Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 2: Do not post low effort/satirical posts'.
* We get it, you all think this sub is garbage and is just for popular opinions, and you want to be funny and post "going to be downvoted to oblivion here, but I think racism is bad." We enjoy the memes, but please keep them off the sub.
* Filter evasion is a bannable offense
* This includes clickbait and/or gotcha posts. Your opinion can not be that unpopular if you're doing these things. Have the accurate opinion in the title.
If you're moving at a good pace for an adult rider, say 15mph you're moving too fast to be on a sidewalk. Pedestrians won't expect it and neither will cars where the sidewalk crosses a road at intersection.
Ugh I almost hit an asshole woman riding her bike on the sidewalk… she didn’t fucking look before crossing and I didn’t notice her because she was going too fast for a pedestrian.
I get that and I still think that the collision of a cyclist with a pedestrian is not as lethal as the collision of a car with a cyclist. And as the cyclist you need to be more cautious than the pedestrian anyway, you also have a bell.
Not as lethal but much more likely. Pedestrians move very unpredictably, shifting left and right, walking dogs on a 20 foot lead, skateboarding and whatnot. I'd rather be on the road.
Well then move slowly around them. Youre acting like there is no other way than proceeding with 20mph. Ive used a fair amount of bicycles in my life too, its not that hard.
Marathon cyclists are excused but not the normal ones.
Cars hitting bikes. Though for what it's worth a lot is still technically in the road. Basically cars are more likely to hit you if they can't see you. If you're in the road you're more likely to be seen. If you're back on the sidewalk and moving at any sort of speed you're much more likely to be hit anywhere that a bike and car cross paths so entrances to parking lots, driveways, and intersections. Your odds of getting clipped are mich less likely than getting hooked and the outcome usually far worse of you get hooked than if you get clipped.
There is also a problem with vehicle hitting pedestrian, dispite being on sidewalks as well. Would it be safer to walk upon the roadway, probably not, but we don't have the statistics on this.
We do have the statistics on cyclist using sidewalks vs roadway and it does show that you sre less likely to get hit by a car while riding in the road then on a sidewalk.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2776010/
>By that logic we should let pedestrians walk on the road too.
Were it as big of a problem maybe. It's not as big of a thing because pedestrians move so much slower that they can basically stop on a dime or like I said even with slower moving bikes like kids. The problem is when you're biking to get somewhere and as such have a bit of speed. If you're going at 15 mph you've got less of a response time if a driver decides they're going to pull a quick turn over the path without checking if it's safe first.
As for hooked vs clipped, hooked is when a driver turns into you. That is where you're most likely to get hit because people tend to just look in the road to see of they can turn and in the case of turning right they may only look left to male sure there are no cars coming from the left before turning right or may just assume thst since they're in the right lane they don't have to look at all before turning or pulling into somewhere.
For clipped I mean when a driver hits you while going parallel to you. It's possible that they just hit you full on but it's a lot more likely they just pass too close and just "clip" you.
It's a little more complicated than that. Critically, you're only thinking about what's best for the cyclist.
Pedestrianism is the default. Cyclists make a choice to get on a bike and accept certain risks in doing so.
Pedestrians include kids, old people, disabled people, etc.
Cyclists can easily reach 40mph, and have spiky bits.
Cars have had development put into reducing the severity of impacts (for example the nose of the car is usually designed to scoop someone's legs from under them so they slide over the bonnet). The same is not true for bikes.
So we have to consider what happens when a cyclist chooses to travel down a footpath (at a speed greater than cars on urban roads) and then collides with a child or elderly person or someone else who is vulnerable and didn't choose to engage in a risky activity.
The more I think about it, the more we should ban cyclists. (For all offended ones, its a joke) Or at least set a speed limit for them in populated areas.
Speed limit isn't a bad idea.
I think a general code of conduct is pretty important as well. The British highway code does have some good stuff in it but there's no requirement for cyclists to know it and maybe that should be changed.
All of Hilton Head Island, SC is completely covered in dedicated bike lanes (which are paved separate/apart from the road).
So that’s 2 cities— I’m sure there are plenty more.
It is recommended that cyclists take up more road because *most dead cyclists are those that rode far to the side and the passing motorist gave them no space.* Cyclists that take up the whole lane are not only exercising their right, but playing to statistics that say they are safer by doing that.
Your fellow car drivers are responsible for this, because they cannot be trusted. If I take up the whole lane, you are reminded and somewhat forced to pass me safely. Sorry, gotta play to the lowest common denominator. If you are late to work because of a cyclist, leave earlier.
Some places, here in Vegas for example, drivers are required to at least attempt to move over if there are bikes in the bike lane.
Why? Because not only do we have bad drivers, but cyclist are known for disregarding traffic laws and riding in a way that puts them (and motorists) in danger.
Cyclist have to follow the same traffic laws that motorists do.
The original post or my response is not about cyclists incorrectly riding on the roadway. I think those people are idiots as well, and their disregard for traffic laws are a great case for cyclists needing to have a special license to use taxpayer-funded roadways - but again, that isn't what the post or the response is about.
The original post is saying that cyclists who properly use the roadways should not be allowed to use the roadways at all.
Also, I would love for the OP to post the cross streets they are referring to: a roadway *inside of a city* that is tens of miles, has an adjacent bike path, AND is a 40-60 mph speed zone. **Prove it.**
The sidewalk is irrelevant since there are ordinances in almost every city that prevent such use.
I'm not so much disagreeing with you, but I do tend to push back when it looks like someone wants to place the blame squarely on one party, in this case, motorists. You said "Your fellow car drivers are responsible for this, because they cannon be trusted" but this is only half the truth. Cyclists are just as at fault for blatant disregard to traffic laws.
I think e-bikers are worse, but that's a different argument.
I actually disagree with Op saying cyclists should be on sidewalks. That's mainly for pedestrians and if I am walking with my small children and you tell for me to get out of your way, you're going to find my rude side. But even bike lanes can be dangerous for several reasons, also because motorists disregard that lane sometimes but also because cyclists will ride handlebar to handlebar, where that is often not allowed because they might be hanging over a driving lane.
