[DoubleFree]

The problem of dangerous interactions between drivers and cyclists is much smaller here in the Netherlands, mainly due to two reasons.

The first reason is the infrastructure, both visible and invisible. Separated bicycle lanes are commonplace and in the few places where they intersect with car traffic, care is taken to make crossing safe and comfortable. This visible infrastructure is complemented by the concept of "Hoofdnetten", where the default routes to some place for different modes of transportation coincide for the least amount of time/space. For example, going somewhere by bike might take you through a residential neighborhood with barely any traffic, which is also slowed by speed bumps and narrowed streets, whereas buses will use a bus lane taking a slightly longer route, and car traffic has to go all the way around.

The second reason is that here, everyone is a cyclist. Going for groceries? Five minute bike ride, much easier and quicker than going by car. Kids cycle to school alone from a young age. Going out for drinks? Bike. Because everyone is a cyclist and there are cyclists everywhere, cyclists are equal participants in traffic and are treated with care and respect.

[DonHopkins]

The safe and comfortable boulevard along the Slotervart canal in Amsterdam that I frequently ride along into the city is not only lined with trees, but there are also lines of trees between the bike lanes and the roads on both sides, and separate dog walking paths and park benches in the trees between the bike lane and the canal, and big roundabouts with outer bike lanes at intersections! So cars don't mix with bikes, and bikes don't mix with pedestrians and dogs (and their poop). It's a really pleasant, stress reducing, smooth, green, cool, shady ride.

https://www.google.com/maps/@52.3495859,4.8053688,3a,75y,74....

[wkjagt]

Another reason is that being really respectful around cyclists is an important part of driving lessons in The Netherlands. And I think you can fail your driving test if you pass a bike too close, open your door without looking if a cyclists is coming from behind, or passing over a bike lane at an intersection without looking.

I am from The Netherlands and I only realized since moving to Canada that my home country is such a safe place for cyclists. I find it interesting that no one in The Netherlands wears a helmet when cycling and yet serious cycling injuries don’t seem to be a common thing, whereas here in Canada I know of multiple people that got “doored” or otherwise have been in a bike related accident.

[bluGill]

>I find it interesting that no one in The Netherlands wears a helmet when cycling and yet serious cycling injuries don’t seem to be a common thing

Neurosurgeons in the Netherlands disagree with this, and are begging locals to wear helmets. https://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2021/10/neurologists-launch-ca...

I don't know how rates of injuries compare between countries, but that is irrelevant.

[ricardobeat]

Cycling already has the lowest percentage of road traffic fatalities compared to other modes. The highest is pedestrians - should pedestrians wear helmets?

A helmet requirement is wholly incompatible with the role of cycling in NL. You hop on a bike anywhere, regardless of what you're wearing. It's a casual transportation mode, just like walking, not a sport activity. This proposal can only make sense for people who don't live in this reality.

In addition, as mentioned by another commenter, when the dutch traffic rules were written decades ago, it was found that helmet usage correlated to increased accident rates - people take more risks when they feel safer, and that in turn makes pedestrians less safe.

[II2II]

> In addition, as mentioned by another commenter, when the dutch traffic rules were written decades ago, it was found that helmet usage correlated to increased accident rates - people take more risks when they feel safer, and that in turn makes pedestrians less safe.

I'm probably a bit of an oddball in this respect, but I do not regard helmets as a means of preventing injury. Reducing the severity of an injury, sure, but even then they are of limited scope (i.e. they are only really useful if there is a direct impact to the head).

Helmets are not an excuse for taking risks. They are a means of reducing the impact of accidents.

[Phrodo_00]

Yeah, a helmet could literally save your life, but it won't stop you from scrapping or broken bones.

[celtain]

>A helmet requirement is wholly incompatible with the role of cycling in NL. You hop on a bike anywhere, regardless of what you're wearing.

I don't really understand this. I keep my helmet clipped to my handlebars, so if I have my bike, I have my helmet. Is it really so much of an inconvenience?

I'm sympathetic to the overall anti-helmet-requirement position, even seemingly trivial concerns like "it messes up my hair" sound legitimate to me. The convenience argument in particular just never made much sense to me though.

