Well, in US cities it's possibly for acting like they are cars on the road. Several states grant some right for cyclists to travel in lanes with cars, but in practice that's absurd. It slows down traffic (to which they defend by saying there is no minimum speed limit), and causes other problems. When you have a frail bicycle riding amongst numerous cars trying to keep up, or inciting rage and causing problems by not being able to, of course there will be accidents.
Things won't get better until cities invest in infrastructure like EU cities have, firm bike lanes and bike infrastructure that is not shared with cars.
I avoided taking the lane while I started, but after being forced into the gutter and nearly side-swiped multiple times, I started regularly taking the lane for my own safety.
That’s what really disappointed me about motorists as a cyclist - you give them an inch and they try to kill you.
There is something about driving that sends otherwise normal people in to a psychopathic rage. If you were walking and someone steps in your way, you wouldn't immediately jump to punching their head in. But same thing in a car and people will just run you over for slowing them down.
> Several states grant some right for cyclists to travel in lanes with cars
Believe it or not, in some places it's actually required to ride in the road along with cars (my current city, for example).
> in practice that's absurd
Honestly, agreed.
> When you have a frail bicycle riding amongst numerous cars trying to keep up, or inciting rage and causing problems by not being able to, of course there will be accidents.
Big yikes, though. Given the likely dire outcomes of collisions between cyclists and cars, and the overarching systems that tend to force cyclists to share the road with drivers in the first place, it feels wrong to me to blame cyclists for "inciting rage".
> Believe it or not, in some places it's actually required to ride in the road along with cars (my current city, for example).
That seems ridiculous! So you have bikes in between cars? How often?
> Given the likely dire outcomes of collisions between cyclists and cars, and the overarching systems that tend to force cyclists to share the road with drivers in the first place, it feels wrong to me to blame cyclists for "inciting rage".
I mean, the rage would be better directed at the city, but emotion isn't rational. If you have someone riding a bike in a lane, 'taking the lane', and can't be overtaken, and they can only do half the speed limit, of course people are going to get mad at them.
Your translation is off. It's not absurd for bikes to use roads, it's absurd to get in the way of and mix with car traffic as though they were a car.
> So, how do I get to where I need to go?
Take bike paths, sidewalks, backroads etc. Or lobby your city for better bike infrastructure. Or accept the risk of the increased likelihood that you will end up a statistic.
If one drives a car politely and generally obeying laws, one will typically not draw the ire of a road rager down upon oneself. Maybe sometimes, but it's generally infighting among assholes.
If you ride a bicycle or some other alternative transportation, the act of existing and using the road will draw road ragers from all sides. I've had several problems.
Once I was riding a bicycle down a busy college road and I happened to not be wearing my glasses. So, my fault, right? There was heavy auto traffic and it was all stopped, so I carefully turned left in front of a car, and I got absolutely boned by this amazingly horrible University-owned golf cart doing 25 in the oncoming bicycle lane. I had to basically hold him hostage until the police came to take a report on us.
Another time, same bicycle, same college town, I decided to take the left lane, a block ahead, in anticipation of turning left. This was a 35mph 4-lane road. So of course, autos immediately piled up behind me, screeching and honking and vrooming and all kinds of pissed, just because, I guess, they had to make a lane change to go around me, or they could stay there and stay enraged. I escaped with my person and bicycle intact.
Very recently, I was trying out the new e-Scooter shares. It is explicitly prohibited to ride them on the sidewalk. So I tootled around the back roads, all 25mph residential, and I was having a lot of fun ringing the little bell. So this chad swoops in front of me on a moped or rice rocket or something. And he slows down and swivels his head and in a kindly condescending tone he said, "you know you're not supposed to ride those in the street?" and so I just rang my bell and smiled. And he turned into the Incredible Hulk. He harried me and spat on my face and screamed at me and honked and stopped short and cut me off and raged for blocks, and I thought I'd never get out alive; it was very upsetting and it is not easy to continue riding when you are so triggered like that. I stayed calm, I didn't do anything against the guy, I sailed to the sidewalk and put the thing down and just walked away. But that put the fear of God into me.
