cyclists and the dangers!!?

Jumping into the road without making sure that it's clear first is illegal in most places -- not to mention stupid. I see motorists doing it all the time.

If you run a red light and get in a collision, it is your fault, regardless of mode of transport.

Most places require bicyclists to have lights at night.

Tight clothing reduces air resistance and helps sweat get to the surface faster, which helps it evaporate faster, which helps keep the rider more comfortable. Cycling shorts also have a special pad inside that reduces chaffing. Back before I started wearing bike shorts, I would always end up badly chaffed when I would ride 50 miles or more while wearing cotton.

Bicyclists do get cited for breaking the rules. You just haven't noticed it. Have you ever noticed any motorists violating any laws without being cited? Have you ever violated any rule of the road without being cited? How many times?

Bicyclists hardly ever kill anyone, rarely even hurt someone else seriously and tend not to even do much in the way of property damage. Liability still applies, but insurance is typically not necessary because the amounts are usually low. This is in stark contrast with motor vehicles which frequently kill people and even more frequently seriously injure people and do enormous amounts of property damage. It's a matter of risk. Motor vehicles involve much greater risk.

If you want to understand bicycle safety instead of pretending that it's obvious (it isn't), try reading Cyclecraft by John Franklin.

1) Cyclist Jumps red lights and gets hit. Who's at fault? -- The cyclist

#2) Cyclist riding at night on unlit road with no lights and in dark clothing. Gets knocked off the bike who's at fault? -- Who ever had the last chance or opportunity to avoid the accident "wreck". Granted, the cyclist should have lights. But if the motorist could have avoided it, they are at least partial responsible.

#3) Why do men insist on lycra cycling kit and do they realise what they look like from behind?? -- Why do you care? You're not the one riding. Lycra & other form fitting clothing is made of special materials to wick away moisture - perspiration.

#4) Why don't cyclists have to have insurance against causing accidents? -- Because of the low monetary value ($$$) of a bicycle vs. that of a car, truck or bus. Also due to the fact that a bicycle would most of the time would leave less damage to a car than what the car owners deductible is. $200 damage to car & $500 deductible. Get it?

#5) Why can they ride through pedestrian precincts? -- They shouldn't. And where I live it's against the law. So I don't.

#6) When was a cyclist last fined for a road traffic offence in the UK and for that matter elsewhere?? -- Just a few weeks ago I was traveling south in a designated bicycle lane following the flow of traffic. Coming right towards me was another bicycle going north in the southbound lane. Right behind me was a cop. Guess what happened? He got cited for driving (riding) the wrong way, just as any motorist would for driving the wrong direction.

I wish I had a nickel for every time I saw a motorist break the law. Happens a lot more than cyclists breaking the law.

Who's at fault? Don't know. Here in the US, the court would ultimately decide. However, the general felling in the cycling community, is that there is prejudice against the cyclist in many cycling related accidents. As to a cyclist being ticketed/fined for a violation, I don't know how often it occurs, but I believe most offenses (riding wrong way, cruising though a red light, night riding without proper equipment, etc), by cyclist are ignored by police officers until involved in an accident.

Apparently, you're OK with women in lycra. And perhaps ladies have a different view of men wearing lycra. Or perhaps the Britts on bicycles just aren't in as good of shape as Americans, where most cyclist are viewed as quite fetching in their lycra. :-)

1) depending on the area riding on the sidewalks may be illegal, even in areas that it is not illegal your are treated as a pedestrian and must fallow all rules. meaning you can not just jump in to the road. Cyclist fault

2) When on the road the cyclists is to be treated as any other car, running a red light is the cyclists fault.

3) If the cyclists does not have the lights or reflectors required by law it is the cyclists fault.

4) I hate them as well, never have i got chaffing in Cotton shorts that i wear.

5) I think they should if riding on the road as every other vehicle on the road does, i agree with that.

6) Because you will hurt or kill someone. same reason a car or motorcycle can not run through crowds of people.

7) public record you look that up on your own.

Graham

A cyclist is a vehicle, so must obey the same laws as motorists. I see cyclists get tickets. Mostly for running stops signs, I have seen one get a speeding ticket, and have heard of some getting tickets for riding while intoxicated.

Cyclist are rarely the cause of accidents, but are often the victims of accidents. They do not require collision insurance because the damage they cause is negligible. If they cause and accident, and are found liable for expenses, they must be brought to task by civil // small claims suit.

Cyclists where their kit because it is the ideal materials to ride with. The slick compression material with padding makes riding comfortable with no friction. The wicking material for the shorts and jerseys keep the rider cool and dry. The helmet speaks for itself.

Many other sports have 'uniforms' that provide for safety and comfort specific to their sport. The only difference is that they are not as public as local roadways.

Soccerref

a techniques fewer all of us is killed with the aid of fact there are a techniques fewer cyclists and a collision is far less possibly to be deadly with the aid of fact they are smaller, lighter and don't circulate as rapidly. in spite of the undeniable fact that, with the aid of fact that motorcycles are silent there is greater risk of a pedestrian wandering in front of any given motorcycle proprietor than any given driving force. of course if cyclists ever journey on the pavement then this would possibly not help concerns whether I even have not seen many cyclists doing this.

both have a responsibility to abide by the laws. if a cyclist is doing these things, then naturally they are at fault. so what are you saying, ban all bikes and turn the world over to the motorist? you are very anti-bike for someone that claims to be a cyclist.

omg

is this anything but a massive tROLL?>>

wle