[sirmarksalot]

Living in a city, the idea of leaving anything of value on your bike, and expecting it to still be there when you get back is completely foreign to me. When I visited Amsterdam, I even had the seat stolen off my rental bike. Biking in the states means carrying a helmet inside with you everywhere you go, and it absolutely sucks.

[brewdad]

When I visited Copenhagen a few years ago, most of the bikes I saw were either unlocked or locked to themselves to prevent riding off but not carrying away. It was rather shocking.

[Phrodo_00]

uh, I normally lock my helmet by putting my u-lock through the double section of the strap. Sure someone could cut the strap but then the helmet would be useless. I haven't had any issues and live in a city with pretty high bicycle theft.

[Kalium]

There are helmets you can lock with your bike.

[bartwe]

You can't really keep your helmet clipped to the handlebar at public parking places as they'll get vandalized or stolen.

[ryukafalz]

If you’re using a bikeshare system, you may not have a helmet with you because you didn’t bring your bike with you.

[fragmede]

That helmet's getting stolen as soon as you go into a store or cafe or the office. Having inside bike parking where it would be safe is a luxury that doesn't exist in most places.

[atourgates]

This argument gets rehashed nearly every time cycling and helmets are brought up. Usually be people talking past each other.

Here are some important conclusions:

1) Cycling as a commuter is quite safe, with or without a helmet.

2) Cycling is safer with a helmet.

3) If you found yourself in some binary where your only options were "cycle without a helmet" or "don't cycle at all", the health benefits of "cycle without a helmet" likely outweigh the risk of serious injury due to not wearing a helmet.

4) Because of #3 and other factors, helmet laws for adults aren't generally a net positive.

5) BUT - it's a good idea to wear a helmet whenver you can, and even the Dutch (fore example) would be better off if they kept their usage of cycling high, but culturally embraced wearing helmets as well.

6) Things are very different in higher-risk forms of cycling like BMX, road racing and MTB, where crashes are much more frequent and higher impact, and you'd be an idiot to not wear a helmet.

[ta8645]

> Neurosurgeons in the Netherlands disagree with this

Neurosurgeons have a very skewed view of the statistical likelihood of head injury. They see such injuries every day, and it can most definitely make them believe that the risks involved are much greater than they actually are.

[midasz]

Reading the article they focus on children and e-bike users. Can kinda understand it from that point, e-bikes can go abnormally fast and children are vulnerable. Would've expected the advice to also count for elderly people. I'm a 30 year old reasonably in-shape guy using a regular bike, chance that something happens to me on a bike is small and it's even smaller that I'd get really hurt by it.

[lastofthemojito]

As I understand it there are 2 Dutch words for cycling [0]:

>Crucially, the Dutch distinguish between everyday cycling (fietsen) and competitive cycling (wielrennen). Fietsers (cyclists) are found everywhere. ... The term wielrennen, on the other hand, is reserved for the sweaty, colourful and seemingly endless cycle races on which the people of Benelux are so keen.

In my experience, at least in my area of the US, mostly kids do fietsen - biking to their friends' houses, or the park, etc. Grown-ups on bikes are typically serious about their wielrennen and wear skin-tight gear and ride fancy road bikes.

I try to drive safely around any cyclists, but I think it's easier to cut folks in the first category a break - they're aware they're slow, they try not to be in the way, etc. Folks in the second category are sometimes frustrating to drive near - at traffic lights they cut to the front, only to advance relatively slowly when the light turns green, or they blow through a stop sign as a car is approaching, etc.

I wonder if we would have better rules, better set expectations, etc, if we similarly had 2 words to talk about cyclists in English.

0: https://www.iamexpat.nl/expat-info/dutch-expat-news/how-do-y...

[gknoy]

    at traffic lights they cut to the front, 
    only to advance relatively slowly when the light turns green

    they blow through a stop sign as a car is approaching

I thought the former was entirely proper -- motorcycles do similarly, going up the gap between traffic. The latter, though ... I've seen that far too much, and is frustrating.

I also see kids and adults riding their bicycles on the sidewalk, sometimes even the wrong direction. I used to get mad at that, until I realized that our local cycling infrastructure is crap, and _on that street_ I'd not want to cycle on the road either.

