Bicycles and Cars; Who Has the Right of Way?

We all have a role to play in keeping everyone safe on our streets. There are little things we can all do that make a difference. Spread the word and change the tide
See more of our videos at www.reframehealthlab.com/
Follow us at / reframe_health
Thanks very much for all the help!
www.animationanswers.com/
www.decodr.ca/
www.mixmyfilm.com/
Kyle Ashley
Nick de Pencier
Mike Evans
Pam Fuselli
Constable Marc Hayford
Meredith Heinrich
Valerie Smith
Adam Sweanor
Darren Walker

[@Oli4Post]

If you even visit the Netherlands with a car: bicycles always have priority, especially in this situation.

[@wm7195]

No, they don’t always have priority. It depends on the right of way situation. But because they are way more vulnerable , in case of doubt whose fault is it, they are right.

[@piknick111]

I think the bigger problem is that cars turning right usually don't signal and so bikers don't know where they are going. I had a lady hit me and as she made the turn decided to finally turn her signal on to hide her mistake. Bikers are far more aware than drivers of cars. It's not like bikers don't drive cars, so how could they possibly know the difference right?!

[@DEAR7340]

re: "Bikers are far more aware..." - This is underrated. As a cyclist I can HEAR a car approaching from ahead from around a curve, or SEE it through the trees, across the curve. If a car is waiting to pass me, I can signal some guidance on when to wait and when to proceed. Meanwhile, take the lane. There is just not much that you can hear from inside a car/truck. Add a radio or telphone to the mix and it is worse.

[@benjammin6228]

I'm a biker and I don't drive at all.

[@johanwittens7712]

The solution to all this is Dutch style (and Flemish style) protected intersections, and European style priority rules. Protected intersections are a whole topic in themselves, look them up. And priority rules always apply here in Europe. In the USA and Canada these intersections just dump everyone on the intersection into this void space where everyone just does whatever. In Europe an intersection like this almost always has one road as the priority road, and one road as the yield road, even if both roads look the same. The bike lane would be painted continuous across the intersection for the priority road, and the yield road would have bike crossings with clear yield signs for cars AND bikes. And on large intersections bike lanes would lead to protected islands and would then all be continuous across the intersection, clearly indicating to cars making a right turn bikes have priority to continue on. But due to the protected intersections conflict is FAR less likely, since bikes and cars meet at more of a right angle and not from behind, and and bikes get a slight head start at a green light. The rules demonstrated here in this video are insanely dangerous to bikes, but they're mostly due to really, really bad road design.

[@mattichikawa2929]

Exactly

[@r.v.b.4153]

@jose ramos My country has great cycling infrastructure and I can't remember the last time I saw a pothole in the road. We have enough taxpayer's money to have good cycling infrastructure and well-maintained roads (without any potholes). Your country s*ucks.

[@georgeemil3618]

In 2020, due to Covid19, work from home and lockdowns, motor vehicle traffic dropped tremendously. As a result road deaths dropped by 27%. Driver fatalities dropped by 53.8%, and pedestrian deaths by 36%. Even though bicycle ridership skyrocketed, fatalities at 4 stayed the same as any typical year between 1 to 4. So who is the most dangerous road user? Not cyclists.

[@axemanners6643]

Those skyrocketed numbers of cyclists were mostly people buying a bike to ride on the trails and not as a form of commuting to work, store, etc.

[@georgeemil3618]

@@axemanners6643 Not in Toronto. They're all over the bike lanes. And by your observation, that just goes to show you bicycle to bicycle collisions and self collisions are very rare. Compare that to car-car collisions including single-car collisions. If there were a spike in car sales, we'd expect a proportional increase in auto-collisions and congestion. But the spike in bicycle sales didn't result in that. Instead, collisions involving bicycles declined - only because there were so few cars on the road.

[@axemanners6643]

@@georgeemil3618 well no 💩 that people would rarely die when colliding on bicycles vs. cars going much faster. And no, most of those people on bike lanes are still riding for recreation & exercise. Once Covid19 is well under control, the cars will come back out as the method of real transportation.

