some unintended consequences due to modern auto design. The more steeply sloped windshields for better aerodynamics mean that in most cases a pedestrian can no longer see where the driver is looking. All they see is a reflection of the bright sky. The greater tendency to have smoked windows to the sides and rear just makes things worse. The flatter angle of the front A-pillars also increases the size of the blind spot[1]. A-pillars have to provide rollover protection these days and as a result have to be somewhat wider to produce the required strength. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_blind_spot#Effects_of_A-pillar_angle_on_visibility https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_blind_spot#Effects_of_...

lostlogin 8y ago
It’s much harder to know where the car you are driving ends too. With bonnets that slope away at an increasing gradient you can’t tell. In older cars you could see the front of the vehicle you were driving. I also find my view obstructed by the wide A pillars, particularly on winding roads.

kgwxd 8y ago

I don't understand why anyone ever though walkways, bikeways and driveways should intersect without strict rights-of-way, or run parallel without actual barriers between them. In low traffic areas, fine, practicality wins, but the 8-lane roads from a decade ago have turned into 8-lanes with motorcycle lanes between them (sometimes only imaginary, but still legally real), bike lanes (sometimes not as the outer-most lane), and mid-street pedestrian crosswalks that have very confusing, seemingly optional, signaling. People sucked at driving under far simpler conditions. They still suck just as bad and new obstacles and distractions keep being introduced. Strict separation is the only sane option.

benrbray 8y ago
What I find absolutely INSANE about American traffic signals is that they're built on the assumption that drivers will turn-on-red while the pedestrian walk signal is active. This causes so many unnecessary conflicts. At best, you get a nasty look from an impatient right-turner who has to slam their brakes to avoid hitting you. At worst, you get killed for obeying a traffic signal. Similar with left turning. Why don't all high-volume roads have dedicated left turn arrows? If a driver misjudges the speed of the next car, you can bet they'll choose to follow through with the turn and hit a pedestrian rather than getting hit by a car going through a green light.

SEJeff 8y ago

Chicago is a super bike friendly city: https://www.bicycling.com/culture/a23676188/best-bike-cities-2018/ https://www.bicycling.com/culture/a23676188/best-bike-cities... Source: I live in Chicago and ride a bicycle when it is nice out.

monksy 8y ago
However, most of the bikers are terrible and enforcement of safety and traffic laws on them is non-existent.

cletus 8y ago

Weird. This article doesn't mention what (IMHO) is one of the biggest factors impacting pedestrian and cyclist safety: the ability in almost all of the US to turn right at red lights. I live in NYC where this is illegal in the five boroughs. Weirdly I've met more than a few people who live here who didn't know this. You will come across drivers who don't know this too occasionally who'll give you attitude if you walk when you have right of way. I've visited the Bay Area a lot and honestly I'm terrified of being a pedestrian or cyclist there. When a car hits a red light and wants to turn right the driver will naturally just look left for oncoming traffic. In doing so they'll not be able to see pedestrian coming from the right who might need to cross the road there and they seem more oblivious to cyclists coming from the left. Couple that with roads that are typically much wider and you feel like you're taking your life in your hands every time you cross the road. In Palo Alto there's a crosswalk across El Camino where it's 6 lanes (IIRC). Not in a million years could you convince me to use it. You just don't know how drivers are going to react. Will they see you? Will they stop for you? Who knows? It's better to cross where there isn't one so you can predict car movement. I don't know how the US ended up with this turning right at a red light rule. I haven't personally been in another country where this is the case. But I can't think of a more anti-pedestrian and anti-cyclist rule than this.

pcsanwald 8y ago
I would upvote this by 1000 if I could. I lived in the bay area for 2 years, and one way streets + right on red is a recipe for disaster for pedestrians because drivers will never look to their right. Interestingly, people in SF rarely jaywalk, and I wonder if it's related to this.
- joshe 8y ago
  I love jaywalking in SF just for this reason. I'm usually crossing in the middle of a block. I can see all the cars and I know where they are going. Plus I wait for lights much less often.
  - cletus 8y ago
    Yep, same. I believe there's been studies on these kinds of things, like the insanity of jaywalking laws as pedestrians tend to be safest when they cross streets when they don't have right of way as they're far more likely to be aware of their surroundings and cautious, particularly when the stakes for the pedestrian are much higher than the driver (ie an accident will tend to end worse for the pedestrian than the car or the driver).

bloomca 8y ago

Well, in the US cars _always_ have the right of way (technically, it is illegal, but who cares, drivers think they are entitled to it). So, nobody stops for you at pedestrian crossings, unless you already are walking on it (and you can even feel their frustration), everybody pulls ahead on the pedestrian crossings at intersections, thus making it dangerous for people, who have to slide around. And the turn on right, yes, mentioned here before – same thing, people pull forward too much, plus don't wait for people to cross fully (again, illegal). Looking at all of it, I am curious why can't they put police behind crosswalks and just fine everybody with such behaviour? Drivers will learn their lessons really quickly (everybody understands fines and money), and this should improve situation drastically.

