[everdev]

In the Bay Area it's popular for cyclists to bike on narrow, winding, steep roads with no shoulder like Sand Hill Rd. or Highway 9 in the Santa Cruz Mountains.

Regardless of how you feel about bikes the conditions are inherently unsafe for bikes and cars and there are multiple annual fatalities.

I can't think of another form of exercise where a participant puts themselves and non-participants in legal danger.

[ainiriand]

While I totally understand your point, I think that the cyclists are not the ones putting themselves in danger. They have every right to use the road safely. The danger is caused by the divers.

There are many reasons for this but the most common is not taking sufficient separation from the cyclist when passing them. Here in Spain is 1.5m but you don't usually see many cars so close.

[everdev]

Biking on a windy road with no shoulder is like swimming in a harbor. If you turn a blind corner and there's an oncoming car and a bike in your lane you need exceptional reflexes to avoid and accident.

Most roads were designed for cars not bikes. I'm all for bike Lanes, but there should be a minimum speed limit on roads too. It's similarly not safe to be going 5mph on a 35mph road.

[nradov]

When going around a blind corner you have to reduce speed enough to be able to stop quickly or avoid any obstacles. This is just basic defensive driving. It's not about bikes; deer, fallen tree branches, and stalled cars are common on those roads.

[brewdad]

Exactly. There's a reason that curve is marked 25mph (or 15mph even). It's not that a modern vehicle can't negotiate the curve safely above that speed, it's that you can't see far enough ahead to safely stop for anything that might be on the road ahead. Pedestrian, cyclist, or 10 ton boulder.

[eat]

s/exercise/transportation/