[lastofthemojito]

> I thought the former was entirely proper -- motorcycles do similarly, going up the gap between traffic.

Apparently it's a matter of debate/context: https://old.reddit.com/r/cycling/comments/b9xklo/at_a_red_li...

[jasonwatkinspdx]

In the US there's a derogatory slang for the most obnoxious form of the second category: Freds. Fred is a guy on a $10k bike that treats a pedestrian and commuter heavy bike path like their own personal tour de France.

[pygy_]

What about mamils?

Middle-aged men in lycra

[sleepybrett]

In seattle I'm staring to see a lot more adult Fietsers than I'm historically used to seeing. E-Bikes have really opened up the audience for more casual cyclers (at least in the spring and summer months).

[brewdad]

E-bikes make the hills manageable for mere mortals.

[sleepybrett]

i am certainly 100% mortal.

[bedatadriven]

There are costs and benefits to requiring helmets.

Requiring a helmet has apparently been shown to depress the use of bikes for every day activities. Going grocery shopping with a bike is less convenient if you have to juggle a helmet along with a liter of milk.

Less biking means roughly more pollution, more obesity, bigger roads, more car accide ts.

On the other side of this equation is the death and injury that helmets prevent. This is non-zero, but apparently in the Netherlands we have judged this marginal benefit of helmets to be less than the advantages of more cycling.

The calculation might be different in countries with inferior cycling infrastructure.

[antihero]

I never used to wear a helmet, and I don’t think anyone should be forced to, but countless anecdotes about people being in comas and becoming permanently brain damaged due to no-fault accidents, combined with peer pressure from everyone I know, and finding one I don’t actively despise the look of, means that now I do. If I’m going grocery shopping I simply don’t take it off in the shop. I’ve incorporated it into my own punk self-image - can’t fuck with the system if I’m in an easily avoidable coma!

Don’t really care for requiring one at all really, our bonces inside out are our own business and if people want to take that risk it’s on them.

[sleepybrett]

If my city were more like amsterdam I'd be happy to forgo the helmet, but in hilly seattle between the chances of getting clipped by a suv or taking a tumble on a steep grade.. I'll stick with the helmet. I don't find it too much of an inconvenience. I just clip it to my bag after I lock up.

[mmcnl]

Fyi, Amsterdam is one of the worst places as a cyclist in The Netherlands. It's very crowded and narrow with very few separated bicycle lanes. The average bicycle infrastructure in the Dutch suburbs are way better.

[Silverback_VII]

>I’ve incorporated it into my own punk self-image

maximum conformity punk?

Helmets signal the choice for security over freedom which is simply not sexy. Moreover it signals your own inability to ride a bike and to recognise/avoid dangers rapidly. Just compare images of cyclists with and without helmet.

Helmets are for children only.

[naltun]

Do you actually believe everything you just said? I can't tell if /s or not.

[shard]

Is that what being punk means nowadays? Being sexy, and avoiding helmets / seat belts / health insurance / vaccinations because it's security over freedom?

[ericbarrett]

I'm alive today because of a bicycle helmet. Put it on, it takes 5 seconds.

[jotm]

I fell a lot and never hit my head. I get the danger but I'm glad it's not legally required

[runarberg]

This is a debate that pops up a lot. I don’t think there is any consensus among health officials, but I think most public health officials tend to side on the no-mandatory but actively encourage helmets.

There are a couple of problem with mandatory helmets, including:

* It discourages a healthy activity.

* It shifts the responsibility from the person causing to danger (drivers) to the potential victims.

* It creates a false sense of safety (e.g. biking slower reduces risk of injuries far more then a helmet).

[diarmuidc]

No it's not irrelevant. If helmet wearing is linked to higher per capita head injuries, mandatory helmet wearing should be discouraged.

[OrderlyTiamat]

That depends on the way it is linked. If it's linked causally in the opposite direction, your advice is quite dangerous. Meaning that if higher per capita head injuries are causing more helmet wearing in sub populations (maybe because they see more news about deadly injuries), than your advice is for people in those sub populations to not wear their helmets.

So it's relevant information, but the direct effect of "wearing a helmet cuts the risk of serious head injury by 60% and a deadly brain injury by 71%" is more important information.

