cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/13118199
(Title shamelessly stolen from this comment in the crossposted !micromobility thread.)
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/13118199
(Title shamelessly stolen from this comment in the crossposted !micromobility thread.)
Cyclists should have safe infrastructure instead of riding with vehicle traffic. Don’t try to shift the responsibility.
I’m saying that as an experienced cyclist as well.
Not having safe infrastructure doesn’t make bikers any less dangerous to be around. My specific citation is the bay area, other places I’ve lived have not had the sheer quantity of bikers (and drivers) with a death wish/complete lack of spatial awareness.
Cyclists are more likely to die on the sidewalk than sharing the road. Given the choice, use the road 99% of the time.
Any sources to support your claim?
I dunno, the sidewalk on the six lane stroad near me seems much safer than the fast, congested road with lane-hopping cars and low visibility.
I get it, and I use sidewalks sparingly, but it really is circumstantial (it’s legal to ride a footpath where I live). For example, slow riding a footpath is much safer than fast riding a footpath because you have more time to react to cars entering/exiting driveways. If you’re riding somewhere nearby that’s actually quite a nice experience. But if you are trying to get somewhere more than a kilometre away, slow footpath riding would obviously slow you down a lot.