this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2025
-19 points (33.3% liked)

Fuck Cars

12585 readers
1131 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Can someone explain this to me?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 day ago (9 children)

I think almost everyone misunderstood what you were getting at. To be fair, it was pretty confusing.

You're saying "Cyclists are told to be on the road. Cyclists aren't protected as well as drivers are. Why should bikes be on the road if that's the case?"

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago (8 children)

To address your question pragmatically, because the next best option most of the time is to be on the sidewalk, and cyclists die more often per km cycled on the sidewalk than on the road.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago (7 children)

cyclists die more often per km cycled on the sidewalk than on the road.

Really? That surprises me. Do you have a source for that?

[–] Evkob@lemmy.ca 4 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

I found this source with some info. Quoting a relevant bit:

Most studies that considered sidewalk-riding suggested that it is particularly hazardous for cyclists, with estimates of 1.8 to 16 times the risk of cycling on-road [29,66-68,71]. However one study found that the risk of traveling on the sidewalk was the same or lower than riding on residential streets [64]. Another considered the direction of travel and found that the elevated risk when sidewalk cyclists entered intersections was almost exclusively related to cycling against the flow of adjacent on-road traffic

It can seem counter-intuitive that riding where the cars are is safer, but if you think about it, it makes sense. Cars don't expect fast-moving vehicles on the sidewalk (they often barely expect pedestrians...), the constant curbs impacts your flow while riding, people more often ride against traffic on the sidewalk than on the road, and honestly people riding on sidewalks probably tend towards more inexperienced than people who feel comfortable riding on the road.

[–] Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world 3 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

people more often ride against traffic on the sidewalk than on the road

There may also be a case of taking the sidewalknis done on my risky roads, that is difficult to control for.

In my case I ride one section against the road on the sidewalk because the alternative is to cross a road of 80kph+ traffic twice in 600m with a toddler. In the other direction we ride on the road because we don't have to cross it, and the traffic is usually only doing 10 kph.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 3 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

It's situational surely, and I think an experienced cyclist knows when to take the sidewalk. But an experience cyclist also needs to know that sidewalks ARE NOT SAFE, they are just a less unsafe alternative when road conditions become intolerably unsafe, and they need to use even more caution than they normally do on the road when they take that option.

[–] Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago

I agree, I'm just curious if you see more sidewalk riding because the roads are so unsafe, thus making the adjacent sidewalks unsafe, thus making sidewalks appear more unsafe than they really are.

It's not an easy factor to tease out of the data; and frankly it's a discussion that should be avoided because it pits cyclists and pedestrians into discussion about the sliver of space left over when tons is already given to motorists.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 12 hours ago

Thank you for sharing; great points.

To me, this sounds a bit like crosswalks/intersections are the unsafe part rather than sidewalks.

It's a rule of thumb for cyclists to walk their bikes across intersections (even on bike paths/trails!), turning cyclists into pedestrians. Not that pedestrians are particularly safe where I live, but that would address part of the issue here.

Sidewalks where I live tend to have boulevards (grass off to either side for cyclists to pull onto), which may be different than the environments where these studies took place (I'm picturing buildings on one side and roads on the other).

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)