[adhesive_wombat]

Indeed: A bit like how wearing a flak jacket is correlated with being shot, and use of scuba tanks are correlated with drowning underwater.

[UncleEntity]

I’ve only ever been shot at while wearing a flak jacket…

[Apes]

You're right in the sense that if you die because your head cracked open like a watermelon on the pavement, that doesn't count as a head injury - it counts as a fatality.

[baxtr]

Discouraged?

[alistairSH]

Yes, note he stated "if head injuries are more common with helmets".

There have been some studies that correlate higher levels of head injuries with mandatory helmet laws. The thesis was that wearing a helmet induces more reckless cycling (higher speeds, etc) due to feeling safer. I don't remember seeing any good follow-ups studies either way and don't necessarily agree with the study.

[admax88qqq]

The other theory is that helmet laws reduce casual cycling by adding an impediment to just hoping on and going. And that those short trips to the strore tend to be safer.

Personally my wife can't find a helmet that fits, Asians have rounder heads and north American helmet manufacturers are oblivious. As a result we never cycle.

[habi]

> open your door without looking if a cyclists is coming from behind,

Once you learn about the https://www.dutchreach.org it's hard to forget it. It helps to avoid the not-looking-for-cyclists problem :)

(It might even have been here on HN where I learned about it.)

[KineticLensman]

The Dutch Rear has recently been added to the UK Highway Code [0], a mix of legal requirements and suggestions for safe road use.

[0] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code

[vishnugupta]

Third reason, law. In an incident between cycle and car, the car is deemed to be at fault by default. Unless the cyclist does something outrageously stupid bordering on committing suicide.

[microtonal]

IANAL, but actually it's even stronger. If the cyclist/pedestrial is at fault, the car driver is normally responsible for 50% of the damage. The reason is that a cyclist (or pedestrian) has a higher chance of heavy injury due to the mass of a car. The primary exception to this is 'force majeure', which is apparently exceptionally hard to prove [1] (the example that the linked page gives is someone pushes a person in front of a car).

[1] https://www.anwb.nl/juridisch-advies/aanrijding-en-dan/aansp...

[matheusmoreira]

> Unless the cyclist does something outrageously stupid bordering on committing suicide.

Yeah, like riding a bike in the first place. Only thing worse is riding a motorcycle.

"The car is always wrong" has got to be the stupidest traffic law ever written. Every single day cyclists and motorcyclists do straight up illegal stuff near me and I have to accomodate them because of stupid laws like that. They do absolutely insane stuff. I get anxious every time I see one on my mirrors.

[inerte]

I remember I learned this on a "Not Just Bikes" YouTube video, but I can't find it now, but it blew my mind how simple intentional things make a huge difference. It was about the car lane, curb, and where people bike/walk in the Netherlands.

In most countries, the car lane is lower than the sidewalk, and when they have to turn, the lane doesn't change - no bumps, or elevation. A pedestrian / cyclist going from their space into the car lane has to usually face a down slope, so it's very clear the person is entering another area.

In at least this Netherlands city or video I watched, Not Just Bikes talked about how over there the car goes into ascent, as in, the car is entering the bicycle space. So it's not as smooth, or convenient, or the same mental model as the other way.

edit: found the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OfBpQgLXUc

[spaetzleesser]

"The second reason is that here, everyone is a cyclist. Going for groceries? Five minute bike ride, much easier and quicker than going by car. Kids cycle to school alone from a young age. Going out for drinks? Bike. Because everyone is a cyclist and there are cyclists everywhere, cyclists are equal participants in traffic and are treated with care and respect."

that's how I felt in Munich. Bikes were everywhere and drivers were used to them. In the US in most places bikes are rare so drivers (including me) stop looking for them.

[johannes1234321]

As somebody living in Munich and visiting Amsterdam from time to time: Munich and Netherlands are very different.

From an American perspective Munich certainly is good, but Amsterdam is still a different league. If you got the chance go there for a while.

[mmcnl]

Amsterdam is not representative of Dutch bicycle culture. Amsterdam is crowded with narrow bicycle lanes that are often shared with cars.