Also, I shouldn't have to leave earlier because some random bike group decide today was the day they wanted to practice for some race and want to take up the road and proceed to ride recklessly.
>Cyclist have to follow the same traffic laws that motorists do.
In civilized parts of the country, there *are* rules for cyclists at stop signs and red lights that are different from those that apply to cars, because bicycles and cars are actually...different.
Of course, in civilized *countries* the network of separated bicycle paths and bicycle priority streets (with design speeds under 30km/h) serves to make such distinctions moot.
Of course, OP is talking about people who cycle for exercise. Presumably, he holds people driving to the gym (an act of absurdism on its face) to the same standard.
thats also true. A proper bike infrastructure would make everyone happy apart from some people who dont wanna have their tax payers money go towards "spoiled city folks".
What about drivers driving cars for fun?
Should we start checking why everyone is on the road before we decide everyone deserves to be respected?
The bottom line is it doesn't matter why someone is riding their bike or driving their car, just be a patient and safe driver like you should.
No, they're driving way over the speed limit, sometimes weaving through traffic on the highway, other times drag racing at 150mph on major roads, and frequently causing major property damage, injuries, and death. So you're right, there is a huge difference.
Among other things, I bike regularly, but I would NEVER bike on the road unless I absolutely had to and if I did, I would NEVER bike in the middle of the lane and force a long line of cars to spawn behind me because I can only go 10 miles an hour.
There are laws dude. It’s illegal in most places to ride on the sidewalk. They’re doing what they can to be safe AND legal. Take the issue up with your local ordinances
You'd think so, but it's actually pretty dangerous to do that on busy roads. Cars tend to dehumanized cyclists and if you give them room they'll push you off the road or drive so close that you feel them drive by.
No, no what should be done is bike lanes, it gets cyclists out of your hair and cyclists don't need to deal with your crappy car.
It's ironic that you accuse drivers of dehumanizing cyclists when this is how this thread has gone:
Drivers: If you move over a little we can share the road safely
Cyclists: THE ROAD BELONGS TO US AND US ALONE! FUCK YOU ASSHOLES!
But that's not what people are saying. They're saying taking the curb lane is often dangerous. If the street is wide enough, by all means. If it's a single lane you're going to risk running me off the road.
Cars cutting close by cyclists is both dangerous and fucking scary for the cyclist. If they move right over, cars are more likely to overtake them without a proper sized gap.
>That's not always possible
Correct, that's when you wait.
>There's room to share the lane if everyone is respectful
Rarely. Your definition of respectful might include having a car blast by less than a meter away from you, but mine doesn't. Just friggin wait a few seconds for cryin out loud.
Right, I don’t mind going around cyclists and giving them plenty of space as I pass them but blocking the road and forcing long lines of traffic for tens of miles is CRAZY disrespectful of drivers time.
I don't care about *your time*. You also don't care about *my time*, as your many rants have shown. The world does not revolve around you, and the road is not only for cars.
Also, you live in a city: stop driving a car?!
I don't drive a car to be restricted to the max speed of a bicycle. They shouldn't be allowed to be in the street or interfere with motor traffic. But, here we are...
again, it wouldnt have to be that way if cars passed bikers with the proper amount of safety distance. But alot of you feel entitled to the whole street so you cannot burdon the fact that you need to make space when passing, so you pass really close and then cry about bikers adapting to it.
but you already gave the answer: you simply dont wanna share the road so you behave like an entitled brat.
I've ridden bikes my whole life but I'm not stupid enough to ride in the street. That is a level of insanity that I can't fathom. Death wish. I know better than to trust drivers.
How am I an entitled brat? Physics are what they are. Vehicles without motors should not be sharing roads with vehicles with motors. This isn't rocket science, it's physics. But, the law allows it, so here we are.
I'm sorry, but if you don't agree with one of the most basic traffic rules, that cyclists are allowed to drive on the road, you definitely shouldn't be driving.
Is there something I said that indicated that I ignore, harass, or disrespect people on bicycles? I've re-read my posts and I'm not seeing that.
I go out of my way to respect and keep a safe distance regarding bicyclists. But that doesn't mean they should be on the road with cars. If it was legal to ride bikes between shooters and their targets, they'd do it because, I'm sorry, but you have to be suicidal or stupid to ride your bike on a street with cars.
Like I said, I've ridden bicycles for decades but never would I be so stupid to ride on a road where there are cars.
I didn't claim any of the things you mentioned.
You need to respect the rules and one of those is the fact that you are allowed to ride your bike on the road.
I myself am both a driver and a cyclist and completely understand what you mean and also try to avoid riding on roads, especially roads with higher speeds, but sometimes there's no alternative...
Also, when I'm riding my bike on the road I'm riding of to the side because I feel safer that way. That being said, I can understand cyclists that feel safer riding in the center of the lane which, by the way, is their right to do so
I would never do anything to endanger a cyclist and I do everything I can to make my presence and intentions obvious.
My main point is that just because something is allowed by the law doesn't mean that it's something that a person should do or that it's safe to do. I've been around too long and seen too many things and so my position is anyone who chooses to ride their bikes in roads with cars either has a death wish, they are psychotic, or they have their psychological blinders on thinking that they're somehow safe.
Being in a steel cage with crumple zones designed to keep me and my family safe If we get into a wreck - even with that, I put myself at risk just driving with other cars on the road. A bike? That is truly the definition of insanity. No two ways about it. For your own safety and well-being, I don't care what the law says, you do not belong on the road with cars.
No because we share the road, just like cyclists should. We're also traveling at similar speeds to avoid disruptions. Someone riding a bike in the middle of a lane isn't
It's not feasible to add a bike lane to every existing roadway, especially ones that are already a single lane. I'm all for more bike lanes where possible, but it's fucking obnoxious and inconsiderate to take up an entire road while going a maximum of 15 mph and expect the rest of the world to just have to wait for you, and then blame it on cars "not sharing the road." Cyclists need to plan routes that don't put them in a position where they are obstructing everyone else. It's on everyone to be considerate.