[@georgeemil3618]

@@axemanners6643 Once cars get back on the road, fatalities and collisions would increase for drivers, pedestrians, motorcycles and bicyclists. So you agree that driving is a danger to all road users including being a danger to other motorists. What should be done to avoid resuming the death and injury rates of pre-Covid years? To start, the separated bike lanes installed during the pandemic to encourage physical activity should all be made permanent. We all know they slow down car traffic, which means drivers will have to be more careful and aware instead of zombie-driving. I've seen it.

[@_EatCrow]

@@axemanners6643 You know there are more forms of transportation then cars and bikes right, trains and buses can be used for far travel so long as they arent a severely underfunded mess like in the US and Canada. Not to mention bikes are far faster then cars for short term commutes in literally any pretty big city you live in. Buses and trains/subways rarely ever kill people and can also be faster, more efficient and thus cheaper then cars. Litteraly no down side except for car companies profits which is why they lobby politicians so hard.

[@karikling8812]

A lot of these problems boil down to road design. Most places in the US and I think Canada as well don't have bike lanes, and even where they do the bike lanes are often crowded with parked cars and pedestrians. In places that don't have bike lanes, they also often have very narrow shoulders full of debris, which forces us onto the same lane as cars.

[@JacksonWestfall]

I couldn't agree more! Our cycling infrastructure sucks!

[@janwensveen1406]

North American Road design is backwater primitive and outdated. They still think paining a line is infrastructure-development.

[@kidsafe]

Ideally vehicles traveling at massively different speeds should be segregated. Open bike lanes next to urban roads where the speed limit is above 30mph or 50km/h should be avoided when able. Parallel bike avenues where through automobile traffic is discouraged with impassible intersections should be implemented. Bypasses underneath big boulevards should be available to both cyclists and pedestrians. Dense city centers should only be accessible by mass transit or commercial vehicles. Where this segregation cannot occur, then bike lanes need to be very wide. On a highway where cars are traveling at 50mph, the road shoulders should be huge to provide cyclists with an extra buffer. Traffic calming measures like chicanes and speed bumps suck. If you want cares to go slower, make their lanes narrower with separators to prevent them from drifting into the bike lane. When in doubt, when you believe it is safe to do so, take the lane.

[@gotworc]

@@janwensveen1406 it's fine I drive and ride bikes

[@gotworc]

@@janwensveen1406 the best part about riding a bike too is you're small enough to just get on the sidewalk, go off the road and go right around people and cars.

[@memer_gaming121]

I have a honest question here. As a person who rode a bike as a kid and only a couple times here and there as an adult I’ve never once thought that bikes belong anywhere near a road. When I saw bike lanes being built in my town I thought they were the most dumb and insane thing ever. So that beings up the question of why are bike lanes put on roads instead of just expanding sidewalks by 4 feet and making side walk bike lanes? Like that just seems 100 times better of an idea to me that makes everyone happy.

[@PRH123]

That's what they do in Germany. And in other countries where the budget allows, which usually means only in the center of big cities. Bike lanes on streets are OK too, it's better than nothing. I rode for 20+ years with no lanes of any kind, so even painted ones seem like a luxury to me.

[@ch007eh7]

2:41 Of course not. I'm also a biker and I wouldn't do that because it's too dangerous. Car drivers take my right of way like once a week. It already happened 3 times that I was just 20cm away before the car would have hit me.

[@wl03bu]

The right turn part of this video needs to be a public service announcement.

[@Testors15]

While the current pundits have decided that a bike on your right will have the right of way, the stupidity is in putting a straight though lane to the the right of a right turning lane. What idiot thought that made sense?

[@AlGritzmacher]

Bike lanes create this right turning conflict. We would be better off without them and teaching everyone that bicycles are vehicles too and should use the same lane sequentially, not to the side of cars.

