Thanks for nothin', Erin O'Melinn

there's a fuzzy line here for me between protecting people at all costs vs people doing a bit more to think about their own personal safety. this carries over into many areas, incl pedestrians where just because one has the right of way it doesn't mean one shouldn't still be taking steps to ensure one's safety.

how is there a fuzzy line here mark? cars kills more people than any non-natural force on earth. read that last sentence again. how is it a hard idea for you to grasp that trying to protect people from the external element most likely to kill them is a good idea vs. just telling them to htfu? are you ambivalent about the value of health care, too?

i know we've smashed heads on this topic before and i agree with taking steps to protect people's well being. however, i take the perspective of taking responsibility for my own personal safety ahead of the rules that say I have the proverbial right of way. maybe that stems from 30 odd years of bicycle commuting or maybe from 10 odd years of motorcycle commuting, but i do know that my awareness level has kept me out of harms way many times even when i've had the right of way. at the end of the day i don't feel it makes sense to blindly entrust my safety and well being to someone else

so yes bring on the extra safety measures, but i will still rely on my own awareness and decisipn making ahead of trusting what other people are supposed to be doing.

i will still rely on my own awareness and decisipn making ahead of trusting what other people are supposed to be doing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ahg6qcgoay4
good luck with that

experience has shown me it works better than relying on the rules of the road to ensure my safety.

nice vid but not the same comparison as riding on the streets. that's closer to an example of target fixation than situational awareness and the vid purposely sets you up to fail.

so yes, so far i've been very good with it and it doesn't have much to do with luck.

i know we've smashed heads on this topic before and i agree with taking steps to protect people's well being. however, i take the perspective of taking responsibility for my own personal safety ahead of the rules that say I have the proverbial right of way. maybe that stems from 30 odd years of bicycle commuting or maybe from 10 odd years of motorcycle commuting, but i do know that my awareness level has kept me out of harms way many times even when i've had the right of way. at the end of the day i don't feel it makes sense to blindly entrust my safety and well being to someone else

so yes bring on the extra safety measures, but i will still rely on my own awareness and decisipn making ahead of trusting what other people are supposed to be doing.

Amen. Coming from a more populated country to here, I do find Vancouverites to be spectaleralry bad at considering their own safety. It doesn't matter if people are driving, biking or walking, they just make a maneuver based purely on their 'right of way' and just assume that because they are 'correct' everything will be OK. It beggars believe that someone would walk out on to a road at a crossing without at least glancing left and right to check to check that the coast is clear.

I've ridden, walked and driven to places since probably around 1977 and have never been hit or hit anything (and I certainly have a 'UK' style of driving….) so there has to be something to be said for looking where you are going and the environment around you.

for years engineers and raw safety numbers dominated bicycle infrastructure decisions in vancouver and cities across north america. ridership stayed low and growth in modeshare was non-existent. the new approach is, to quote jalen rose, to "give the people what they want!" it may not be what they "need," but it's what they need to get riding

While I am not going to disagree, it is this way of thinking that has given us tiny women driving monster SUVs 500m to take their kiddies to school. As Jeremy Clarkson (who I'm sure you love ha ha) once pointed out, if people wanted to BE safe, rather than FEEL safe, then cars would be fitted with huge spikes sticking out from the steering wheel and aiming between the drivers' eyes instead of having a million impact protection features.

While I am not going to disagree, it is this way of thinking that has given us tiny women driving monster SUVs 500m to take their kiddies to school.

in north america the car industry has made great strides pandering to human nature (they: sell safe, sexy and fun; you: buy stuck in traffic getting fat; repeat), while cycling infrastructure thinking has fought it every step of the way (take the lane - you'll be fine! just remember to always wear a helmet, in case, you know).

why shouldn't cycling advocates use proven successful techniques rather that bashing their helmeted heads against the wall?