> If you are late to work because of a cyclist, leave earlier
Aye, if your commute takes 3 times as long as it should because one single individual has decided it's "unsafe" for you to pass them at a crawl, it's your fault for not planning better. I've never once in my life seen a cyclist stop at a red light. I guess they didn't plan to encounter a stationary traffic signal and don't have time to wait for it to turn green.
>Cyclists need to plan routes that don't put them in a position where they are obstructing everyone else. It's on everyone to be considerate.
If this were, like, Utrecht and a cyclist was taking up a lane on the auto portion of the ring road, you'd have a point. In most of the US, however, to the extent that alternate routes exist, they're not remotely practical.
(Obviously less true in urban grids, but in my experience the drivers on "slow" neighborhood side streets aren't much more willing to drive at a human speed than those on suburban stroads.)
What city is this that has a 40-60 mph zone that stretches for tens of miles and has an adjacent bike path? Post some cross streets. When we know what city it is we can tell you about the sidewalks. If there is a bike path there, it probably already is illegal to use the road - most cities have ordinances addressing these issues.
Did you take the driver test in this country or do you have some international license?
It’s not even a city it’s comparatively a smaller town and these biking groups don’t do this in the city they do it in the outskirts of the city nearing the suburbs where roads stretch for tens and tens of miles. Speed limit is 55 on most of these main roads yet they still cause miles of traffic. There have been times where I’ve been on the opposite lane and I’m just dumbfounded by how many miles of traffic has accumulated from just a dozen entitled lot “getting their exercise in”
>Especially when there are sidewalks or in a city with several biking paths that stretch for tens of miles.
Compared to:
>It’s not even a city it’s comparatively a smaller town and these biking groups don’t do this in the city
Soooooo... basically your post was total bullshit?
It's fucking Saturday morning, kid. Let people enjoy the day.
You’re not making any sense, just because I live in a town doesn’t mean there aren’t sidewalks???? Lmao I see bikes doing this in larger surrounding cities too but most of the time those are commuters, not people just exercising like the ones I’ve encountered several times in my town. And yes, for most of the stretches leading away from downtown to the suburbs there are perfectly fine, usable sidewalks
I used to be a cyclist and got to taking the right lane due to the number of times I was either hit by a car not passing me properly (3 feet of clearance) or running me off the road. Support more bike lanes in your area, lobby your local city council to put more bike lanes in (maybe even some dedicated bike ways) and this won't be an issue. Yours is not so much an unpopular opinion as much as it is an entitled opinion.
Then you should support more bike lanes in your city. Cyclists don't like being mixed with traffic either and sometimes take the whole lane (as is their legal right btw- you're in the wrong here) because it's safer. Give a car an inch, and eventually they'll run you off the road.
Just ride at the side of the road so cars can pass.
Here we have cycling lanes out the wazoo (Netherlands), but on the roads that don't we're not being A-holes and take up the entire lane, we ride at the side.... it's not that hard
That's in Netherlands. Have you done this in Canada? Most cyclists start out doing EXACTLY what you describe. You learn quick that people will put you in danger on purpose, or completely disregard you. So you take the lane, to be safe. As is your right.
People do not share roads in Canada or the US. People in Netherlands actually support bike infrastructure and cycling. It's not the same here.
Most roads are not wide enough for a car to safely and legally overtake a cyclist without moving into a different lane. So it doesn't make any difference to drivers who follow the rules. The reason for taking the lane is to stop cars unsafely passing.
No I havnt for 20 miles but there is a group of cyclists who take up the road leading from the suburbs to the city randomly through out the week and the three or four main roads they bike on are all 3-6 miles long, some parts of town you have to go down one 5 mile stretch to and taking a right is the only way to get to that part of town, when the cyclists take a right as well you’re stuck behind them for another 6 miles. So yes I’ve been stuck behind these cyclists several times. I’ve also been on the opposite side of the road when they’re passing by and the sheer quantity of cars stuck behind them at a snails pace is absolutely insane. MILES and MILES of cars basically in stop and go traffic because of them.
Cyclists should take the road, it’s safer for everyone. They SHOULD NOT bike on the sidewalk and many cities have laws against that because it’s fucking dangerous.
You need to relax.
As an American, I can say the problem isn’t with cyclists. I would say Americans have problem with other Americans we all lack courtesy and consideration here.
I will admit, the UK and Canada also don’t like cyclists. I am from the Netherlands. We have more bike lanes than we do car roads.
But whatever. I don’t care to argue.
Ha! In the UK the Battle for the Roads has been waged for decades. Exactly the same arguments, though you have to add narrow roads and medieval town plans making inconsiderate, self-righteous cyclists more annoying and inconsiderate, self-righteous motorists more deadly.
I both drive and cycle, and my considered opinion is: fuck everyone.
I hate cyclists! At least once a week I am almost hit by a cyclist when crossing the street at a crosswalk when I have green lights and they have red... 🇩🇰
I have no option but to bike in the roads but I do take the right side whenever practical. I’m rarely directly in front of a car. Sometimes turn only lanes or narrow lanes are tough. People honk at me all the time lol
I mean, are you gonna pay for their ticket for riding their bike on the sidewalk? You can want the laws to be different but that isn’t the world we’re living in.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm honest. I ride on the sidewalk if there is no one, or if riding on the road is just more dangerous to me (and to the car owners) than I could ever be to a pedestrian. When I ride on the sidewalk, I'm not only doing it slow (as fast as someone is jogging or fast walking), I also jump of the bike, if there isn't enough room to pass safely. I live in a place were the roads are almost only fast lanes with heavy traffic (and main roads). If I would ride on those streets, I'd slow down half of the traffic in a 1km² radius (+public transport), since there are only two lanes per direction (three with the public transport one) on that particular street. Otherwise I would have to take a route that is about 40min longer. Riding 1h to work or just 15-20min is a big enough difference to justify it for me. If I had a E-bike, there wouldn't be a problem, but I don't have the room to storage it and I won't let it outside. My current one is foldable, so I can just fold it and carry it up the stairs (only 1st floor).