[@lifeisawesome1391]

It works perfectly well not eh Netherlands.

[@lifeisawesome1391]

​@@AlGritzmacher The data disagrees with you. Cycling in countries with good separated infrastructure (Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Sweden) is way safer than cycling in places that push for vehicular cycling.

[@NakedUndone]

@@lifeisawesome1391 I don't believe this has anything to do with the "infrastructure" although art of the reason may be that segregated bike lanes force riders to move much more slowly or risk getting t-boned at an intersection...

[@raywyatt5368]

@@AlGritzmacher It's safer for cyclists to use the thru lane when going straight through. Some states/ jurisdictions, i.e., California, allow this move.

[@smitajky]

Unfortunately bad habits creep in. The overwhelming majority of motorists signal after they have commenced a turn rather than signalling their intent early. Even if someone makes a mistake or breaks a law, if you KNOW that is what they are going to do it can be allowed for and no collision occurs. This is not merely part of bike/car interactions. It is true for every and all interaction. Drive/ride with consideration and expect that others will do the same. I live in a rural area and the difference in courtesy between here and the city is enormous. Even though speeds are far higher so too is the safety and courtesy.

[@karlkoehler341]

In a car you are isolated from the surroundings. Turn on your music, and you notice even less of what's going on. This is even worse with bigger vehicles. Almost all commercial truckers know and compensate, i.e. they are professionals. That's not true for most other people. I don't believe that people in the city are worse. There are just more of them. You are more likely to run into that disgruntled couldn't-care-less person who can't walk 5 yards and thus parks in the bike lane instead.

[@kailahmann1823]

@@karlkoehler341 well, the net is full of videos with truck drivers running over basically everything without even realizing it…

[@JohnnyAfghanseed]

failed my road test because i didnt shoulder check and change lanes into bike lane before turning, so maybe this changes from city to city? if there are no bikes coming you can change lanes into the bike lane and turn from it

[@azsky4233]

Those turning islands at every corner where cars turn outside of it is very necessary. I still don't see it being implemented.

[@bmoshareholderappleshareho855]

Based on my personal experiences and observations, everybody thinks they're right, regardless of how wrong they might be.

[@JodBronson]

*It is "Right or Wrong" or it is 'Understanding'?*

[@MegaStephen68]

I learned a very simple rule growing up and I still use it to this day. It is called 'Right of Weight', it is the simple rule that no matter if you are in the right it is always smarter for the smaller lighter vehicle to yield to the bigger heavier vehicle if it appears that the driver of the bigger heavier vehicle isn't going to yield for you. Having your way even if you are in the right means nothing if you are dead or serious maimed.

[@velohench]

Lol, this is one of the dumbest things I've read.

[@maxdudomite]

Hey now, you’re talking too much sense for some of these people to understand. Their priority is to make a point that they’re right and the others are wrong, no matter what.

[@PRH123]

The current mindset seems to be "right of cost," wherein less expensive vehicles are expected to yield to more.expensive ones...

[@johnnydwicked]

If you come to a stop at a red light on a bike and if there's a car or multiple cars in front of you, can you just roll up to the front or do you have to wait behind the car?

[@michellsmorgcycle4161]

I'd just wait in the line with the cars. It is safer for most circumstances. If there is a bike box at the intersection, you could filter up to use it... but you've better time it right to get to the box before the light goes green. But... if you aren't very familiar with the part of town you're riding through, would you know if there is a bike box up ahead? In most US cities, bike infrastructures aren't uniformed. Bike lanes come and go, let alone bike boxes. I say filtering up is not a good idea in most cases, because the drivers you're filtering past probably won't be on the look out for you, unlike the drivers that have stopped with you when the light turned red. Those guys knew where you were. The drivers up ahead that you would filter pass.... don't.