As Jeremy Clarkson (who I'm sure you love ha ha) once pointed out, if people wanted to BE safe, rather than FEEL safe, then cars would be fitted with huge spikes sticking out from the steering wheel and aiming between the drivers' eyes instead of having a million impact protection features.

here's a situation in which bike advocates have followed the car industry's leads - focusing on injury mitigation rather than prevent - but are starting to break away. helmets reduce the severity of head injuries in crashes. it turns out the routes the vast majority of cyclists prefer (cycle lanes, bike lanes and signed bike routes) are the ones that reduce the number of crashes and rates of injury. this evidence was kind of the last nail in the "john forrester and the engineers know what's best for you" school of bike planning - its turns out the the types of facilities cyclists say they want are the ones that actually make them the safest:

here's a situation in which bike advocates have followed the car industry's leads - focusing on injury mitigation rather than prevent - but are starting to break away. helmets reduce the severity of head injuries in crashes. it turns out the routes the vast majority of cyclists prefer (cycle lanes, bike lanes and signed bike routes) are the ones that reduce the number of crashes and rates of injury. this evidence was kind of the last nail in the "john forrester and the engineers know what's best for you" school of bike planning - its turns out the the types of facilities cyclists say they want are the ones that actually make them the safest

i completely agree with this boom. all i'm saying is that even with the safety measures in place (which i agree are effective) more vulnerable road users need to take greater measures to ensure their safety than relying on what has been put in place. i think the first measure towards safety is to change the attitudes of some road users from "i have the right of way" to "i need to be aware of what's happening around me to ensure my safety."

two examples:

1. last week while driving home from work at 11pm i was travelling east bound on first ave between victoria and nanaimo. there's a guy on a bicycle wearing dark clothing with a small and ineffective light plodding up the hill there. a perfect of example of someone being totally oblivious to their safety. just a few blocks either north or south there are dedicated bike routes and at a minimun side streets with less traffic that are far safer.

2. a couple of weeks ago i was communting west bound on the 10th ave bike route between ontario and manitoba. the north/south traffic on manitoba has a stop sign and the west bound traffic on 10th has the right of way. 2/3rds of the way down the hill from ontario hill i'm already scanning the intersection at manitoba even though i have the rigth of way. lo and behold i see a driver approaching the intersection with signs of planning to roll through it without stopping. so i check my speed, keep covering the brakes and keep an eye on what the vehicle is going to do while still scanning the rest of my route. just like i anticipated the guy does not stop and pulls a left in front of me. as i'd already checked my speed and prepared for him to pull out it was easy to avoid a collision with him. if i hadn't been doing that and just following my right of way i would have been broadsided or hit him pretty hard.

so yes we need the safer measures and they definitely help, but they are not a replacement for awareness. more of #2 and none of #1.

Were spending too much time and money cockblocking Darwin these days.

even with the safety measures in place (which i agree are effective) more vulnerable road users need to take greater measures to ensure their safety than relying on what has been put in place. i think the first measure towards safety is to change the attitudes of some road users from "i have the right of way" to "i need to be aware of what's happening around me to ensure my safety."

no doubt. its not an either or thing

Were spending too much time and money cockblocking Darwin these days.

Now this is one hell of a quality post right there. Actually, this is more or less another way of using the old military/army/conservative/….. way of saying that if a person is not strong enought (mentally and/or physically), then said person should be weeded out. ONly the strong survive?

It has been obvious for quite some time now, dear poster, that social darwinism does not work.

Now this is one hell of a quality post right there. Actually, this is more or less another way of using the old military/army/conservative/….. way of saying that if a person is not strong enought (mentally and/or physically), then said person should be weeded out. ONly the strong survive?

It has been obvious for quite some time now, dear poster, that social darwinism does not work.

…So we should find new and more expensive ways to avoid being accountable for our own actions. Gotcha.

It has been obvious for quite some time now, dear poster, that social darwinism does not work.

Yes, but this has much to do with the fact we often don't get a clean kill.

Maimed dimwits only increase their cost to society.

…So we should find new and more expensive ways to avoid being accountable for our own actions. Gotcha.

i imagine there are versions of this strategy you approve of