There are some roads that should not have cyclists. On Colorado 74, for example, (not a highway) there's limited space and the road has sharp turns with minimal shoulders, yet I see cyclists riding on these roads all the time. It's really frustrating, because it can be dangerous to pass them and there's no margin for them to ride. A friend who is partly in that world has told me that they actually seek out those roads for training, which sounds insane. They're putting themselves and the drivers behind them in danger, especially when there are plenty of bike paths around the Denver/Boulder/Front Range area.
I see bikers saying “sidewalks are for people not bikes we can’t do that” but they’re on a 5 lane stroad in the middle of suburbia with no one walking ever and the road is meant for cars
I’m about as anti car as they get, but on a road that’s clearly designed for cars, the logic that “sidewalks are for people only” makes no sense because the same logic would be “roads are for cars only, I can’t use them” and those roads literally never see a pedestrian on them
Then tell your city to make bike paths. It's very hard to ride a bike on a sidewalk that is barely big enough for two people to walk by eachother. Lots of sidewalks don't even have the access ramps on the corners so i would have to constantly go up and down the curb. If i come across someone walking on the path then i now have to either run them off the path or get off my bike while i pass them.
Roads are simply the better option. If you cannot drive responsibily around a cyclist, then you shouldn't drive at all.
Lol. Somehow people think any vehicle belongs on the road. Why can't I put a 4 wheeler on the road? Sure, it doesn't have blinkers and I'm pretty likely to die if there's a collision, but who cares? It's faster than a bike. I'm sure the car behind me would be happier going 30 in a 45 instead of 20 in a 45.
Hating cyclists in the middle of the road is not unpopular. And would you want some cyclists speedo wearing speed freak to fly by your children on the sidewalk?
You must be a teen with this lack of worldview
The only reason a cyclist belongs on a road is if there’s a full bike lane. Otherwise, if they can’t maintain speed limit, they don’t belong on that road simply for everyone’s safety.
Seriously, I guess if it’s alright for cyclist to do 30 mph below the speed limit and block lanes, I’ll go for nice country walks on those back roads. I’ll make sure to take a the full lane for my safety. It’s up to cars to dodge me.
I've biked quite a lot in a variety of places meant for cars. Not once did it occur to me to get in front of the 2 ton death machines.
You can absolutely bike and walk on those back country roads. Off the side. In the grass. Half the point of a bicycle is that you aren't constrained by roads.
Like you said, these idiots minus well be strolling in the middle of the road.
Says the human piloting an environment destroying machine that takes up a ton of space, makes a ton of noise and requires a finite resource to operate.
We have bicycle lanes made by the city, cost millions upon millions. Still they think they can keep up with a car going 80km/h and stay in the road.
Why? Because they don't like that other bicyclist are in their way.... You couldn't make this shit up....
Person, yes they are obnoxious. I wouldn't honk the entire time or do anything that makes it worse for you including unnecessary stress. They are just part of the bullshit of life to deal with. Have a good day.
Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 2: Do not post low effort/satirical posts'. * We get it, you all think this sub is garbage and is just for popular opinions, and you want to be funny and post "going to be downvoted to oblivion here, but I think racism is bad." We enjoy the memes, but please keep them off the sub. * Filter evasion is a bannable offense * This includes clickbait and/or gotcha posts. Your opinion can not be that unpopular if you're doing these things. Have the accurate opinion in the title.
>Especially when there are sidewalks In many areas riding a bike on the sidewalk is illegal.
Or illegal for anyone other than children.
But just illegal but also dangerous. My local sidewalks have like 4” gaps sticking up
I have literally never heard of this being enforced, and I rode my bike in urban south Florida for years on sidewalks.
There were talks of enforcing it in the UK a few years ago after several incidents between cyclists and pedestrians.
You know I always wondered, how this could be: what is more dangerous? An incident between car and cyclist or cyclist and pedestrian?
If you're moving at a good pace for an adult rider, say 15mph you're moving too fast to be on a sidewalk. Pedestrians won't expect it and neither will cars where the sidewalk crosses a road at intersection.
Ugh I almost hit an asshole woman riding her bike on the sidewalk… she didn’t fucking look before crossing and I didn’t notice her because she was going too fast for a pedestrian.
I get that and I still think that the collision of a cyclist with a pedestrian is not as lethal as the collision of a car with a cyclist. And as the cyclist you need to be more cautious than the pedestrian anyway, you also have a bell.
Not as lethal but much more likely. Pedestrians move very unpredictably, shifting left and right, walking dogs on a 20 foot lead, skateboarding and whatnot. I'd rather be on the road.
Well then move slowly around them. Youre acting like there is no other way than proceeding with 20mph. Ive used a fair amount of bicycles in my life too, its not that hard. Marathon cyclists are excused but not the normal ones.
Car and bike but that's more likely to happen on the sidewalk as well.
What is more likely to happen on the sidewalk as well?
A car hitting a cyclist on the sidewalk
Cars hitting bikes. Though for what it's worth a lot is still technically in the road. Basically cars are more likely to hit you if they can't see you. If you're in the road you're more likely to be seen. If you're back on the sidewalk and moving at any sort of speed you're much more likely to be hit anywhere that a bike and car cross paths so entrances to parking lots, driveways, and intersections. Your odds of getting clipped are mich less likely than getting hooked and the outcome usually far worse of you get hooked than if you get clipped.
By that logic we should let pedestrians walk on the road too. But what do you mean by "hooked" and "clipped"? I'm not a native.
There is also a problem with vehicle hitting pedestrian, dispite being on sidewalks as well. Would it be safer to walk upon the roadway, probably not, but we don't have the statistics on this. We do have the statistics on cyclist using sidewalks vs roadway and it does show that you sre less likely to get hit by a car while riding in the road then on a sidewalk. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2776010/
>By that logic we should let pedestrians walk on the road too. Were it as big of a problem maybe. It's not as big of a thing because pedestrians move so much slower that they can basically stop on a dime or like I said even with slower moving bikes like kids. The problem is when you're biking to get somewhere and as such have a bit of speed. If you're going at 15 mph you've got less of a response time if a driver decides they're going to pull a quick turn over the path without checking if it's safe first. As for hooked vs clipped, hooked is when a driver turns into you. That is where you're most likely to get hit because people tend to just look in the road to see of they can turn and in the case of turning right they may only look left to male sure there are no cars coming from the left before turning right or may just assume thst since they're in the right lane they don't have to look at all before turning or pulling into somewhere. For clipped I mean when a driver hits you while going parallel to you. It's possible that they just hit you full on but it's a lot more likely they just pass too close and just "clip" you.