closetohome 8y ago
> Well, in the US Parts of the US. Where I live if you pause near the edge of a sidewalk for too long cars will just start screeching to a stop and waving for you to cross. To the point that it's a problem.

towaway1138 8y ago

I recently moved to a city with "excellent" bicycle infrastructure. Contrary to what I might have imagined, this seems to make things more dangerous for all. The extra lanes, markings, lights, and signs increase distraction, making it harder to concentrate on what actually matters--people. In addition, almost no bicyclists actually drive lawfully here. It's typical to see them going the wrong way down streets, blowing stop signs, red lights, and crosswalks. And often when a rather nice bike lane is at hand, they'll choose to ride down the sidewalk instead, endangering pedestrians. I'm not sure what the answer is, but as a pedestrian, I fear bicyclists more than cars.

maxxxxx 8y ago
"It's typical to see them going the wrong way down streets, blowing stop signs, red lights, and crosswalks." That bothers me too. I ride a bike myself but a lot of bikers ride like complete idiots. My favorite is riding at night without lights and reflective equipment.
- amanaplanacanal 8y ago
  I see this too, but I will say that by far the great majority are doing it right. The ones doing it wrong are definitely more memorable, though.
  - towaway1138 8y ago
    It's so rare here that I actually call it out to my wife when I see a properly lit bicyclist at night.

elhudy 8y ago

I don't care what the law says or what anybody thinks; if there is an empty sidewalk I'm going to bike on it rather than put myself at risk on the road.

antisthenes 8y ago

The best tell of the US bike infrastructure being a joke is that local governments have the audacity to put some paint on a 45MPH road, and call it a bike lane. No separation, no barrier, just cars whizzing by at 45+, next to a cyclist going 15. And the bike lanes sometimes suddenly disappear, making bikers dismount or merge into fast traffic. No, thanks. I'll take the sidewalk that's empty 90% of the time. Even in rare places where signs say "bikes may use full lane", I've been near ran over by cars angrily speeding past me.

pdovy 8y ago

There's a great, if a bit cheesy video from FortNine [1] on why motorcyclists can be basically invisible to even cautious drivers due to the way our brain processes information, and I think the same thing would apply for bicyclists. When I'm on my bike (of either type) I assume nobody sees me and act accordingly. For cyclists and pedestrians to really be safe we need to design our road infrastructure to counteract those issues from the start. I visited Copenhagen a few years ago and biked everywhere, and it was a real eye opener how safe and easy it was compared with my home in Chicago. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x94PGgYKHQ0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x94PGgYKHQ0

dr_dshiv 8y ago

The Netherlands dealt with this decades ago with a "stop murdering our children" movement. It worked. It should be replicated. https://usa.streetsblog.org/2013/02/20/the-origins-of-hollands-stop-murdering-children-street-safety-movement/ https://usa.streetsblog.org/2013/02/20/the-origins-of-hollan...

jdlyga 8y ago

Manhattan definitely has this problem. It's a pedestrian city where most people walk and take the subway everywhere. Meanwhile, there's a ton of cars everywhere, mostly Ubers and people driving through to get to New Jersey, that act like the whole island is their personal highway. It's super dangerous, like putting a gun range in the middle of a playground.

simplyluke 8y ago

The article only gives a passing mention to distracted driving but I really think it's what's driving the dramatic increases over the past decade much more so than vehicle design or social attitudes. Around 6 months ago I started driving a truck, offering a much higher vantage, sitting in traffic I'd say > 60% of people are actively on their phones at any given time. It's an epidemic and I'm not sure what the fix is - maybe treating it more like DUIs? The city of Austin just had a bus driver kill a cyclist a few weeks ago who was later found to have been texting and driving a city bus. We know that drivers on phones rely primarily on their peripheral vision to spot other vehicles, but it's very easy for a pedestrian or cyclist to slip through that.

killjoywashere 8y ago

I was the co-captain of my college cycling team. I still find certain open roads in Southern California reasonable, but I find myself more and more concerned about the other traffic on the road. I am a physician in no small part because I got hit by a car while riding my bike, and my surgeon was exceptionally gracious, letting me scrub in on surgeries during my convalescence.* ------ * Unrelated footnote: This was before HIPAA. I very much wonder if my kids would be afforded the same opportunity today.

FloNeu 8y ago

More dangerous... god, better not set a foot into this country again :)

tonymet 8y ago

Walking terrifies me. I'm not exaggerating. I do hours of high risk activities every week, and nothing terrifies me more than walking.