The golf cart thing sounds like negligence, and I'm glad you were able to file a report.
> So of course, autos immediately piled up behind me, screeching and honking and vrooming and all kinds of pissed, just because, I guess, they had to make a lane change to go around me, or they could stay there and stay enraged.
To what extent were you impeding the normal flow of traffic?
> And he slows down and swivels his head and in a kindly condescending tone he said, "you know you're not supposed to ride those in the street?" and so I just rang my bell and smiled.
In no way was the guys reaction justified, but that does sounds like an antagonizing response.
> To what extent were you impeding the normal flow of traffic?
Well, as I said, I was in the left lane for about a block; it was a 4-lane 35mph road, so everyone had a clear right-hand lane to pass me. Traffic was, I suppose, medium. The lanes were completely clear as I moved over to the left; it's not like I weaved through a clump of vehicles to get there. The road feeds a freeway, so it was a common thoroughfare for college students and townies alike to GTFO.
> In no way was the guys reaction justified, but that does sounds like an antagonizing response.
Shrug. I was in a happy-go-lucky mood and I was already smiling and ringing the bell. What else could I do? Scowl and lean on my horn instead? Pull over and illegally ride on the sidewalk like he wanted? Argue with him, Facebook-comment-style, about who knows the law better? It didn't occur to me that there are people who may be antagonized by a bike bell.
> Shrug. I was in a happy-go-lucky mood and I was already smiling and ringing the bell. What else could I do? Scowl and lean on my horn instead? Pull over and illegally ride on the sidewalk like he wanted? Argue with him, Facebook-comment-style, about who knows the law better? It didn't occur to me that there are people who may be antagonized by a bike bell.
I'm frequently disappointed by broken bells on those scooters, because I love to use it. It's essential to safety. Those things are silent but deadly: they go up to 17mph, and I am confident that 95% of the people on the road are thankful that they can hear me coming because of that bell.
Let me tell you, as a pedestrian, I am eternally thankful to every cyclist who announces his presence behind me with something like "passing on your left", although a bell is much easier to use :-)
> Things won't get better until cities invest in infrastructure like EU cities have, firm bike lanes and bike infrastructure that is not shared with cars.
This is of course the gold standard on larger and faster streets, but remember that even the Netherlands doesn't put separate bike infrastructure on every street. On the smaller neighborhood streets, they... slow down traffic. And it seems to work pretty well.
From what I can tell (having admittedly only read books/watched urban planning videos/watched ride videos about it and not been there myself yet), neighborhood streets tend not to get used as through-routes. Sometimes because it's naturally slowed by the street design (so why take the slower streets instead of the faster one nearby?), and sometimes because they use barriers to redirect traffic and prevent it. You're only likely to drive on the slower streets if you live there.
In the US, drivers have the expectation that they should be able to take any street they want without delay. In the Netherlands that's not true; if you're driving on a fietsstraat for example, you are allowed there but it's explicitly not designed for you. There are other streets you're meant to take.
But also:
> Pretty often I guess with the amount of bike riders. And no one cares?
Probably because just about every driver there also rides a bike, and knows what it feels like from both perspectives. I'm in the US but starting to ride a bike around myself has certainly made me a more careful driver and more understanding of how to react around bikes.
> From what I can tell (having admittedly only read books/watched urban planning videos/watched ride videos about it and not been there myself yet), neighborhood streets tend not to get used as through-routes. Sometimes because it's naturally slowed by the street design (so why take the slower streets instead of the faster one nearby?), and sometimes because they use barriers to redirect traffic and prevent it. You're only likely to drive on the slower streets if you live there.
Things won't get better until cities invest in infrastructure like EU cities have, firm bike lanes and bike infrastructure that is not shared with cars.