Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So the trick here is to make an unsubstantiated claim, when asked for a source vigorously Google and link whatever you can find without reading. Then when confronted with that, change the burden. Then when presented with a factual claim to deflect and engage in whataboutism.
Good job guys. You’re only convincing yourselves.
"I think bicyclists don't stop at stop signs" is not a factual claim.
So if I understand correctly, your belief is that cyclists in DC scrupulously follow all rules. Which is interesting, because then why would cyclists in VA lobby for the state to pass a law specifically exempting them from stopping at stop signs? There should be no reason to do that at all.
You are engaged in I don’t know what purpose or goal. But it really does a disservice to other cyclists.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So the trick here is to make an unsubstantiated claim, when asked for a source vigorously Google and link whatever you can find without reading. Then when confronted with that, change the burden. Then when presented with a factual claim to deflect and engage in whataboutism.
Good job guys. You’re only convincing yourselves.
"I think bicyclists don't stop at stop signs" is not a factual claim.
Anonymous wrote:So the trick here is to make an unsubstantiated claim, when asked for a source vigorously Google and link whatever you can find without reading. Then when confronted with that, change the burden. Then when presented with a factual claim to deflect and engage in whataboutism.
Good job guys. You’re only convincing yourselves.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You haven't produced any evidence that bicyclists in DC don't follow the rules - or don't follow the rules more than drivers don't follow the rules.
Cyclists in DC that stop at stop signs are in a small minority. I think that’s a fair assessment.
Drivers in DC that stop at stop signs are in a small minority. I think that's a fair assessment.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You haven't produced any evidence that bicyclists in DC don't follow the rules - or don't follow the rules more than drivers don't follow the rules.
Cyclists in DC that stop at stop signs are in a small minority. I think that’s a fair assessment.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You haven't produced any evidence that bicyclists in DC don't follow the rules - or don't follow the rules more than drivers don't follow the rules.
Cyclists in DC that stop at stop signs are in a small minority. I think that’s a fair assessment.
Anonymous wrote:You haven't produced any evidence that bicyclists in DC don't follow the rules - or don't follow the rules more than drivers don't follow the rules.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:As are streets with a lot of bicyclists ignoring traffic signs and signals.
Cars are more dangerous in low traffic density situations while bicycles are more dangerous in high traffic density situations. It all has to do with pedestrians being able to observe and predict the traffic situation. Hanoi is a famous example of that.
No. First of all, bicyclists obey traffic signs and signals at similar or better rates as drivers. It's possible that you're so used to drivers not obeying traffic signs/signals that you don't notice. Second of all, cars are more dangerous to pedestrians under every circumstance except when cars are not moving and bicyclists are moving. That's just basic physics. A person riding a bicycle weighs maybe 200 pounds total (including the bicycle). Even just a small car weighs 15 times more. A Suburban weighs 30 times more.
If you want to talk about transportation in Hanoi, probably the travel forum is the appropriate place.
You have a source for that?
https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-07-18/survey-finds-bicyclists-and-motorists-ignore-traffic-laws-similar-rates
https://www.outsideonline.com/2273001/cyclists-comply-traffic-laws-more-drivers
https://usa.streetsblog.org/2018/01/03/study-cyclists-dont-break-traffic-laws-any-more-than-drivers-do/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2019/05/10/cyclists-break-far-fewer-road-rules-than-motorists-finds-new-video-study/?sh=602b7c124bfa
For what it's worth, if I stopped with both feet on the ground at every stop sign while bicycling, many of the drivers behind me would get very annoyed.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:As are streets with a lot of bicyclists ignoring traffic signs and signals.
Cars are more dangerous in low traffic density situations while bicycles are more dangerous in high traffic density situations. It all has to do with pedestrians being able to observe and predict the traffic situation. Hanoi is a famous example of that.
No. First of all, bicyclists obey traffic signs and signals at similar or better rates as drivers. It's possible that you're so used to drivers not obeying traffic signs/signals that you don't notice. Second of all, cars are more dangerous to pedestrians under every circumstance except when cars are not moving and bicyclists are moving. That's just basic physics. A person riding a bicycle weighs maybe 200 pounds total (including the bicycle). Even just a small car weighs 15 times more. A Suburban weighs 30 times more.
If you want to talk about transportation in Hanoi, probably the travel forum is the appropriate place.
You have a source for that?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:As are streets with a lot of bicyclists ignoring traffic signs and signals.
Cars are more dangerous in low traffic density situations while bicycles are more dangerous in high traffic density situations. It all has to do with pedestrians being able to observe and predict the traffic situation. Hanoi is a famous example of that.
No. First of all, bicyclists obey traffic signs and signals at similar or better rates as drivers. It's possible that you're so used to drivers not obeying traffic signs/signals that you don't notice. Second of all, cars are more dangerous to pedestrians under every circumstance except when cars are not moving and bicyclists are moving. That's just basic physics. A person riding a bicycle weighs maybe 200 pounds total (including the bicycle). Even just a small car weighs 15 times more. A Suburban weighs 30 times more.
If you want to talk about transportation in Hanoi, probably the travel forum is the appropriate place.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:As are streets with a lot of bicyclists ignoring traffic signs and signals.
Cars are more dangerous in low traffic density situations while bicycles are more dangerous in high traffic density situations. It all has to do with pedestrians being able to observe and predict the traffic situation. Hanoi is a famous example of that.
No. First of all, bicyclists obey traffic signs and signals at similar or better rates as drivers. It's possible that you're so used to drivers not obeying traffic signs/signals that you don't notice. Second of all, cars are more dangerous to pedestrians under every circumstance except when cars are not moving and bicyclists are moving. That's just basic physics. A person riding a bicycle weighs maybe 200 pounds total (including the bicycle). Even just a small car weighs 15 times more. A Suburban weighs 30 times more.
If you want to talk about transportation in Hanoi, probably the travel forum is the appropriate place.
Anonymous wrote:As are streets with a lot of bicyclists ignoring traffic signs and signals.
Cars are more dangerous in low traffic density situations while bicycles are more dangerous in high traffic density situations. It all has to do with pedestrians being able to observe and predict the traffic situation. Hanoi is a famous example of that.