• Showroom7561
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    There is protection here: he is in a place set aside for cars only.

    Did you see the width of the shoulder he’s riding in? On regular high speed roads where cyclists are allowed, you’d be lucky to have that kind of buffer.

    And considering that intersections are the most dangerous places for crashes, he’s safer on the highway shoulder.

    Where I live, we have roads with sharrows and no shoulder or bike lanes. The posted speed limit are usually 50 or 60km/h, but I’ve clocked cars/suvs passing me at over 80km/h, often making dangerous or illegal passes in the process (i.e. into oncoming traffic).

    If you are in a car only place don’t cry when you are not protected from cars in that area.

    I will re-state what I wrote about: even in places designed for cyclists and pedestrians, car drivers still end up killing them.

    There is no safe place to be a pedestrian or cyclist when there are cars around, so “cars only” is just a form of discrimination. This is a North American issue, since other developed countries have been sorting this problem out.

    The real question is why isn’t there are place for bikes that goes the same places. (Note that I didn’t look at a map, I just assumed like most places there isn’t a reasonable alternative for bikes)

    Because that huge “cars only” interstate is taking up a massive amount of space. I don’t know specifically where this cyclist was, but there are large areas near the i-90 that doesn’t have cycling infrastructure.