The great thing about the Dutch bicycle structure is that it spans the entire country. It's not just the big cities. Every city, town and village has high quality bicycle lanes. You can easily bike around the country on dedicated bicycle routes in The Netherlands.

[antihero]

Just need a way to deal with bike theft. My number one concern is parking my pretty decent bike within view of where I’m sitting or not leaving it unattended for over five minutes. I’m insured, but I have a bond with my wheels!

If anyone has recommendations for stealth theft detection/tracking devices I’m all ears.

[solardev]

These are great, light u-lock style frame locks made of titanium: https://tigrlock.com/

Your wheels and components might still get stolen, but not much is really going to stop that. You can add a cable lock if you really want to but they're easy to cut through.

Bike registration (https://bikeindex.org/) might help in some circumstances.

But really, insurance is the thing that will cover you. Many renters'/homeowners' insurances will cover theft of bikes too, even when you're away from home, so you don't necessarily need supplemental bike insurance.

The thing about the trackers is that they're for after-the-fact recovery, not deterrent (especially if they're stealth). It's just going to get parted out, so if you're lucky you might recover the frame and not much else.

[throw0101a]

> Just need a way to deal with bike theft.

Vehicle registration works, but takes a bit of effort:

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=el1Xznv5ge4

Vancouver had a 42% drop in theft after joining this program:

* https://project529.com/garage

Created by X-box co-founder:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_Allard

[acomjean]

Someone broke into my building and stole a bunch of bikes from the bike room (people weren’t locking them up once inside). The few that were registered to park at the university (big silver stickers) were left alone.

Often I don’t think the bike theives check if the bike is “good”. My cousins bike was just over $150 new and was stolen. He had a cheap lock because he thought who would steal this.

I’ve been riding 10 years a moderately decent bike. No issues but I use a U lock which is decent.

Please lock through the frame. I’ve seen like 6 front wheels locked to bike racks with the rest of the bike gone..

[nomel]

We had hundreds and hundreds of bikes at my previous job. It was amazing. You could just hop on and go anywhere. Nearly all disappeared. As it turns out, the scruffy looking guy I saw, riding one bike and steering another with his free hand, wasn't collecting and returning them in the whee hours of the morning.

The new bikes had GPS attached, but they limited the numbers, due the theft. Those slowly disappeared, too. Last I saw, there were just a few bikes at each bike rack, compared to maybe 50 at each.

[isbvhodnvemrwvn]

Where I live the organized thieves (as opposed to the local drunks) disassemble the bike and get rid of the frame ASAP. Same with cars, they park them in large car parks with no monitoring to see if it had a tracker, after a couple weeks they drive it off to disassemble (with fake plates to avoid ANPR)

[jotm]

Yeah, my acquaintance does something similar, collects ebikes and scooters with a GPS jammer, takes all the parts and dumps the frame.

A big waste imo, though newer models have trackers inside the battery - smart considering it's quickly becoming the most valuable part.

[SketchySeaBeast]

A few years ago my wife had her registered bicycle stolen after I screwed up and left the garage open. We reported it stolen and only took 3 days for it to make its way back to us. It made its way back to us because the cops stopped someone for looking like they too nice of a bike, so that's a whole other problem, but registration works.

[vdqtp3]

> that's a whole other problem

Is it? Or were your cops right and doing their job?

[stonogo]

Impossible to tell from one event, coming from someone who has been pulled over because I "didn't look like" I could afford my car.

[mauvehaus]

In my experience it's mostly a matter of not having the most desirable bike or the shittiest lock. Put a $100 u-lock on a $300 bike, and you can almost be assured that you'll have neither. Put a nice enough lock on yours, and you can be pretty sure you won't have the most easily stolen bike either.

At least in the US, road bikes are pretty much immune to being stolen because they're seen as terminally uncool by the lay population. Would I leave a $5000 road bike locked up at a subway station? Not likely, but I'm not fast enough to justify owning one anyways. $2000, yeah probably, as long as I'm not leaving it there daily.

Anecdotally, police won't do shit to recover a stolen bike in the US. Having some kind of tracker is only going to help you once it's already been stolen. I'd focus my efforts on preventing the theft in the first place.

[microtonal]

In my experience it's mostly a matter of not having the most desirable bike or the shittiest lock.

