In China large groups of bicyclists are the norm and folks are in much better physical shape. China can teach us a lesson in this regard

When bikers do something stupid, it's annoying. When a driver does something stupid, it's dangerous and often deadly. Yet we all obviously accept the existence of cars and their necessity in our lives. Why not bikes, too?

The argument against bicycle lanes and bicyclists' rights is merely the ol' I-don't-like-them-so-they-shouldn't-get-what-they-want argument. And that argument has nothing to do with what is smartest or safest.

As a member of an armed revolutionary paramilitary organization, I'm shocked that we might have to apply for a parade permit in order to finally set the bitch off.

Just be glad that you don't live in South Carolina, where each subversive has to register with the state and pay a $5 filing fee (which in NYC dollars is something like $3000).

We almost missed getting our 501-3C status because Colonel Mustapha ran out of stamps.

So if I'm riding to work and there happens to be 49 other cyclists on the same street as me, going in the same direction, can the police arrest me?

If not, how is this functionally different than a group bicycle ride such as those organized by the Five Boro Bicicle Club, the main plaintiff?

This is old, but pretty good:

http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/downloads/pdf/episrv/episrv-bike-report.pdf

There's a lot in there but the summary on page 30 is pretty good. Basically, almost all bicycle deaths are because the rider is outside of a bike lane and not wearing a helmet.

Also, FakeHipster, yes, cars kill people a lot more often than bikes because there are a lot more cars on the road. And yes, hunter.blatherer, drivers do break the law more often because there are many more of them. Those are both idiotic points, because neither of them has anything to do with percentages. What percentage of bicycle riders break the law compared to motorists, and how often does that contribute to an accident? That's what I'm talking about.

Percentages don't kill people, people do. And people with cars who are negligent kill a lot of people every year - pedestrians and cyclists - and are treated leniently.

Until following the law is less dangerous to my and other lives than not following the law (i.e. going through a red light after checking that there is no cross traffic, so that I am more visible and less in the way of drivers), I will continue to do what is safer. And that's how a lot of other people feel too.

If we get a safer bicycling infrastructure, and more cyclists on the road, you'll see less of the behavior you're complaining about.

But you should still be more outraged over the high number of driver-caused deaths.

"I will continue to do what is safer."

You mean to say: "I will continue to do whatever the hell I feel like doing."

Sorry, the law and your fellow citizens disagree with you. Your sense of self-entitlement is incredible!

Incidentally, I have never ridden a bike on the sidewalk. Never.

Your lawless actions are what gives cyclists a bad name and is what generates the gross antipathy towards cyclists.

Think about the consequences of your decision and how it affects others. Why should DOT install any more bike lanes if you alone are the arbiter when it is finally safe to get off the sidewalk?

This must be another case where you can't argue against the argument actually being made, so you pretend that a weaker point is being made.

Are you even paying attention? I never ride on the sidewalk either. But treating a red light like a yield signal harms no one, and waiting for it to turn green and then trying to keep up with impatient drivers would cause far more accidents.

At least if I run a red, I put significantly more distance between myself and the tons of moving metal behind me.

Exactly. It's also better for the humans in those tons of metal, since they don't have to be as nervous about hitting you (if they're one of those drivers who care).

It has been proven statistically (at least in Britain) that it is safer for everyone if bicyclists run red lights through an empty intersection than if they wait for the light to turn green, because, evidently, many motorists cannot see something as small as a bicycle, especially when they are crowded up at a red light and impatient to be off when it turns green. The basic problem is that intersections and signals are not generally designed and managed for bicyclists (and pedestrians, etc.) but for automobiles. This is clearly because automobile drivers have higher social status on the streets than other users, and therefore more rights, at least with the government. It is not obvious how to change this situation even when, as in New York City, motorists are in the minority. Someone in this thread mentioned "the back of the bus" and that is more or less what separate bicycle lanes represent. They may be a partial solution, but many motorists do not observe them just as they do not observe bicycles at intersections.

The statistics about people not being hit when in bicycle lanes may refer to conditions where the bicycle lanes are rare and well away from busy motor traffic, as was the case several years ago. According to what I've seen about helmets, the figures are usually fixed by people who want to sell helmets; if you get hit hard, you're probably going to die regardless of what's on your head. You'd need full body armor to protect you, because that's where cars hit you -- usually the hips or shoulders -- and that's what you fall on.

"If we get a safer bicycling infrastructure, and more cyclists on the road, you'll see less of the behavior you're complaining about."

In fact, this is already happening.

Sorry, but until you can keep up with the cars on FDR on your bicycle, you're not really traffic. When bikes ride in the middle of the street, they slow traffic down, plain and simple.

On top of that, if drivers broke the law as frequently and, more importantly, as dangerously, as the large majority of bicyclists do (many of whom are the CM folks), people would be going (rightly) berserk.

Drivers break the law more often than bicyclists, if only because there are so many more of them.

And the only ones going berserk are the families of the many people they kill.

Listen, we can argue in circles about who breaks the law more often, but the point is this: just because cars break the law doesn't give you the right to. If you're so annoyed with the way people drive, then one-up them and obey the law even more strictly. This constant grandstanding about it just pisses the NYPD and a lot of other people off and really doesn't help anything. If a cop shoves you off your bike in Times Square, you've got a legit complaint. Otherwise, just stfu and ride in the bike lane, please. Enough of this 'they're on the sidewalk too!' bs. If you're breaking the law, don't complain when you get appropriately bitch-slapped.

It's not about grandstanding, it's about safety (mine and others'). I can't one-up anyone from a grave, just because I was following the law and they weren't. And I never ride on the sidewalk and regularly chide other riders who do.