People on bikes may be rude and may not follow the rules, but can’t be aggressive.
When a man with a .45 meets a man with a rifle, the man with a pistol will be a dead man.
Original stripe from the Onion: https://www.theonion.com/bum-rush-hour-1846606314
Cross-posted from: https://mastodon.uno/users/rivoluzioneurbanamobilita/statuses/113615912203015089
That’s why your car has lights. If someone could have spray painted a garbage can black, filled it with bricks, and put it in the street, would you have smashed into it and damaged your bumper? If the answer is yes, then you were going too fast. Drivers have a responsibility to drive to the conditions. You’re the one operating the deadly machinery.
Could he have benefitted from putting on reflectors? Sure, yes he could have. But that is a decision for his own benefit, it doesn’t affect you. If he’s an idiot, then he’s only being an idiot to himself. If a car driver is an idiot, then someone else could die. That’s why idiots should all be on bicycles.
This weirdo is clearly here to troll. One of the more bizarre profiles I’ve seen within 5 seconds of looking at it
The textbook answer, the one you have to learn when you take drivers education around here at least, is that traffic should travel at a speed that is safe in the current situation (taking into account the environmental conditions, the condition of the road etc) but not exceeding the maximum velocity.
Poor visibility is one of the main reasons to reduce speed. As is things that affect handling, like snow or wet conditions.
So, “At what speed should a car travel at night in a 40mph zone?”
I don’t know. But if you almost ran someone over, you probably took a risk you shouldn’t have.
I mean the answer obviously depends on what the road is like. Near me, for example, I have 2 different roads that I drive on most often at night, both with speed limits around 35-40. One of them is in town, and has streetlights, stoplights by the crosswalks, and is just generally way better lit. Even so at night visibility is worse, so I’ll go like 10 below the speed limit (maybe only 5 bit depending on if I don’y see/think people are out walking or if I’m not as worried about visibility). The other road is basically a country road. It has trees and farm fields on either side, no lights, and is extremely hilly. Because of all that I go like max 20 or 25 pretty much, so I have enough time to brake for a biker I missed when I went over a hill, or for a deer or other animal that jumps out in front of me.
The dangerous thing in a crash between a bike and a car is definitely the car, so it should also fall more on the car to be safe. Not to say a bike has no responsibility for their own safety obviously, but a car should be traveling slowly enough that they have the ability to stop without hitting something if they have a sudden need to, and that means potentially going much slower than the speed limit at night.
Could he have benefitted from putting on reflectors? Sure, yes he could have. But that is a decision for his own benefit
Back in ol’ England, it’s illegal to ride without reflectors, and illegal to be without lights at night.
Some years ago in the Netherlands, I was cycling home through a pitch black cycling path covered by trees (so not even moonlight) with my very decent bike light illuminating the path ahead of me.
Before I could even process that there was another cyclist coming towards me, a dark figure zips past so closely that I feel their jacket brush my left hand. It startled me so much that I needed to stop and catch my breath. I could only imagine what would have happened if I had hit him head on with us both going 25 km/h.
I’m curious to hear how that incident was my fault.
