Quote:
Originally Posted by #-3
Numbers are a funny thing, there are probably allot of factors that contribute to that 93%, it's possible the laws are too skewed in the cyclists direction, or the volume of cars makes them more likely to cause an accident. But I would suggest the Average car is about 20x the size of the average bike therefore 20x easier to see and anticipate.
I'm not saying it is OK to be unaware of your surroundings when cycling or driving, but you are probably 20x more likely to be unaware of a bicycle than you are to be unaware of a car. Which is likely what causes most of these accidents.
Either that or people who drive cars are just ignorant A-holes who enjoy running yuppie cyclists down Grand theft Auto Style.
|
You are right in that what causes most of these accidents is the person in the vehicle are unaware of bicyclists, but they are also unaware, or uncaring as to how their actions impact others.
Last year I was cycling on a residential road that was a designated bike route. A minivan approached me from the rear, pulled wide to pass me on the left, and immediately hooked right in front of me to turn right, the result was that I ran into her bumper and was extremely lucky I wasn't seriously injured or killed. The drivers response, a middle finger through the back window. This woman was "aware" that I was there, as evidenced by her wide left turn, but she simply wasn't smart enough, or aware enough to realize that there wasnt enough room to pass me before her turn.
To suggest that rules are skewed towards cyclists... they follow the same rules of the road as a car so I don't really get that. if 93% of the time the car was at fault, that means that 93% of the time the car broke the rules, not the cyclist, I don't see how you read that stat any other way. Just because there are more cars on the road than bikes shouldn't matter, if you aren't able to drive a car without hitting someone, then you aren't fit to drive.