Who is the real danger on the Texas roads? (Houston: credit, law)

[Svensk08]

Originally Posted by vegankris

This isn't about whether or not cycling is "safe" in Houston. This is about the very wrong wording in the Texas Driver's Education that states that "cyclists are a huge danger on the streets". This is in fact completely wrong. Cyclists and their bikes are not weapons. Vehicles are weapons. They kill people everyday. The wording should be changed to impress upon motorists what an enormous responsibility they take on every time they get behind the wheel of a vehicle. If you are not willing to see your car/truck/suv as a weapon, then you don't belong behind the wheel of that vehicle.

Ever try persuading a teenage male Texan in a Drivers' Ed class that driving is an "enormous responsibility"? It remains a foreign concept to many of them throughout their lives.

[crone]

Originally Posted by Svensk08

Ever try persuading a teenage male Texan in a Drivers' Ed class that driving is an "enormous responsibility"? It remains a foreign concept to many of them throughout their lives.

My kids understood that a car was a lethal weapon. One would not get her license until she was nearly 18 due to the responsibility she felt about driving. The boy was almost 18 when he got a license. I picked his driving instructor, a friend who taught drivers ed for 35 years and also had good sense.

Parents need to take drivers ed, too.

[DanielWayne]

Serious question-isn't it illegal for cars to do 30 mph below the speed limit? Just this morning we had to go around 2 cyclists on Bay Area Blvd doing just that. Now I think bikes are awesome, but if you are an impediment to highway traffic, then you are a danger in Houston. I want a bicycle myself, but no way am I gonna test Houston drivers. I'll stick to bike lanes and parks.

[houstonfan]

Cyclists are very dangerous when there's no designated lanes for them. Everyone else has to do creative driving to get around them which, if not done with patience, puts everyone else in danger. Just this morning, I saw a cyclist right in the middle of a lane on a 6 lane major road, peddling nonchalantly at maybe 10mph. I was in 2 lanes over so not directly affected but it created a scary situation as people tried to swerve around that person. The first car obviously saw him and changed lanes but the car behind him didn't see the biker until the first car switched lanes and so he had to slam on the brakes and try to swerve. And etc down the line. It was kinda tense and a lot of angry honking. Even 2 lanes over, i was affected bc every lane moved over to the left a little to avoid the swerving from the right lanes.
I like to ride bikes recreationally but I dont' believe bikes, horses, donkeys, etc belong on the busy roads unless they had their own designated lanes.

[DejaBlue]

Originally Posted by vegankris

Are you for real?? Since when has a cyclist ever caused the death of a motorist? If a car hits a cyclists, the cyclist dies or suffers massive injuries. The motorist has a scratched and dented car.

But you're implying that it can't ever happen.

Originally Posted by houstonfan

Cyclists are very dangerous when there's no designated lanes for them. Everyone else has to do creative driving to get around them which, if not done with patience, puts everyone else in danger. Just this morning, I saw a cyclist right in the middle of a lane on a 6 lane major road, peddling nonchalantly at maybe 10mph. I was in 2 lanes over so not directly affected but it created a scary situation as people tried to swerve around that person. The first car obviously saw him and changed lanes but the car behind him didn't see the biker until the first car switched lanes and so he had to slam on the brakes and try to swerve. And etc down the line. It was kinda tense and a lot of angry honking. Even 2 lanes over, i was affected bc every lane moved over to the left a little to avoid the swerving from the right lanes.
I like to ride bikes recreationally but I dont' believe bikes, horses, donkeys, etc belong on the busy roads unless they had their own designated lanes.

This and until they get their own stay on trails.

Everyone barely has patience for other drivers on the road now add cyclists?

[TexasHorseLady]

I have to agree that the cyclist who says that cyclists cannot do harm to motorists is deliberately putting blinders on (not conducive to safe driving OR cycling). A cyclist can cause an accident that harms them; they can also cause an accident that causes a vehicle to swerve into another vehicle or to run off the road, without being harmed themselves. Do deny this possibility and to say that all of the onus belongs on the motorist and none on the cyclist is the height of irresponsibility.

[wxf848]

This is driver's ed, not bicyclist's ed. From the perspective of the car driver, the bicyclist presents potential danger, especially younger ones who don't know the rules. Obviously, if there's a collision, the bicyclist loses.

From the cyclist's perspective, the danger is from the cars. Bicyclist's education, if it existed, would train people to look out for cars. Driver's education trains people to look out for bicyclists since they work differently and don't behave like cars.

I think the way it's presented is valid. It isn't saying which is more danger to the other; it's teaching driving students about the world from the perspective of driving a car.

[MtnLion512]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

I have to agree that the cyclist who says that cyclists cannot do harm to motorists is deliberately putting blinders on (not conducive to safe driving OR cycling). A cyclist can cause an accident that harms them; they can also cause an accident that causes a vehicle to swerve into another vehicle or to run off the road, without being harmed themselves. Do deny this possibility and to say that all of the onus belongs on the motorist and none on the cyclist is the height of irresponsibility.

The onus is overwhelmingly on the motorist over the cyclist. Are you seriously trying to stack up single anecdotes and hypothetical scenarios ("cyclists COULD cause a vehicle to swerve into another vehicle...") against the overwhelming evidence demonstrating the potential and realized harm that motorists cause every day? Give me a break!

The evidence is stacked against the notion that cyclists are remotely near as big of a danger as automobiles on the road, so the burden of proof is on you - can you provide any credible evidence supporting your position? All I've seen so far on this and previous threads on this topic is equivocation.

[TexasHorseLady]

Anyone who is on the roadways is a danger to anyone else on the roadways. Does that make you feel better? My point was that to strenuously deny that cyclists (or pedestrians, or motorcyclists, or other cars or trucks) on a road can pose any serious danger to others on the same road is naive and irresponsible, at the very best, and I hold by that point.

[Nairobi]

Cyclists are becoming more of a problem than they have ever been. It seems that you have several individuals trying to force the bike culture on cities that just aren't set up for it. In compact areas where motorists generally don't exceed 30MPH, I don't see it as an issue. On major thoroughfares, cyclists have five times the responsibility as those in automobiles, IMHO.