[@JodBronson]

Hmmmm.... So if there was a Bike Lane + Car Lane, then it's ok? What if there is enough room for both? Me, I'd wait behind other cars if there isn't enough room. When I get to the Red Light, I wait and see who is turning and who isn't. I let all the turning vehicles go first unless they let me go. Safety gotta go both ways, but it's safer to let them go first since 1 minute is not going to kill you.

[@eanerickson8915]

Roll up to the front.

[@PRH123]

Roll up to the front. It also has the benefit that stopped cars see you, and reduces the chance of anyone turning in front of you.

[@cyclingvideoes]

Most places say to merge fully into the bikelane before turning. Overall the video had some good points, even if I might not fully agree with all of them.

[@lifeisawesome1391]

Ontario also says that, her tis the link www.ontario.ca/document/official-mto-drivers-handbook/sharing-road-other-road-users

[@michaelstuartesson4377]

Yes it seems that cyclists are generally treated as second rate road users according to these rules.

[@JuanGuzman-kn3lt]

Thanks for making this video! Great content!

[@djentile7773]

I was turning right at a one way turn and a guy on a bike rode in front of me and I almost pulled out and hit him. I feel like he should have stopped on the side walk and waited for me to drive off as to not get run over. It scared me bad , so glad I didn't hit him.

[@moshdee456]

Been hit 2x on a bike: once a driver pretended to make a right turn to cut ahead of everyone else when the light turned green and another time by a car turning right across a protected bike lane. Now I just get behind them and if they're turning right, I go around their left.

[@JodBronson]

*Take the road if you have to. Your safety MUST GO FIRST !!!*

[@admiralbeez8143]

Unless you’re in a separated bike lane, I believe as a vehicle you’re suppose to pass on the left, as you did.

[@QiuyuanChenRyan916]

The road design needs to update, not to argue who is right or wrong, it is basically two kids asking for candy again.

[@michaelstuartesson4377]

Are (painted) protected bicycle boxes at traffic lights / crossroads not common in Canada? In the Czechlands they have recently starting to paint them in larger cities but cyclists nevertheless have the right to cycle up the centre of the road overtaking stationary cars and wait at the front to be first off (less exhaust fumes than waiting behind cars).

[@travisgoesthere]

you would have to be crazy to use that here in the USA . The Bike box is suicidal

[@PRH123]

They do the same in the UK. Often traffic lights have additional lights for bicycles, which go green several seconds easier than they go green for cars, giving the bikes a few seconds to get rolling before the cars start moving.

[@donaldwalter1317]

I can feel threatened making a left turn at an intersection where there are two vehicle left turn lane’s indicated. I will occupy the center of most right left turn lane, signalling my intention that I’m turning left. Vehicles approaching from behind me get aggressive in their effort to turn left will sometimes go around on my right to make their left turn! A Copenhagen left by bike can involve a cyclist needing to stop in a bike lane to dismount and thence walk with bike on pedestrian walkways, again remount in a busy bike lane to follow through with a original left turn. This is causing more inconvenience and danger to pedestrians and cyclists. I tried that method in France, Denmark, Canada, USA and it’s a major problem with a fully loaded bike, especially with a trailer attached. It can take 10-15 minutes just to make a left turn using that method!

[@thurstonrider]

I think these methods may be better suited to Toronto, however every state, province, and municipalities have their own rules and exceptions. I totally agree making left turns on busy arterials and multilane streets can be intimidating and FRUSTRATING. Nothing is worse than not being able to get over two lanes of traffic to access the left turn lane(s). Bike boxes should be more common--even if that means restricting access to some streets to vehicular traffic.

[@kailahmann1823]

Does Denmark really handle the indirect left this complicate? In Germany you just wait at the next corner in front of the line (there is usually a designated area for this) when the intersection isn't fully separated due to missing space or a careless city. And weaving around a stationary car that couldn't do it's turn in time is a recipe for disaster.

[@anotherelvis]

In Denmark we do the same.

[@Vic_T_234]

It's easy common sense but a lot of ppl don't have them. Rules of the road ain't hard to learn.