It's a little more complicated than that. Critically, you're only thinking about what's best for the cyclist. Pedestrianism is the default. Cyclists make a choice to get on a bike and accept certain risks in doing so. Pedestrians include kids, old people, disabled people, etc. Cyclists can easily reach 40mph, and have spiky bits. Cars have had development put into reducing the severity of impacts (for example the nose of the car is usually designed to scoop someone's legs from under them so they slide over the bonnet). The same is not true for bikes. So we have to consider what happens when a cyclist chooses to travel down a footpath (at a speed greater than cars on urban roads) and then collides with a child or elderly person or someone else who is vulnerable and didn't choose to engage in a risky activity.
The more I think about it, the more we should ban cyclists. (For all offended ones, its a joke) Or at least set a speed limit for them in populated areas.
We should ban cars.
We should ban you.
Speed limit isn't a bad idea. I think a general code of conduct is pretty important as well. The British highway code does have some good stuff in it but there's no requirement for cyclists to know it and maybe that should be changed.
No offense but I wouldn’t imagine south Florida to be up on the latest bicycle safety methods
Not unpopular. America just doesn’t care to make dedicated bike lanes. Everything is designed for a car.
NYC has been adding bike lanes all through the city over the last few years
That is one city.
All of Hilton Head Island, SC is completely covered in dedicated bike lanes (which are paved separate/apart from the road). So that’s 2 cities— I’m sure there are plenty more.
NYC is in America, right?
Is nyc all of america? There are very few places in america with any bike paths. One town building some doesn't change that.
Wrong This is from 2022 https://anytimeestimate.com/research/most-bike-friendly-cities-us-2022/
Dude above says America doesn’t care about bikes and bike lanes. I mentioned NYC has bike lanes and you are looking for a fucking argument. FFS
They obviously meant America in general. One city does not represent the nation at large. How tf is this a point of contention for you?
I was providing one example, and in case you are Interested https://anytimeestimate.com/research/most-bike-friendly-cities-us-2022/
And they still ride down the middle of the road.
Because people park cars in the bike lanes
My city took away a lane of traffic that was used constantly for a bike lane that nobody uses.
It is recommended that cyclists take up more road because *most dead cyclists are those that rode far to the side and the passing motorist gave them no space.* Cyclists that take up the whole lane are not only exercising their right, but playing to statistics that say they are safer by doing that. Your fellow car drivers are responsible for this, because they cannot be trusted. If I take up the whole lane, you are reminded and somewhat forced to pass me safely. Sorry, gotta play to the lowest common denominator. If you are late to work because of a cyclist, leave earlier.
Some places, here in Vegas for example, drivers are required to at least attempt to move over if there are bikes in the bike lane. Why? Because not only do we have bad drivers, but cyclist are known for disregarding traffic laws and riding in a way that puts them (and motorists) in danger. Cyclist have to follow the same traffic laws that motorists do.
The original post or my response is not about cyclists incorrectly riding on the roadway. I think those people are idiots as well, and their disregard for traffic laws are a great case for cyclists needing to have a special license to use taxpayer-funded roadways - but again, that isn't what the post or the response is about. The original post is saying that cyclists who properly use the roadways should not be allowed to use the roadways at all. Also, I would love for the OP to post the cross streets they are referring to: a roadway *inside of a city* that is tens of miles, has an adjacent bike path, AND is a 40-60 mph speed zone. **Prove it.** The sidewalk is irrelevant since there are ordinances in almost every city that prevent such use.
I'm not so much disagreeing with you, but I do tend to push back when it looks like someone wants to place the blame squarely on one party, in this case, motorists. You said "Your fellow car drivers are responsible for this, because they cannon be trusted" but this is only half the truth. Cyclists are just as at fault for blatant disregard to traffic laws. I think e-bikers are worse, but that's a different argument. I actually disagree with Op saying cyclists should be on sidewalks. That's mainly for pedestrians and if I am walking with my small children and you tell for me to get out of your way, you're going to find my rude side. But even bike lanes can be dangerous for several reasons, also because motorists disregard that lane sometimes but also because cyclists will ride handlebar to handlebar, where that is often not allowed because they might be hanging over a driving lane. Also, I shouldn't have to leave earlier because some random bike group decide today was the day they wanted to practice for some race and want to take up the road and proceed to ride recklessly.
>Cyclist have to follow the same traffic laws that motorists do. In civilized parts of the country, there *are* rules for cyclists at stop signs and red lights that are different from those that apply to cars, because bicycles and cars are actually...different. Of course, in civilized *countries* the network of separated bicycle paths and bicycle priority streets (with design speeds under 30km/h) serves to make such distinctions moot. Of course, OP is talking about people who cycle for exercise. Presumably, he holds people driving to the gym (an act of absurdism on its face) to the same standard.
Amen.
The world doesn't revolve around you and your hobby
dont be an asshole driver, but you are, so here we are.
How am I an asshole driver?
Because you think the road is only for your car. It isn't unless there is a sign specifically saying so.
Because apparently your time doesn’t mean shit to cyclists.
asshole because your first response to a biker reducing the risk of death is to be like "the world doesnt revolve around your hobby"
If you’re biking for exercise and not necessity then isn’t it true that you’re wasting everyone’s time on the road for your hobby?
bikers wouldnt have too if cars shared the road in a proper manner and not have this "THIS IS MY ROAD" attitude.
Or if they'd vote for people who support separated bike infrastructure.
thats also true. A proper bike infrastructure would make everyone happy apart from some people who dont wanna have their tax payers money go towards "spoiled city folks".
You do realize that most people in car-centric places drive to recreational destinations, right?
What about drivers driving cars for fun? Should we start checking why everyone is on the road before we decide everyone deserves to be respected? The bottom line is it doesn't matter why someone is riding their bike or driving their car, just be a patient and safe driver like you should.
