I think it just emphasises the point that there are already a range of measures being taken to address it and that as much as you'd like, you just can't help some people.
That isn't quite the right angle, I think, Zoidberg. You're right that people make stupid mistakes, but one of the main things, as to err is human, that we have to do is to increase the tolerance that our traffic environment has for such mistakes. It is simply not acceptable to tell people that they must not make mistakes.
As a cyclist it should be obvious that you're the bottom of the food chain and you should act like it, ie with a sense of awareness and knowledge of the risk involved.
I disagree with this, too. I know you probably don't mean it like this, but it sounds like a very passive acceptance attitude that we sometimes call 'cyclist inferiority syndrome'. It arises from the fact that if, and it's a big if, one is in a collision with a heavier and more powerful vehicle, a cyclist will come off worse. However, generalising it across all possible traffic situations doesn't work and is redolent of a victim complex. At the same time, cycling is the ideal mode of urban traffic and some transportation uses, has loads of advantages, is enjoyable, and all the rest of it. All of this puts cycling a lot closer to the top of the urban food chain than one might imagine.
Thing with bikes is that it's like having kids, any numpty can do it. But saying that, I am well against any kind of registration or licensing for bikes as it totally contradicts the freedom of bikes. Bikes are awesome but a lot of people who ride them aren't.
If anything, people who aren't yet 'awesome' enough to pass muster with you need help and support rather than to be left alone, surely?
Possibly the best thing would be to make it compulsory for all vehicles of a certain size to have the signs mentioned which warn cyclists of the dangers on them that are eye level for cyclists. Can't see that happening though.
That's a very small ask as part of a much wider need and has already been done by lots of companies, even voluntarily and off their own bat.
As I posted above, a lot more needs to be done. If you study traffic and understand the problems better, you will realise that while we have a long way to go, many of the best solutions are actually very simple, and there is every reason for optimism and every incentive not just to leave things to 'social Darwinism' or other bogus theory of human interaction.
That isn't quite the right angle, I think, Zoidberg. You're right that people make stupid mistakes, but one of the main things, as to err is human, that we have to do is to increase the tolerance that our traffic environment has for such mistakes. It is simply not acceptable to tell people that they must not make mistakes.
I disagree with this, too. I know you probably don't mean it like this, but it sounds like a very passive acceptance attitude that we sometimes call 'cyclist inferiority syndrome'. It arises from the fact that if, and it's a big if, one is in a collision with a heavier and more powerful vehicle, a cyclist will come off worse. However, generalising it across all possible traffic situations doesn't work and is redolent of a victim complex. At the same time, cycling is the ideal mode of urban traffic and some transportation uses, has loads of advantages, is enjoyable, and all the rest of it. All of this puts cycling a lot closer to the top of the urban food chain than one might imagine.
If anything, people who aren't yet 'awesome' enough to pass muster with you need help and support rather than to be left alone, surely?
That's a very small ask as part of a much wider need and has already been done by lots of companies, even voluntarily and off their own bat.
As I posted above, a lot more needs to be done. If you study traffic and understand the problems better, you will realise that while we have a long way to go, many of the best solutions are actually very simple, and there is every reason for optimism and every incentive not just to leave things to 'social Darwinism' or other bogus theory of human interaction.