[@Kevin_geekgineering]

ya that's funny to think a car driver can kill a cyclist just by giving him a nudge, but cyclist should be always in fear of his life because driver don't have such a fear !! you see the imbalance of fatality : 2 tons of steal against soft flesh : how about recognizing that drivers SHOULD care for cyclist : because they will be killed as easy as can't even think about, even if a driver is right does not mean he can kill (or nearly kill) someone: be more kind, be more human please

[@janwensveen1406]

That is why Americans are allowed to carry guns, To defend against Vehicular assassination attempts

[@mr.burkenstock4188]

There is no basic rules and regulations for people on bikes. When ever driving and notice a person a bike riding I'm always confused cause I know they're suppose to take the center of the lane not but they hang off to the right which makes it awkward like are you giving me the right of way? I remember this one time a bicyclist was on the road then jumped on the sidewalk then jumped back into the road, I almost killed them. Another time I was at a stop sign and was going then a bicyclist came and did not stop at the sign (they're suppose to). People just aren't sure what bike rules are and someone's got to put it down on paper and in the driver's handbook.

[@supervirtualboyshow]

In Ontario, the rules for cyclists are provided by the Ministry of Transportation, which publishes a Guide to Safe Cycling. You're right that cyclists must obey the traffic laws, but they are also required to keep right, except when it is unsafe to do so. In most instances, cyclist are not supposed to be in the centre of the lane.

[@kailahmann1823]

every vehicle should (in most places must) to stay to the right to make it not unnecessary difficult to overtake - if your vehicle is both both slower and much narrower than the lane this becomes even more useful.

[@prettyboyjesse]

I feel like this is something you'd watch at school. Nicely done.

[@blitzn00dle50]

straight traffic has priority, how is this a question

[@JodBronson]

Right! Anything turns... Cars or Trucks or Bikes or an Elephant needs to watch out for where they are turning to.

[@diabloman802000]

For anyone curious about the ANSWER to the question, 2:30, since this dude just LOVES to hear himself talk.

[@averagejoe6031]

I don’t think this is some sort of both sides of equal issue thing. Cars share much more of the blame in this and it’s the car dependent infrastructure to blame that disregards anyone not in a car.

[@ricomajestic]

The roads in a city were not designed for bike riders! Most people can't even see someone on a bike especially when they are behind you. How do you merge onto a bike lane when the lane is only like 2 feet wide and how do you see a bike in back of you?

[@astro4248]

I was on an ebike and a car pulled in front of me and stopped to pull out of a parking lot and I went straight into them and messed myself up who was at fault

[@RowanT]

Holy shit the exact same thing happened to me back in October except I was on a road bike and I was in a very clearly marked bike lane.

[@LanTheWarder]

You know how all the issues of this video could be solved even in a car-centric city? You paint a bicycle zone before the zebra crossing where bicycles are prioritized. It costs next to nothing to do this, but then again if a city looks like the one in this video then the bigger problem is probably the politicians who double down on car-centric solutions in all decisions they do.

[@americanpatriot8605]

If anyone in a car knew what I was signaling.. This wouldn't need to be said.

[@reframehealthlab2955]

Hopefully a few more people will learn the signals!

[@robertgerrity1]

Great video focused on the basics.

[@jooproos6559]

Or installing the better Bicycles road.Like we have in the Netherlands!

[@liquidSpin]

Love this video. It's 100% truth.

