When is it ok to kill cyclists?

Earlier this month The New York Times published an opinion piece about cycling, “Is it O.K. to Kill Cyclists?“. It prompted a huge number of articles and blog posts which, insofar as discussion about cycling safety helps to improve cycling safety, is probably a good thing.

Even the Economist has waded in with, “The American right-of-way“, which someone has kindly brought to my attention this morning. So I thought I would give my opinion on it.

Is it OK to kill cyclists? Absolutely not. How could the answer to this question ever possibly be yes? But as the author of the original article points out, if a motorist hits and kills a cyclist, chances are they will receive no punishment whatsoever. So our society – and I’m thinking New Zealand, Australia, Britain, US here – currently does say it is ok to kill cyclists. This is in stark contrast to the Netherlands where drivers are always at fault. The onus is on the driver to prove they are not at fault and this is quite difficult to do.

Earlier this year a friend of mine was cycling in Auckland and was struck by a car from behind. The driver of the vehicle was not charged at all and not only that but my friend was inexplicably told by the attending officer to get a car because cycling in Auckland is dangerous. If drivers were forced to take responsibility for harming cyclists then maybe it wouldn’t be quite as dangerous as it is. They would be forced to be more vigilant and cautious and this is a good thing.

These discussions come at a time when London has just had its sixth cyclist killed in two weeks. I can’t help but notice that the prevailing attitude in the articles about these tragedies is one of blame on cyclists. For instance, Boris Johnson is calling for a ban on cyclists wearing headphones. Another article encourages cyclists to wear high-visibility vests and helmets. No-where have I seen talk of making motorists responsible. Why not? It’s a stark example of prejudice against cyclists and continued promotion of our car-centric culture.

I will say one thing though. By and large the motorists in York are very cautious around cyclists and always give way to me. I have actually been blown away by the level of courtesy and politeness of York’s motorists. But this might be because I have a monster bike.

Posted

November 21, 2013

Cycling

Rachel M

Tags:

accident, bikes, cars, cycle, cycling, infrastructure, kill, motorists

Comments

27 responses to “When is it ok to kill cyclists?”

xbox2121

November 21, 2013

Cyclists where I live are required to wear helmets and clothing with reflective stripes on it just like you mentioned. This city just recently passed a law forcing motorists to give cyclists a three foot right away. So maybe where I live its a start.

Reply
1. Rachel
  
  November 21, 2013
  
  A three foot right of way does sound like a good start. Changing the law to make motorists accountable would be even better though.
  
  Reply
  1. xbox2121
    
    November 21, 2013
    
    Sorry they are accountable in part if they break the 3 foot guidelines they can get a ticket and if an accident occurs and it is the motorists fault they get busted. I also forgot to mention this law was only passed a couple of months ago and motorists are still complaing about it. I say let the complain I have always given way to cyclists its no big deal just common courisity
Victor Venema

November 22, 2013

Even if a cyclist makes a big mistake and behaves irresponsibly, putting the death penalty on that is disproportional. Without motorists the same error would have only minimal consequences.

In The Netherlands the motorist is not automatically guilty in case of an accident, but he does have to pay for the costs. This is also partially a practical matter as motorists are required to have a liability insurance and if someone becomes invalid this is very costly, which otherwise society would have to pay for.

Reply
1. Rachel
  
  November 22, 2013
  
  I found your comment, Victor. After you liked my post I went and checked the spam folder. This is a good strategy I think. 🙂
  
  Thanks for the clarification about the law in the Netherlands. It sounds very sensible to me and something that other countries can learn from. It’s true that cyclists and pedestrians are much more vulnerable on the roads and I think that by making motorists more accountable we are simply recognising that vulnerability.
  
  Reply
2. Rachel
  
  November 22, 2013
  
  Maybe you should move to the light side and get a wordpress blog instead? It may not solve the problem of course but you’d think wordpress would know which of its own blogs were spam.
  
  I used to blog at blogger and moved to wordpress and have found it much better. You can even move all of your existing blog posts over. That’s what I did.
  
  Reply
  1. Victor Venema
    
    November 22, 2013
    
    It worked! 🙂
    
    Wouldn’t you lose all the feed subscribers and Google’s link love by moving to a new URL?
  2. Rachel
    
    November 22, 2013
    
    You can update your feedburner subscribers – http://yourbusiness.azcentral.com/move-feedburner-subscribers-blogspot-wordpress-blog-8758.html
    
    But you will lose your google links. However I found this was only temporary and they very quickly recovered. You would also have a redirection link from blogger of course.
    
    I only moved my blog because my mother-in-law was getting upset with the stuff I was writing 🙂 but it turned out to the best thing ever and I prefer wordpress.
  3. Denise
    
    November 22, 2013
    
    WordPress is good because the comments are so much easier to manage. I love seeing when I have a new message.
    