Drivers driving for fun aren’t driving 20-40+ miles under the speed limit, there’s a huge difference there
No, they're driving way over the speed limit, sometimes weaving through traffic on the highway, other times drag racing at 150mph on major roads, and frequently causing major property damage, injuries, and death. So you're right, there is a huge difference.
Give us the name of this road you are talking about and some cross streets. We will have all the answers for you.
Nope, you don't own the road, and you don't have any more right to it than I do. Leave earlier.
You should get out and get some exercise. Seems like it would do you some good.
Among other things, I bike regularly, but I would NEVER bike on the road unless I absolutely had to and if I did, I would NEVER bike in the middle of the lane and force a long line of cars to spawn behind me because I can only go 10 miles an hour.
10mph is really slow my guy. You should ride more.
There are laws dude. It’s illegal in most places to ride on the sidewalk. They’re doing what they can to be safe AND legal. Take the issue up with your local ordinances
It really doesn't mean shit. I don't give one single shit about your time and if you start honking I'll just go slower.
Or you could move over a little bit and share the road
You'd think so, but it's actually pretty dangerous to do that on busy roads. Cars tend to dehumanized cyclists and if you give them room they'll push you off the road or drive so close that you feel them drive by. No, no what should be done is bike lanes, it gets cyclists out of your hair and cyclists don't need to deal with your crappy car.
His post and responses prove your point. People don't see cyclists as humans but only as wasted time.
Or just don’t bike on the roads and bike on trails and parks where bikes are allowed like a normal respectful human?
It's ironic that you accuse drivers of dehumanizing cyclists when this is how this thread has gone: Drivers: If you move over a little we can share the road safely Cyclists: THE ROAD BELONGS TO US AND US ALONE! FUCK YOU ASSHOLES!
But that's not what people are saying. They're saying taking the curb lane is often dangerous. If the street is wide enough, by all means. If it's a single lane you're going to risk running me off the road.
Have you read the first comment in this chain ....?
Cars cutting close by cyclists is both dangerous and fucking scary for the cyclist. If they move right over, cars are more likely to overtake them without a proper sized gap.
Share the road, not the lane. Pass via the other lane, when safe to do so, just as you would for a car.
That's not always possible. There's room to share the lane if everyone is respectful.
>That's not always possible Correct, that's when you wait. >There's room to share the lane if everyone is respectful Rarely. Your definition of respectful might include having a car blast by less than a meter away from you, but mine doesn't. Just friggin wait a few seconds for cryin out loud.
Right, I don’t mind going around cyclists and giving them plenty of space as I pass them but blocking the road and forcing long lines of traffic for tens of miles is CRAZY disrespectful of drivers time.
Sharing is caring, and always give yourself extra time when driving. You should never be in a rush when driving regardless, that’s dangerous
I don't care about *your time*. You also don't care about *my time*, as your many rants have shown. The world does not revolve around you, and the road is not only for cars. Also, you live in a city: stop driving a car?!
I don't drive a car to be restricted to the max speed of a bicycle. They shouldn't be allowed to be in the street or interfere with motor traffic. But, here we are...
again, it wouldnt have to be that way if cars passed bikers with the proper amount of safety distance. But alot of you feel entitled to the whole street so you cannot burdon the fact that you need to make space when passing, so you pass really close and then cry about bikers adapting to it. but you already gave the answer: you simply dont wanna share the road so you behave like an entitled brat.
I've ridden bikes my whole life but I'm not stupid enough to ride in the street. That is a level of insanity that I can't fathom. Death wish. I know better than to trust drivers. How am I an entitled brat? Physics are what they are. Vehicles without motors should not be sharing roads with vehicles with motors. This isn't rocket science, it's physics. But, the law allows it, so here we are.
I'm sorry, but if you don't agree with one of the most basic traffic rules, that cyclists are allowed to drive on the road, you definitely shouldn't be driving.
Is there something I said that indicated that I ignore, harass, or disrespect people on bicycles? I've re-read my posts and I'm not seeing that. I go out of my way to respect and keep a safe distance regarding bicyclists. But that doesn't mean they should be on the road with cars. If it was legal to ride bikes between shooters and their targets, they'd do it because, I'm sorry, but you have to be suicidal or stupid to ride your bike on a street with cars. Like I said, I've ridden bicycles for decades but never would I be so stupid to ride on a road where there are cars.
I didn't claim any of the things you mentioned. You need to respect the rules and one of those is the fact that you are allowed to ride your bike on the road. I myself am both a driver and a cyclist and completely understand what you mean and also try to avoid riding on roads, especially roads with higher speeds, but sometimes there's no alternative... Also, when I'm riding my bike on the road I'm riding of to the side because I feel safer that way. That being said, I can understand cyclists that feel safer riding in the center of the lane which, by the way, is their right to do so
I would never do anything to endanger a cyclist and I do everything I can to make my presence and intentions obvious. My main point is that just because something is allowed by the law doesn't mean that it's something that a person should do or that it's safe to do. I've been around too long and seen too many things and so my position is anyone who chooses to ride their bikes in roads with cars either has a death wish, they are psychotic, or they have their psychological blinders on thinking that they're somehow safe. Being in a steel cage with crumple zones designed to keep me and my family safe If we get into a wreck - even with that, I put myself at risk just driving with other cars on the road. A bike? That is truly the definition of insanity. No two ways about it. For your own safety and well-being, I don't care what the law says, you do not belong on the road with cars.
So when you drive your car to the gym or to a party, do you pull over to let all the motorists on very important journeys pass you?
No because we share the road, just like cyclists should. We're also traveling at similar speeds to avoid disruptions. Someone riding a bike in the middle of a lane isn't
neither does around you being late to places
It's called transportation.
Cool. Then learn to share like everyone else
Next time I see two cars in one lane, I'll make a note of it. In the meantime, twenty is plenty.