[@johanwittens7712]

2:30 This rule is completely idiotic and endangers cyclists for no reason at all. First off, the car should always look for traffic coming from behind no matter what. This rule gives them a 'free pass' for not looking when turning, and puts the responsibility on the weak road user. The person driving the two ton machine should be responsible, especially since they are technically in the left lane making a right turn. The same rule that forces drivers to wait for pedestrians crossing should apply to waiting for bikes crossing too. Secondly, forcing cyclists to move out of the bike lane into a normal lane simply to go around a car is very dangerous. It puts the cyclist into normal motorised traffic out of the relative safety of a bike lane, endangering the cyclist. But it also increases unpredictability of the behaviour of cyclists for drivers of motorised vehicles. Drivers have to watch out for cyclists now that can enter traffic unexpectedly to move around a vehicle turning right. And creating a difference between a bike lane with an interrupted line and one with a solid line is just again creating complexity and confusion FOR NO REASON. Just choose one and apply the standard rule that the bike has priority. No confusion possible, clearer for both bikes and drivers, and less conflict possible... This rule is stupid, and only leads to MORE conflict between road users. It endangers cyclists dramatically, AND makes it more difficult for drivers to predict what a cyclist is going to do. This rule only applies in the USA and Canada btw, in most of Europe this rule doesn't apply. In Europe if a cyclist is approaching from behind on your right, and there's a bike lane, you as a driver ALWAYS have to give priority to them. If there's no bike lane you give priority unless you're already in front of them. No confusion possible. No dubious and dangerous situations. No unpredictable moves from cyclists. And no forcing cyclists into traffic. If there's no bike lane, you as a driver are considered as making an overtaking manœuvre when you pass a cyclist, so all rules apply as if you were overtaking a car. So you cannot pass a cyclist and then cut them off to turn right. And if there is a bike path, it's always continued on the intersection with paint or some sort of crossing, and then cyclists on that cycle path crossing ALWAYS have priority unless indicated otherwise by road markings and/or signs. The rule demonstrated here is incredibly dangerous, but also a result of bad infrastructure where the bike lane just stops at the intersection and bikes and cars are just dumped in an ''empty'' ''do whatever'' space... This is also a result of the stop sign culture, where there's no priority rules and everyone just is treated the same at the intersection. In Europe one of the roads would be the priority road and do the bike lane would be continuing across the intersection, and the other road would be the yielding road with yield signs and sharks teath on the ground. Even if it had stop signs, only one would have them and the other would be the priority road. And don't even get me started on the left turn. That's just... insanity. No wonder N-American roads are so dangerous.

[@kailahmann1823]

aren't US stop signs even "who ever comes first, goes first", rewarding people for speeding? ;)

[@steveniemyer9288]

In Ohio cars turning right can cross the solid bike lane line 200’ before the intersection as long as a cyclist is not present in the bike lane.

[@ricomajestic]

What does that mean? There are might always be bikes in a bike lines. They might be 20-50 feet behind the car.

[@eriklindskog1841]

Now, are the rules different in Canada as opposed to, say, California. In California "motorists must merge into a bicycle lane when making right turns", meaning cars can't turn over the bike lane as shown in this video. Notably, when the car is attempting to merge into the bike lane, any bikes there has the right of way. This all makes perfect sense as you are not allowed to turn over an adjacent lane, just saying, but maybe things are done differently in Canada.

[@eanerickson8915]

What does a pedestrain cross walk have to do with anything?

[@puyu8621]

0:57 those signs are obviously for the crossing road you don't need to stop there.

[@thierrynolevaux9268]

Pedestrians, bicycles and then cars.

[@stevemahoney1733]

They're called turn indicators not turn confirmations for a reason.

[@_DMAC]

Well done video!

[@pizzagetty4327]

2:18 for anyone who doesn't want the history of bikes and cars

[@ph11p3540]

Notice how he emphasizes the Copenhagen left turn by dismounting on the bike before using the sidewalk. Last thing you want is to get fined $125 for biking 20 feet just to get in behind other bikers waiting for the light.

[@allgoo1990]

I used to ride bicycle a lot, until Oct-2021, Corona virus vaccine crippled me. Back then riding bicycle on sidewalks were against the law. Now everybody doing it and hitting the walkers or screaming them to get out of the way.

[@Pmz604]

Ppl bend the rules..until there's an accident and then it's the blame game and playing victim.

[@afrakory]

2:17

[@appleturnover519]

These rules should be published! But no! All we get is posters like "Share the road"!