    The explanation of the law in the Netherlands sounds like eminent common sense and practical thinking. It totally makes sense for a driver to have the responsibility of taking care of cyclists – it’s like any other hazard. Motorists need to watch out and be aware, because it’s a more vulnerable road user’s life that is at risk.
  4. Rachel
    
    November 22, 2013
    
    I have to say I prefer commenting on other wordpress blogs too. It seems easier.
Sherri

November 22, 2013

See Rachel, this is why I love reading your posts, I always learn so much. I’m actually shocked as I thought that it was always the driver’s fault if a cyclist is hit, as with a pedestrian! What fool me? I mean, I have seen some pretty reckless cyclists doing really stupid things over here and that is a different thing altogether. But I am really shocked that six cyclists have been killed in two weeks in London. Wow. Things need to change over here.

Reply
1. Rachel
  
  November 22, 2013
  
  I have to admit that I thought it was the driver’s fault if they hit a pedestrian or cyclist too. That was until my friend in Auckland was hit by a car. There was also a case in Auckland this year of a 12-year-old boy riding his scooter home from school; he was hit by a car (wasn’t hurt fortunately), but then the motorist’s insurance company sent the boy’s mother a fine for damages to the car! Here’s the story: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10888453
  
  Reply
  1. Sherri
    
    November 22, 2013
    
    Goodness, I just read this link and I can’t believe it! I can understand about the fault issue but I honestly always thought that no matter what it was always the driver’s fault in the case of pedestrians. This is just crazy!
  2. Rachel
    
    November 22, 2013
    
    It’s unbelievable isn’t it.
grahamatlinc

November 22, 2013

When I was a kid in the 50’s, drivers were very careful of cyclists and especially younger ones. By the 70’s this had changed drastically. All aspects of life had started to move at a higher pace. The roads became increasingly dangerous as people rushed around and became more reckless.

I am convinced that there would be very many more accidents except for those proceed defensively, giving leeway to the the reckless.

We need to slow down, but what chance as long as it increases profits. It is sad for those who suffer as a result. Nevertheless we get better. It’s just very slow compared with our span of days.

Gram

Reply
1. Rachel
  
  November 22, 2013
  
  Have you heard of the slow movement, Graham? – http://www.slowmovement.com/
  
  It started with slow food which is the antithesis of fast food. Take time to cook real food properly rather than buying fast food from fast food establishments. This has morphed into other things like slow cities, slow school, slow travel….
  
  Reply
  1. grahamatlinc
    
    November 22, 2013
    
    I have now. Excellent notion.
    
    I wonder if it includes Sloe Gin. 🙂
  2. Rachel
    
    November 22, 2013
    
    I’m sure it does. Especially if you’re making it yourself – http://www.jamieoliver.com/news-and-blogs/blogs/sloe-gin-recipe/
mixedupmeme

November 22, 2013

Please be careful.

Reply
1. Rachel
  
  November 22, 2013
  
  Yes, I’m careful 🙂 I cycle the same way that I drive: like a granny.
  
  Reply
northernbike

November 22, 2013

if a car hits another car from behind it is almost always deemed the fault of the car at the back but this doesn’t seem to apply if a car rearends a cyclist. Alot of folks think cyclists want special rights when all we really want is equality before the law

I also find most drivers give plenty of room and are courteous in my corner of North Yorkshire and I hope I try and reciprocate.

I am down in York next week so I will try not to upset the good relationship between cars and bikes and certainly will look out for any huge dutch stretch limo bikes with aussie riders

Reply
1. Rachel
  
  November 22, 2013
  
  If you do see any huge Dutch stretch limo bikes be sure to say hello 🙂
  
  Reply
Bronwyn

November 22, 2013

Interesting articles, Rachel, All three of them. Can see the point in treating cyclists and pedestrians as vulnerable road users. The Dutch laws make sense and would encourage drivers to think twice before losing it and placing cyclists at risk. I’m always amazed at the vitriol some drivers reserve for cyclists. God, we all make mistakes.

Reply
1. Rachel
  
  November 22, 2013
  
  I’m assuming the law in Australia is similar to New Zealand and Britain. Do you know whether that’s the case? And presumably pedestrians are treated in a similar way to cyclists.
  
  Reply
Bronwyn

November 22, 2013

Fault has to be proved and drivers often get off — it seems because juries don’t like to convict — a point already raised in your post. Here’s an interesting crikey.com article on the death of a cyclist in Brisbane in 2011. The comments are interesting too.. http://blogs.crikey.com.au/theurbanist/2013/05/08/are-cyclists-mere-obstacles-to-motorists/

Reply
1. Rachel
  
  November 22, 2013
  
  That’s just awful, Bronwyn. A 24-year-old Australian violinist gone forever because some wanker wasn’t paying sufficient attention on the road and now faces no penalty whatsoever. There’s something seriously wrong with this picture.
  
  Reply
  1. Bronwyn
    
    November 23, 2013
    
    You are right. It’s incredibly tragic. The account in the Courier Mail was especially sad to read. The poor cyclist was just an obstacle on the road whom the truck driver took risks to get around. You do wonder if motorists would take these risks if they knew they would automatically be found accountable for any damage, injury or death caused.