[sustran] Re: Give cyclist a safety wing

[Lewis Thorwaldson]

I agree with Sujit completely.
It is simply a wise decision to make oneself more visible without being
overburdened by the precaution. Ex. I wear white as opposed to black
(usually) and have lights on my bike for night. When driving a car, I also
use my headlights during the day. Just makes sense and is not a huge hassle.
However, no, we shouldn't as vulnerable users be the ones who have to be
completely in charge of our own safety. Common sense rules, but the onus
should be on the drivers since they are the dangerous link in the equation.
Same as it should be that pedestrian safety is in the hands of cyclists.
Also, when we start forcing or strongly encouraging a uniform for bicycling
- bright clothing, helmet, etc - this will discourage potential riders who
do not want to either look like a fool, or just don't feel like dealing with
it or can't afford to buy all these accessories. It also spreads the image
that cycling is not safe since you need all this stuff in order not to get
killed, which further discourages cycling. And we all know that the best way
to improve cycling safety is to increase the number of cyclists on the
roads. More cyclists means more visibility and expectation of cyclists, and
a greater likelihood that any driver is also a cyclist and understands how
to act.

-Lewis Thorwaldson



My reaction is similar to Sudhir's but perhaps a little stronger.

I'm amazed to see efforts on trying to make the cyclist visible through one
smart idea after another! While it is logical that pedestrians and cyclists
being a vulnerable group should avoid wearing clothes that may make them
invisible to the driver of a vehicle that may hit them with serious results
(to the walker or the cyclist) surely the onus of finding a solution
to the danger from auto vehicles (cars, motorised two wheelers, SUVs,
trucks, buses,  etc)  should not be on the shoulders of the potential
victims.

Surely we (as the society) must devise ways through which pedestrian and
cyclist safety is absolutely ensured. If this means putting in place
foolproof ways to ensure low vehicle speeds, traffic calming methods,
narrowing of road widths, increasing car-free areas in high human density
zones, strict enforcement and strong punishments for violators etc so be it.


Why should we accept that cars have a "birth-right" to charge along streets
used by living beings (as against the race tracks for example) while those
most likely to be hit by cars must devise ways to keep themselves safe?

--
Sujit