[@eanerickson8915]

99% of the time, you can cross on the pedestrian light.

[@HanginInSF]

Remember your mom telling you not to bike in traffic?

[@andrewbifulco]

LOL as if a two ton car and a cyclist were somehow a fair fight. This isn't Capt. America vs. Iron Man. How about cars give us more vulnerable road users like cyclists and pedestrians the courtesy of not killing us.

[@ryanmuller4996]

EXACTLY! Facts! 👍🏻👍🏻

[@michaelfarrell1891]

Yes bicyclists are more prone to breaking the rules of the road than drivers are - period. BUT and it is a moral, legal, ethical, political, psychological, life saving "BUT", bicyclists function at a higher level of consciousness while riding, they are more aware and more in tune to what is going on around them, whereas driving is a boring mundane task , where in time as a result of the human condition are at a lower level of consciousness than when the are, say, eating/ having a meal. This prompts a bicyclists actions, even when it dos not in any way affect the driver, to wake up the driver, a now more awake, higher consciousness driver is startled and places a high moral judgment on the bicyclist. It is this unprovoked moral judgment by the driver and the actions the drivers takes to self-justify their actions that is the source of 99% of all car-bike hate.

[@janwensveen1406]

True, Bicyclists tend to break the rules, this is often because breaking a rule is the only way to survive the situations where they are forced in due to bad drivers and primitive backwards road design.

[@dmv2ks]

That's not actually necessarily true; there's not much data or research that suggests that cyclists break traffic laws more often than motorists, on the contrary actually. There's more data that suggests that the rate of not following the law is approximately equal and the notion otherwise seems to be colloquial at best.

[@EbikeAdventuresSD]

Bikes but cars think they do

[@bikinglikebecker]

I like how you just skip over at 2:40 that if a cyclist is in front of the car at an intersection the car has to wait for the cyclist to proceed before they can turn right.. EVEN AT RED LIGHT!!

[@JohnPrepuce]

So a car has to wait to turn right at a red light until the light turns green when the bicyclist can then go forward?

[@bikinglikebecker]

@@JohnPrepuce Car has to wait only if the car approaches a red light intersection behind a cyclist.. just like in turn if a cyclist approaches a red light behind a car signalling to turn, the cyclist has to give right of way to the turning car even if the light turns green... Which is one of the reasons why I want shared curb lanes instead of bike lanes so we just maneuver around cars turning, giving them the space to do so...

[@JohnPrepuce]

Ok, I was just wondering how a car should interact specifically when there are bike lanes. Agree with you about sharing the road, though.

[@deplorable-0ne]

Cars, I don't care what the law is.

[@IA-om3my]

Your voice.

[@deafstoned9521]

I disagree on the rule that Bikes shouldn't use the sidewalk. Oppose to car, as a cyclist, you don't have a literal metal cage designed to protect you in an accident, and the infrastructure in America makes it WAY too easy for drivers to become ignorant.

[@kailahmann1823]

most sidewalks are to narrow to pass pedestrians safely or even to cycle on them at all. And also people coming out of a driveway may not expect anything fast on them.

[@Paul_C]

Sorry, nope. Car drivers are hostile tonthe max, they important and NEED to be first, it is the rule of 'I'm big and I'm coming through, no matter what'. Maybe abolish the 'right on red'. You really don't want to be a pedestrian with that 'automatic red so I can turn right'.

[@PeterSdrolias]

Human beings are inherently designed to make mistakes. Expecting bikes to operate on infrastructure designed for cars is inefficient and dangerous. Implementing designs from the Netherlands would be a good place to start.

[@JodBronson]

We have a long way to go where I am, that is for sure! Surprisingly, The Netherlands is so advanced I'd love to live there! Growing up, I have never heard anything bad about The Netherlands. Still today, so many good things come out of it too.