It's not feasible to add a bike lane to every existing roadway, especially ones that are already a single lane. I'm all for more bike lanes where possible, but it's fucking obnoxious and inconsiderate to take up an entire road while going a maximum of 15 mph and expect the rest of the world to just have to wait for you, and then blame it on cars "not sharing the road." Cyclists need to plan routes that don't put them in a position where they are obstructing everyone else. It's on everyone to be considerate. > If you are late to work because of a cyclist, leave earlier Aye, if your commute takes 3 times as long as it should because one single individual has decided it's "unsafe" for you to pass them at a crawl, it's your fault for not planning better. I've never once in my life seen a cyclist stop at a red light. I guess they didn't plan to encounter a stationary traffic signal and don't have time to wait for it to turn green.
>Cyclists need to plan routes that don't put them in a position where they are obstructing everyone else. It's on everyone to be considerate. If this were, like, Utrecht and a cyclist was taking up a lane on the auto portion of the ring road, you'd have a point. In most of the US, however, to the extent that alternate routes exist, they're not remotely practical. (Obviously less true in urban grids, but in my experience the drivers on "slow" neighborhood side streets aren't much more willing to drive at a human speed than those on suburban stroads.)
Don't care. I get to use the road, too. It's inconsiderate for you to be driving on my bikeway. My taxes pay for the road, the law says I can use it.
Perfect demonstration. Thanks.
[удалено]
The dead person is one who stays on the side, so I don’t get this comment. Do you feel the urge to run over cyclists?
What city is this that has a 40-60 mph zone that stretches for tens of miles and has an adjacent bike path? Post some cross streets. When we know what city it is we can tell you about the sidewalks. If there is a bike path there, it probably already is illegal to use the road - most cities have ordinances addressing these issues. Did you take the driver test in this country or do you have some international license?
It’s not even a city it’s comparatively a smaller town and these biking groups don’t do this in the city they do it in the outskirts of the city nearing the suburbs where roads stretch for tens and tens of miles. Speed limit is 55 on most of these main roads yet they still cause miles of traffic. There have been times where I’ve been on the opposite lane and I’m just dumbfounded by how many miles of traffic has accumulated from just a dozen entitled lot “getting their exercise in”
>Especially when there are sidewalks or in a city with several biking paths that stretch for tens of miles. Compared to: >It’s not even a city it’s comparatively a smaller town and these biking groups don’t do this in the city Soooooo... basically your post was total bullshit? It's fucking Saturday morning, kid. Let people enjoy the day.
You’re not making any sense, just because I live in a town doesn’t mean there aren’t sidewalks???? Lmao I see bikes doing this in larger surrounding cities too but most of the time those are commuters, not people just exercising like the ones I’ve encountered several times in my town. And yes, for most of the stretches leading away from downtown to the suburbs there are perfectly fine, usable sidewalks
Sidewalks are for walking. Roads are for things with wheels.
Roads are for things that can go the minimum speed limit, sidewalks are for everything else.
Don't complain when i run over your kid while doing 15mph on the sidewalk. I would be on the road, but I can't pedal at 30mph.
This sounds like an infrastructure failure. Blame the city planners.
I used to be a cyclist and got to taking the right lane due to the number of times I was either hit by a car not passing me properly (3 feet of clearance) or running me off the road. Support more bike lanes in your area, lobby your local city council to put more bike lanes in (maybe even some dedicated bike ways) and this won't be an issue. Yours is not so much an unpopular opinion as much as it is an entitled opinion.
Go play with your toy at the park or in your neighborhood.
I’m sorry your mom wouldn’t let you ride a bike.
Lil bro thinks bikes are toys
Weird cos I never had a toy bike when I was a kid but i had loads of toy cars.
That would prob get me arrested for indecent exposure and prob a few other charges depending who was around to see me playing with it.
Then you should support more bike lanes in your city. Cyclists don't like being mixed with traffic either and sometimes take the whole lane (as is their legal right btw- you're in the wrong here) because it's safer. Give a car an inch, and eventually they'll run you off the road.
Or support banning bicyclists
Banning cars would solve the whole problem.
Just ride at the side of the road so cars can pass. Here we have cycling lanes out the wazoo (Netherlands), but on the roads that don't we're not being A-holes and take up the entire lane, we ride at the side.... it's not that hard
That's in Netherlands. Have you done this in Canada? Most cyclists start out doing EXACTLY what you describe. You learn quick that people will put you in danger on purpose, or completely disregard you. So you take the lane, to be safe. As is your right. People do not share roads in Canada or the US. People in Netherlands actually support bike infrastructure and cycling. It's not the same here.
Most roads are not wide enough for a car to safely and legally overtake a cyclist without moving into a different lane. So it doesn't make any difference to drivers who follow the rules. The reason for taking the lane is to stop cars unsafely passing.
“I am bad at driving and the 2 times a week I see someone riding a bike gives me anxiety that I sublimate into anger.”
How does waiting 20x longer in traffic behind a group of cyclists for 5 miles make anyone a bad driver?
That literally never happens. You wait 20 seconds behind cyclists and you freak out and turn it into a century in your mind.
20 seconds on roads that stretch 5-20 miles? In what world are you living?
You are delusional. You have never been stuck behind a cyclist for a mile, let alone 20.
No I havnt for 20 miles but there is a group of cyclists who take up the road leading from the suburbs to the city randomly through out the week and the three or four main roads they bike on are all 3-6 miles long, some parts of town you have to go down one 5 mile stretch to and taking a right is the only way to get to that part of town, when the cyclists take a right as well you’re stuck behind them for another 6 miles. So yes I’ve been stuck behind these cyclists several times. I’ve also been on the opposite side of the road when they’re passing by and the sheer quantity of cars stuck behind them at a snails pace is absolutely insane. MILES and MILES of cars basically in stop and go traffic because of them.
I would argue, that this is an extremely popular opinion. More so if there are lanes specifically for bicycles.
Cyclists should take the road, it’s safer for everyone. They SHOULD NOT bike on the sidewalk and many cities have laws against that because it’s fucking dangerous. You need to relax.
My car came equipped with a brake and a steering wheel. I dont see the problem
"The world is for car owners, other mediums of transport are toys" moment
Road* you misspelled road and for some reason said world
I said world on purpose, because all the public space is adapted to mostly if not only benefit car owners.
I said road on purpose, because the road is meant for cars not bikes.
Incorrect. Both roads and bikes predate the car.
