Busting the myth of the "scofflaw cyclist" Danish Road Directorate studies reveal that while 66% of motorists routinely break road traffic laws only 5% of cyclists do so. Law breaking by cyclists is higher where there is no cycle-specific infrastructure.

Some interesting stuff here, including links to more studies showing similar results in different countries.

The summary is that the reason motorists break more laws is that speeding is so common.

I don’t think this is because motorists are all evil and cyclists are all saints. Probably, the reason motorists break speed limits is that it can be relatively difficult to keep cars below the speed limit. It’s all too easy to absentmindedly speed up. It’s also, perhaps becuase of this, widely seen as socially acceptable to break the speed limit (speaking anecdotally).

One interesting thing here, which may not surprise regular readers of Fuck Cars, is that better cycling infrastructure leads to less lawbreaking by cyclists. As is often the case, it’s the design of roads and cities that changes behaviour, not abstract appeals to road users to be sensible!

  • @frankPodmore@slrpnk.netOPEnglish
    1•10 months ago

    But it is a logically sound reason to ask, if they’re required for cyclists, why not in cars?

    And hey, why stop at transportation? I’m sure wearing a bike helmet makes it less likely that I’ll suffer a serious head injury if I fall down the stairs at home, so I’d better start wearing one inside, too. It’s the socially responsible thing to do.

    • Eoghan Murray
      1•10 months ago

      @frankPodmore @gowan
      “Promoting the use of bicycle helmets runs counter to … policies that are aimed at the primary prevention of crashes (as opposed to secondary prevention [of injuries])”
      “Attempts to promote bicycle helmets should not have the negative effect of incorrectly linking cycling and danger.”
      https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/eu-road-safety-policy/priorities/safe-road-use/cyclists/pros-and-cons-regarding-bicycle-helmet-legislation_en

      • @gowan@reddthat.com
        1•10 months ago

        Try reading your own source next time as they continually talk about how helmets work to reduce harm. The problem with this specific case was the promotion of helmet wearing decreased the number of people riding bikes.

        Your source in no way counters the idea that helmets are a good safety precaution for cyclists.

      • Eoghan Murray
        1•10 months ago

        @frankPodmore @gowan I guess the idea is that if you mandate helmets it will reduce bicycle use (which may be part of the reason you’ll seeess deaths). Less cyclists in an area raises the risks for those cyclists that remain. Drivers feel more comfortable with helmeted cyclists, and studies show they drive closer to those cyclists that wear helmets compared with those that don’t (see ‘risk compensation’)
        I wear a helmet cycling kids to school fwiw.