[@NakedUndone]

Here it comes: "why don't we have bike lanes like in the Netherlands?" Have you ever cycled in the Netherlands? Because I have and I was not impressed with their so-called "infrastructure". Most Dutch cyclists ride at maybe 15 km/h tops. There's a reason for that. The bike lanes are not designed for cyclists who want or need to go faster. Fine if the land is flat, the village where you live is only 5 km from end-to-end and the most you'll ever cycle on an average day is 10 km. It doesn't work so great in sprawling N. American cities or for that matter for cyclists who value their time.

[@JodBronson]

@@NakedUndone - *You need to READ THIS again from the OP... "Implementing designs from the Netherlands would be a good place to start." Nowhere did the OP said it was perfect!*

[@NakedUndone]

@@JodBronson I don't believe that the designs from the Netherlands are a good place to start. Frankly, they are a lousy place to start. The designs of most of the bike lanes are fundamentally flawed and this flaw has been understood for decades. How about we develop our own infrastructure that caters to our unique needs and moreover that is more democratic, i.e., that does not treat cyclists as second-class road users and as incompetent children?

[@JodBronson]

@@NakedUndone - *WTF? GO BACK TO ENGLISH 101!*

[@CR250RidR]

bicycling is almost always a Liesure activity. most people driving have to for work. therefor bicyclists are a nuisance in our way. you really gotta ask some times how is it 1:00PM on a Thursday and you're riding your bike around for fun and getting in our way?? that's not really fair to us who are working and making deliveries etc.I mean its 1:00 on a weekday don't you have work?? you lucky SOB!!

[@axemanners6643]

4:35 what place is this? No Asians and only 2 Whites.

[@meyman9]

Got to the point half way through the video

[@gian-paolocassarino]

Never the bike they didn't pay for the infrastructure through rego

[@mycolleeny]

Bikes should abide by the same rules as cars. A visible license number on a bike to start with. But car owners should chill and be more respectful to everyone else sharing the road, including pedestrians! Walking in the city has become a dangerous sport.🤷‍♀️

[@lifeisawesome1391]

They are different vehicles with different properties, why should they abide to exactly the same rules?

[@mycolleeny]

Life is Awesome same rules should apply to everyone, cars, people and bikes.

[@lifeisawesome1391]

@@mycolleeny So, cars should be allowed on sidewalks, and pedestrians should be allowed on interstates? You are funny.

[@grumpynerd]

Bikes should abide by the rules that apply to them. Generally bikes are more like motor vehicles in their responsibilities and rights than most people suppose, but there are some differences -- e.g. no bikes on limited access, no cars in the bike lane. Where there is a difference in the vehicles, it is reasonable for the rules to be somewhat different. For example in my state it's perfectly legal for cyclists to ride two abreast in a lane, but if this inhibits passing traffic then you must switch to single file. Some states have similar rules for motorcycles. I have no objection in principle to bike license plates, but there is not really any compelling reason for them other than cars have them.

[@MegaStephen68]

I have rarely had any trouble with single riders where I live. In the city they do seem to ignore stop signs and red lights pretty often. But for some reason if you get 10 or more cyclists riding together they turn into two wheel assholes.

[@UnknownNameUnknownNumber]

#Cancelbikesonroads 🤗

[@davidson2004fatboy]

BIKES SHOULD NOT BE ON the ROADS , PERIOD !!! I SHARE ROADS WITH OTHER INSURERS !!! NO INSURANCE, NO SHARE.

[@_EatCrow]

EXACTLY! Bikes should be given a segragated bike like with protection like a concrete curb from the cars, its frankly asonine to think bikes should be sharing a road with a 2 ton death machine. In places where this is the norm like the netherlands there are so few bike deaths its depressing the amount of death thats considered acceptable because car companies lobby politicians.

[@NakedUndone]

@@_EatCrow Sad comment on your driving skill, or rather, lack thereof.

[@lucho1limte]

Cars shouldnt exsist so bikes belong to roads more

[@henrimessinghausen5185]

AS a Dutchman...hahahahahahahahahahahaha