Ahh the old “let’s apply rules designed for cars to bicycles” fallacy
Some of what you have said is correct but let’s make this clear: cycling across a pedestrian crossing at walking pace posses vastly less threat to human life than a car doing that would.
Fundamental physics, momentum=mv
Bicycle plus rider: 100kg
Car: 1500kg
That’s a 15x
For a comparison,
Human: 80kg
Bicycle + rider: 100kg
That’s 1.25x
If we assume that risk is proportional to momentum, then that’s an 125% increase of threat from a bicycle vs a human (running at the same speed) and 1500% increase of threat from a car vs a bicycle.
So to compare cars to bicycles doesn’t work, they pose a vastly reduced threat to human life va cars and in fact, cars pose more of a threat to cyclists than they do to pedestrians (I.e more cyclist die in car accidents that pedestrians).
Some of what you have said is correct but let’s make this clear: cycling across a pedestrian crossing at walking pace posses vastly less threat to human life than a car doing that would.
Fundamental physics, momentum=mv
Bicycle plus rider: 100kg
Car: 1500kg
That’s a 15x
For a comparison,
Human: 80kg
Bicycle + rider: 100kg
That’s 1.25x
If we assume that risk is proportional to momentum, then that’s an 125% increase of threat from a bicycle vs a human (running at the same speed) and 1500% increase of threat from a car vs a bicycle.
So to compare cars to bicycles doesn’t work, they pose a vastly reduced threat to human life va cars and in fact, cars pose more of a threat to cyclists than they do to pedestrians (I.e more cyclist die in car accidents that pedestrians).