The article doesn’t describe a “biker problem” though. It specifically is talking about e-bikes and electric scooters.
It follows actions by city officials from Paris to Honolulu to Hoboken, N.J., who are responding to residents angry about zippy vehicles with silent electric motors zooming down sidewalks and streets, often startling people, and occasionally hitting pedestrians.
A manually powered bicycle or scooter is a lot different from an electric powered version capable of 20-30mph.
Unfair treatment of one group versus another isn’t right and more cycle friendly infrastructure is needed but do you put both regular and e-bikes on that infrastructure to share it? Wouldn’t that lead to a lot of the same complaints that sharing with cars currently generates?
I do think you’re right that it’s not all of any one of these groups (cyclists or motorists) that are problematic; we just notice the ones that are problematic the most. That said, cyclists are the minority which means they need “imperfect allies” of motorists to drive the change that leads to more, better cycling infrastructure.
I don’t know the best way to go about that but ignoring the laws you’re required to follow isn’t a great way to go about it. I’d propose instead that working to change the rules for cyclists so that they aren’t bound by the “one way” and are allowed to legally proceed through a red as long as they can safely do so (no opposing traffic at the light/stop, they’ve stopped and confirmed it’s safe to proceed) and so on would be good. Then it might incentivize some motorists to ditch their car so they can get around easier as well as improve the experience for current cyclists.
All of this is assuming the traffic laws in NYC work similar to where I am.
I will assume you live in the midwest. Maybe some suburbia.
NYC is entirely different than suburbia and actually is also entirely different from SF, DC and Tokyo. I don’t know about other cities.
Within 30 seconds of biking from my apartment, I will already have seen.
A car go through a red light.
A car parked on the sidewalk.
A delivery truck parked in the bike lane, and part of the street.
Multiple people crossing the street randomly, not at crosswalks.
I will have passed maybe 3 other bikers.
Within a minute:
Massive construction on the street.
Cars parked in the road.
Dodged deep pot holes.
Within 5 minutes
Multiple cars going through red lights, I would maybe guess 5.
Multiple cars doing u-turns that are not allowed.
Maybe 30 people walking across the street in random places.
Some drugged up guy standing somewhere in the street.
Hit an area where the streets are purposely laid out so, if you want to go the “right way” you have to ground around multiple blocks. It’s a peculiar place.
This is the base line.
All of this works together because there are basically no laws.
A car goes through a red light, as long as it doesn’t hit someone it’s ignored.
Same for u-turns, same for illegal temporary parking.
You want to gun your car, make the wheels squeal and accelerate as fast as you can until the next red light? Nobody will care if you don’t hit someone.
It’s a zoo. The normal thinking of laws doesn’t really apply. If you get upset about every car that runs a red light, you’ll be upset all the time. If you get upset at people doing stupid shit, you’ll be upset all the time.
The article doesn’t describe a “biker problem” though. It specifically is talking about e-bikes and electric scooters.
A manually powered bicycle or scooter is a lot different from an electric powered version capable of 20-30mph.
Unfair treatment of one group versus another isn’t right and more cycle friendly infrastructure is needed but do you put both regular and e-bikes on that infrastructure to share it? Wouldn’t that lead to a lot of the same complaints that sharing with cars currently generates?
I do think you’re right that it’s not all of any one of these groups (cyclists or motorists) that are problematic; we just notice the ones that are problematic the most. That said, cyclists are the minority which means they need “imperfect allies” of motorists to drive the change that leads to more, better cycling infrastructure.
I don’t know the best way to go about that but ignoring the laws you’re required to follow isn’t a great way to go about it. I’d propose instead that working to change the rules for cyclists so that they aren’t bound by the “one way” and are allowed to legally proceed through a red as long as they can safely do so (no opposing traffic at the light/stop, they’ve stopped and confirmed it’s safe to proceed) and so on would be good. Then it might incentivize some motorists to ditch their car so they can get around easier as well as improve the experience for current cyclists.
All of this is assuming the traffic laws in NYC work similar to where I am.
I will assume you live in the midwest. Maybe some suburbia.
NYC is entirely different than suburbia and actually is also entirely different from SF, DC and Tokyo. I don’t know about other cities.
Within 30 seconds of biking from my apartment, I will already have seen.
Within a minute:
Within 5 minutes
This is the base line.
All of this works together because there are basically no laws. A car goes through a red light, as long as it doesn’t hit someone it’s ignored. Same for u-turns, same for illegal temporary parking. You want to gun your car, make the wheels squeal and accelerate as fast as you can until the next red light? Nobody will care if you don’t hit someone.
It’s a zoo. The normal thinking of laws doesn’t really apply. If you get upset about every car that runs a red light, you’ll be upset all the time. If you get upset at people doing stupid shit, you’ll be upset all the time.
Ah, it’s okay if you ignore the laws because everyone else is doing it too.
In that case it sounds like Darwinism on NYC streets and cyclists and motorists alike earn whatever comes their way.
LOL. Yeah, that pretty much sums it up.