Right, but that’s the point: cyclists’ safety should be a superior concern to drivers’ convenience. They aren’t equivalent, and the status-quo habit is to pick the one that causes more harm!
The cyclist is also just inconvenienced, they could just get off the bike and go around and then just continue on with their day. Unlike the car, what’s their stock until the guy comes back and moves the van. The biker is less inconvenienced than the car is.
Dude, the cyclist is not endangered in this scenario. Let me explain since you have trouble because I guess you’re 5. Guy on bike sees truck in way, guy gets off bike, guy walks bike with other people who are also also walking on sidewalk, once guy gets past truck, guy gets back on bike, back in bike lane, back doing bike stuff, bike guy does this as many times that are needed, bike guy never has to come in any danger from big scary 2 ton metal things he don’t understand wizzing by.
Why can’t the cars just pass then? Why do cyclists have to give away a lane that is made for them just so cars wouldn’t have to wait 10 seconds to pass the van?
Do you really think that anyone riding a bike in the bike lane would come off a bike iust to avoid a stationary obstacle? Most would pass them on the road (which is what makes the van parking in the bike lane dangerous).
Things aren’t gonna change for cyclists so you have a choice, either use the sidewalk (safe choice)or join car traffic. Up to you. Either face reality or don’t.
I bike every day to work and don’t expect any vehicle to ever yield to me for anything. I either go around or , when available, use the sidewalk, and I don’t complain
Things can change if you complain enough to the right people. It isn’t “it is how it is so we shouldn’t do anything”. Contacting government officials or consistently reporting illegally parked vehicles might some day improve things.
I also bike to school every day and I do expect cars to yield when they should. If you let them go when they should’ve yielded, they ain’t going to yield to the next cyclist and might kill them. I’d rather not condition drivers into thinking that bikes will always give them priority.
I also drive a tiny car and subscribe to the lugnut theory–that is, the more lugnuts, the more out of its way you get, same applies to anything else. Think about it this way, would you rather be right and dead, or wrong and alive to go see your family?
When bike guy - or child, or elderly person, or wheelchair-bound person, the people who are also also walking on the sidewalk - goes around the van, how do they get around the van? Where do they go?
You were very careful to lay out every single detail for a small child like me, but you left out that one specific detail. Why was that? Was it somehow detrimental to your point?
Right, but that’s the point: cyclists’ safety should be a superior concern to drivers’ convenience. They aren’t equivalent, and the status-quo habit is to pick the one that causes more harm!
The cyclist is also just inconvenienced, they could just get off the bike and go around and then just continue on with their day. Unlike the car, what’s their stock until the guy comes back and moves the van. The biker is less inconvenienced than the car is.
Do you actually not understand how the cyclist is endangered in this scenario? Do you actually need that explained?
Dude, the cyclist is not endangered in this scenario. Let me explain since you have trouble because I guess you’re 5. Guy on bike sees truck in way, guy gets off bike, guy walks bike with other people who are also also walking on sidewalk, once guy gets past truck, guy gets back on bike, back in bike lane, back doing bike stuff, bike guy does this as many times that are needed, bike guy never has to come in any danger from big scary 2 ton metal things he don’t understand wizzing by.
Why can’t the cars just pass then? Why do cyclists have to give away a lane that is made for them just so cars wouldn’t have to wait 10 seconds to pass the van?
Do you really think that anyone riding a bike in the bike lane would come off a bike iust to avoid a stationary obstacle? Most would pass them on the road (which is what makes the van parking in the bike lane dangerous).
Things aren’t gonna change for cyclists so you have a choice, either use the sidewalk (safe choice)or join car traffic. Up to you. Either face reality or don’t.
I bike every day to work and don’t expect any vehicle to ever yield to me for anything. I either go around or , when available, use the sidewalk, and I don’t complain
Things can change if you complain enough to the right people. It isn’t “it is how it is so we shouldn’t do anything”. Contacting government officials or consistently reporting illegally parked vehicles might some day improve things.
I also bike to school every day and I do expect cars to yield when they should. If you let them go when they should’ve yielded, they ain’t going to yield to the next cyclist and might kill them. I’d rather not condition drivers into thinking that bikes will always give them priority.
I also drive a tiny car and subscribe to the lugnut theory–that is, the more lugnuts, the more out of its way you get, same applies to anything else. Think about it this way, would you rather be right and dead, or wrong and alive to go see your family?
When bike guy - or child, or elderly person, or wheelchair-bound person, the people who are also also walking on the sidewalk - goes around the van, how do they get around the van? Where do they go?
You were very careful to lay out every single detail for a small child like me, but you left out that one specific detail. Why was that? Was it somehow detrimental to your point?