Post

Every conversation about bike lanes is like: "Car crashes kill a huge number of people every day, including pedestrians, cyclists, & car occupants. Good bike infrastructure has been shown to make everyone safer (& doesn't increase congestion)." "But sometimes cyclists break rules & hit people!"

I'm sure it is bad when cyclists intentionally do things that make themselves or others less safe but that is a completely unrelated conversation unless you're pointing out that good bike infrastructure makes it significantly less likely that cyclist behavior will impact other people in any way!

Im not sure it is an unrelated question. For instance, what do we mean by “make everyone safer”? If we say good bike infrastructure means pedestrians are merely being maimed by cyclists than killed by cars, are we counting that as a win because fewer people have died therefore the street is safer?

I'm struggling to understand what you want to communicate, here, because I don't know what you're arguing we would do differently in a world where we *do* consider bad cyclist behavior relevant to whether good bike infrastructure makes people safer...