View Single Post
  #766  
Old February 5th 18, 03:31 AM posted to rec.bicycles.misc
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,697
Default AG: Dead Right

On Sun, 4 Feb 2018 09:49:25 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 2/3/2018 9:55 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sat, 03 Feb 2018 21:07:10 -0400, Joy Beeson
wrote:


(In appropriate jurisdictions, replace "right" with "left".)

There are various and sundry laws in different jurisdictions about
passing another vehicle on the right.

What the law says doesn't matter. What matters is that

WHEN YOU PASS A VEHICLE ON ITS RIGHT
YOU ARE BETTING YOUR LIFE THAT IT WON'T TURN RIGHT.

You don't want to make that bet unless you are sure that you will win.


Essentially you are talking about "Self Preservation:, described by
Google as "Self-preservation is a behavior that ensures the survival
of an organism. It is almost universal among living organisms.

The description goes on to say, The desire for self-preservation has
led to countless laws and regulations surrounding a culture of safety
in Western society.[10] Seat belt laws, speed limits, texting
regulations, and the "stranger danger" campaign should all be familiar
examples of societal guides and regulations to enhance survival, and
these laws are heavily supported due to the animal need we possess for
self-preservation.

" Self-preservation is also thought by some to be the basis of
rational and logical thought and behavior".


But there are complications. Rather frequently, I encounter people who
have deluded ideas about dangers. On one hand, the people Joy is
addressing have no idea that they are putting themselves at risk.

On the other hand, and ever more common, there are people who imagine
that certain safe or even beneficial activities are dangerous. Those
people will (for example) never ride a bicycle at all, because they
think bicycling is very, very dangerous. As a consequence, they are much
more likely to die of a variety of ailments triggered by being
sedentary. (Refusing to ride without a magic plastic hat is a variation
on this theme.)

I've come across a man - educated, recently elected judge - who said he
would never walk in a forest while wearing earplugs, because there is
such a high risk of a tree falling on a person. (Seriously!)

It's easy for an old country boy (like me) to walk around muttering
"damned fool", but the problem is much deeper then that. It is
basically lack of knowledge, I was going to write "ignorance" but
decided that was a bid argumentative.

Re trees falling down, I've spend a considerable amount of time
walking about in forested areas and I am aware that trees very rarely
fall down... well, except in hurricanes and typhoons :-) but
apparently the judge doesn't have that experience.

Of course, to put a different slant on the story it is equally
accurate to state that the average poster here is incompetent to
discuss the legal system and its derivatives as used in the U.S. and
its various states. Witness how many times when a bicycle and an auto
come in violent contact the cry "Off with his head echoes through the
realm. If one attempts to interject a little reality, like, "is there
any evidence what took place? Any witnesses? Can a case be made? There
is an immediate outcry, generally in the vein of "bicycle got hit it
must be the auto's fault. No other possibility exists.

There are millions of kids who are told to NEVER talk to strangers. Or
never walk to school.


Well, one can only comment that as children did walk to school when I
was a student with no ill effects and if it is now unsafe then the
only possible assumption that y'all must have evolved a society, in
the past 50 years, or so, where children are unsafe.

(Which certainly makes more sense then an oak tree falling on your
head :-)

There are countless people who will never fly in a commercial airline.

And on the third hand, there are the clueless who's deluded
self-preservation leads them to do things that put them at much, much
greater risk. Every wrong-way bicyclist is convinced that he's far
safer than those riding properly. The same is true for sidewalk riders,
despite copious research proving them wrong. And of course, there are
plenty of bike lanes to the right of potential right-turning vehicles.
Those lanes actively delude people into thinking they're safe.

Ignorance is a tough opponent.


The interesting thing is that although the cyclist is often found to
be at fault - breaking traffic rules, drunk, etc., no one seems to
admit that it is very possible that the major problem with the
question of bicycle safety is the people that ride them. Nope, we
argue that all we have to do is build another MUP and everybody will
be safe as safe can be.

Reality is a terrible thing to have to face.
--
Cheers,

John B.

Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home