My thought today was this: if cars are heavier, they do more harm than bikes even at equal speeds. Therefore, to equalize the safety of cars to bikes so that we are being fair to both, cars need to always be driving at speeds slower than bikes tend to go. Doing that would give people a choice: haul heavy goods slowly or travel light and quick. It would be fair safety expectations that share responsibility equally… sort of.
Yes… exactly. You understand my point perfectly. What 99% call reasonable is not strictly fair if what we mean by fair is what I described above. That’s what I meant by no one wants it to be fair. I would take your point a step further and argue that 100% of people don’t want what I described above and that’s my point.
Yes, that's correct. There isn't anything unfair about people not agreeing with me. Anyone is allowed to disagree with anyone. That's fair.
I think what you're trying to say without saying it is that what I was describing above as fair isn't fair. You've yet to say that explicitly so apologies if I'm putting words in your mouth but I'm inferring by the term "short-sighted desires" that, even though your facts agree with my facts, you disagree with my conclusions.
Let me help you out by over-explaining my position so you can properly disagree with me and we can go our separate ways.
My argument above is that not that we should do this or that it would be popular or that anyone would want to do this...etc. but if we did want to, we could define "fair" between drivers and cyclists as making their impact forces more equivalent.
Impact force is an scientific measurement that quantifies the actual damage done in a crash. Two objects with the same impact force will do the same impact damage in a collision (assuming other factors are equal). Force equals mass times acceleration (or deceleration in a crash scenario) so mass and speed are the two direct contributors to impact force. This is why speed limits exist. When drivers of heavy objects obey the speed limit and reduce their speed, it reduces impact force (and improves reaction time) thereby making the roads safer.
So then, here's the math on impact force. A cyclist traveling at a whopping 25 mph and weighing 200 lbs on a 50 lb bike has a peak impact force of 24 kN. For a 200 lb driver in a 3,000 lb car (i.e. a Prius) to have the same impact, he would need to drive at 7.1 mph.
My thought today was this: if cars are heavier, they do more harm than bikes even at equal speeds. Therefore, to equalize the safety of cars to bikes so that we are being fair to both, cars need to always be driving at speeds slower than bikes tend to go. Doing that would give people a choice: haul heavy goods slowly or travel light and quick. It would be fair safety expectations that share responsibility equally… sort of.
"
cars need to always be driving at speeds slower than bikes tend to go
"
Good luck with getting a 15 mph speed limit for cars. That's going to take quite the miracle.
Yes exactly. Thanks for admitting that the system's not fair and no one wants it to be.
What you call not fair 99 percent call reasonable.
Yes… exactly. You understand my point perfectly. What 99% call reasonable is not strictly fair if what we mean by fair is what I described above. That’s what I meant by no one wants it to be fair. I would take your point a step further and argue that 100% of people don’t want what I described above and that’s my point.
There's nothing unfair about people not agreeing with your short sighted desires.
Yes, that's correct. There isn't anything unfair about people not agreeing with me. Anyone is allowed to disagree with anyone. That's fair.
I think what you're trying to say without saying it is that what I was describing above as fair isn't fair. You've yet to say that explicitly so apologies if I'm putting words in your mouth but I'm inferring by the term "short-sighted desires" that, even though your facts agree with my facts, you disagree with my conclusions.
Let me help you out by over-explaining my position so you can properly disagree with me and we can go our separate ways.
My argument above is that not that we should do this or that it would be popular or that anyone would want to do this...etc. but if we did want to, we could define "fair" between drivers and cyclists as making their impact forces more equivalent.
Impact force is an scientific measurement that quantifies the actual damage done in a crash. Two objects with the same impact force will do the same impact damage in a collision (assuming other factors are equal). Force equals mass times acceleration (or deceleration in a crash scenario) so mass and speed are the two direct contributors to impact force. This is why speed limits exist. When drivers of heavy objects obey the speed limit and reduce their speed, it reduces impact force (and improves reaction time) thereby making the roads safer.
So then, here's the math on impact force. A cyclist traveling at a whopping 25 mph and weighing 200 lbs on a 50 lb bike has a peak impact force of 24 kN. For a 200 lb driver in a 3,000 lb car (i.e. a Prius) to have the same impact, he would need to drive at 7.1 mph.