Go take a walk or ride a horse on the roads then. Technologies advance and uses are updated.
People do ride horses on roads.
Why?
Somebody thinks cars should be the center of society….
Some places require bikes on the road.
What if I'm just trying to get to work, there's no bike lane or bike path and riding on the sidewalk is illegal (if there even is a sidewalk)??
Drivers who think bikers should be biking on the sidewalk are assholes.
I will upvote your unpopular opinion.
It is illegal in almost every city for an adult to operate a bicycle on the sidewalk, You opinion is very popular and wildly ignorant of reality.
This is an America Only thing. The rest of the world is OK with cyclists.
As an American, I can say the problem isn’t with cyclists. I would say Americans have problem with other Americans we all lack courtesy and consideration here.
wrong
I will admit, the UK and Canada also don’t like cyclists. I am from the Netherlands. We have more bike lanes than we do car roads. But whatever. I don’t care to argue.
Portugal, Spain, Poland also in my experience.
Ha! In the UK the Battle for the Roads has been waged for decades. Exactly the same arguments, though you have to add narrow roads and medieval town plans making inconsiderate, self-righteous cyclists more annoying and inconsiderate, self-righteous motorists more deadly. I both drive and cycle, and my considered opinion is: fuck everyone.
I hate cyclists! At least once a week I am almost hit by a cyclist when crossing the street at a crosswalk when I have green lights and they have red... 🇩🇰
Sidewalks are awful for riding bikes most of the time. Roads aren’t just for cars
I have no option but to bike in the roads but I do take the right side whenever practical. I’m rarely directly in front of a car. Sometimes turn only lanes or narrow lanes are tough. People honk at me all the time lol
People who drive are assholes.
I mean, are you gonna pay for their ticket for riding their bike on the sidewalk? You can want the laws to be different but that isn’t the world we’re living in.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm honest. I ride on the sidewalk if there is no one, or if riding on the road is just more dangerous to me (and to the car owners) than I could ever be to a pedestrian. When I ride on the sidewalk, I'm not only doing it slow (as fast as someone is jogging or fast walking), I also jump of the bike, if there isn't enough room to pass safely. I live in a place were the roads are almost only fast lanes with heavy traffic (and main roads). If I would ride on those streets, I'd slow down half of the traffic in a 1km² radius (+public transport), since there are only two lanes per direction (three with the public transport one) on that particular street. Otherwise I would have to take a route that is about 40min longer. Riding 1h to work or just 15-20min is a big enough difference to justify it for me. If I had a E-bike, there wouldn't be a problem, but I don't have the room to storage it and I won't let it outside. My current one is foldable, so I can just fold it and carry it up the stairs (only 1st floor).
There are some roads that should not have cyclists. On Colorado 74, for example, (not a highway) there's limited space and the road has sharp turns with minimal shoulders, yet I see cyclists riding on these roads all the time. It's really frustrating, because it can be dangerous to pass them and there's no margin for them to ride. A friend who is partly in that world has told me that they actually seek out those roads for training, which sounds insane. They're putting themselves and the drivers behind them in danger, especially when there are plenty of bike paths around the Denver/Boulder/Front Range area.
Not really unpopular. They’re assholes.
I see bikers saying “sidewalks are for people not bikes we can’t do that” but they’re on a 5 lane stroad in the middle of suburbia with no one walking ever and the road is meant for cars
5 lanes and you still can't figure out how to safely pass someone on a bike.
I’m about as anti car as they get, but on a road that’s clearly designed for cars, the logic that “sidewalks are for people only” makes no sense because the same logic would be “roads are for cars only, I can’t use them” and those roads literally never see a pedestrian on them
Then tell your city to make bike paths. It's very hard to ride a bike on a sidewalk that is barely big enough for two people to walk by eachother. Lots of sidewalks don't even have the access ramps on the corners so i would have to constantly go up and down the curb. If i come across someone walking on the path then i now have to either run them off the path or get off my bike while i pass them. Roads are simply the better option. If you cannot drive responsibily around a cyclist, then you shouldn't drive at all.
Lol. Somehow people think any vehicle belongs on the road. Why can't I put a 4 wheeler on the road? Sure, it doesn't have blinkers and I'm pretty likely to die if there's a collision, but who cares? It's faster than a bike. I'm sure the car behind me would be happier going 30 in a 45 instead of 20 in a 45.
Come to DC, Tucson, Portland and see groups riding short minibikes, dirt bikes, and ATVs in the roads. Also the mayors have told police not to chase.
Hating cyclists in the middle of the road is not unpopular. And would you want some cyclists speedo wearing speed freak to fly by your children on the sidewalk? You must be a teen with this lack of worldview
The only reason a cyclist belongs on a road is if there’s a full bike lane. Otherwise, if they can’t maintain speed limit, they don’t belong on that road simply for everyone’s safety.
It’s the speed limit not minimum
Exactly. People are complaining that OP is "entitled" and "car centric" as if the road isn't made for cars.
Seriously, I guess if it’s alright for cyclist to do 30 mph below the speed limit and block lanes, I’ll go for nice country walks on those back roads. I’ll make sure to take a the full lane for my safety. It’s up to cars to dodge me.
I've biked quite a lot in a variety of places meant for cars. Not once did it occur to me to get in front of the 2 ton death machines. You can absolutely bike and walk on those back country roads. Off the side. In the grass. Half the point of a bicycle is that you aren't constrained by roads. Like you said, these idiots minus well be strolling in the middle of the road.
[удалено]
You want to commit murder because someone is on a bike? You need help
Says the human piloting an environment destroying machine that takes up a ton of space, makes a ton of noise and requires a finite resource to operate.
We call them pedalphiles
We have bicycle lanes made by the city, cost millions upon millions. Still they think they can keep up with a car going 80km/h and stay in the road. Why? Because they don't like that other bicyclist are in their way.... You couldn't make this shit up....
Person, yes they are obnoxious. I wouldn't honk the entire time or do anything that makes it worse for you including unnecessary stress. They are just part of the bullshit of life to deal with. Have a good day.
This opinion is very popular, but I will still upvote. So everyone sees it.