Right, in The Netherlands, where there are a lot of bikes, this is the basic rule: just make sure that there are other bikes that are more attractive to steal, even if it's a new bike. The second basic rule is: use a chain lock to attach your bike frame to an unmovable object, so that a thief cannot just throw your bike in a van and remove the locks elsewhere.

What I do:

- Use a ring lock for the back wheel. Makes it unattractive to steal just the wheel. The lock needs to be unscrewed from the frame to remove the wheel.

- Use a chain lock and make it go through the frame, front wheel, and attach it to an unmovable object. In order to steal the frame, the thief would have to saw through the chain in plain sight.

- If there is no supervised parking, park the bike in an area where there are enough people where someone will notice a thief trying to break the locks.

- Get bike insurance. It's usually only 10 Euro per month and if your bike gets stolen, you get back the bike's value.

- Some insurers also install a tracker. This has double value: bikes with a tracker are less attractive to steal. Secondly, bikes with a tracker are usually moved to a 'cool-off' location first. This is usually just some place removed a few streets from where the bike was stolen. If it's still there after a few days, the thieves know that nobody is actively tracking the bike and they can take it somewhere to comfortably break the lock. So, it's likely that the insurer will find the bike at the cool-off location without much damage.

[merely-unlikely]

Unfortunately here in NYC the public won't bat an eye while your lock is cut off[1]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGttmR2DTY8

[danenania]

I wouldn't want to confront a potentially aggressive person with a saw in hand either. I might call the police, but I'd assume that by the time they got there, the thief would be gone, and that's if the police even cared enough to send someone.

I think this is mainly an enforcement issue. The police could easily track these people down if they were willing to put any energy into it.

[happyopossum]

> The police could easily track these people down if they were willing to put any energy into it.

That's a bit of a myopic view - in many of these cities, the DA will refuse to prosecute someone for thefts like this, so it does no good to arrest someone. Police in many cities are underfunded and understaffed, and if they're getting no support from the DA they have to prioritize.

[jasonwatkinspdx]

This very much varies by location in the US. In the central areas of most major metros your bike WILL be stripped if locked up on the street and not attended/guarded. I live in one of the most bike friendly cities in the US, and I can't even lock up my bike outside of a bar/restaurant downtown without having to chase off aggro dudes trying to strip parts off it in the broad daylight. And I'm talking a dirt cheap commuter bike from bikesdirect.com. A $2k bike locked up downtown here would last 2 minutes. They use battery powered grinders, so how uber your lock is doesn't matter anymore either.

It's a really frustrating problem, and has changed the way I feel about this city a lot. Being able to just casually ride around with friends socializing in summer evenings was really great. Now it's everyone taking ubers.

[merely-unlikely]

My experience having recently had my road bike stolen would disagree. You're spot on about fancy bikes automatically being a target and the importance of your lock job being at a minimum more difficult to get through than the neighbor's. I now have a cheap single speed for my "around town" bike along with a heavy kryptonite ulock.

[nuclearwast]

This is something I never understood. Why so many bike theft? a regular new one is 3-4 hundred$ and cannot be sold that easily (Say vs electronic goods). Why theft is so popular?

I mean thief can steal one for their own purpose, but then what? He steal another one every weeks?

I dont get it.

[cogman10]

Steal the bike, sell it on craigslist/facebook marketplace/etc for $100, profit.

It can often take less that 5/10 minutes to steal a bike which is a pretty good RoR.

How could we stop it? Probably the best way would be stronger regulations on community marketplaces/pawn shops/ebay/etc. ATM, they don't GAF about selling stolen goods.

[wpietri]

I also think the police just don't take it very seriously. Certainly that's the case here in SF. I've reported a number of stolen bikes over the years and my impression was of massive indifference. After bike number 7 was stolen, I just gave up. A few years later I'm thinking about buying a bike again, and risk of theft is my number one concern.

[cogman10]

Well, not to defend the police, but after a bike is stolen I don't know what you could expect them to do.

Even if they had a dedicated bike recovery task force, the most they could do is visit local pawn shops and browse community marketplaces for a bike matching the description (assuming it wasn't broken down for parts).

Now, before a bike is stolen, I'd expect police to actually patrol places where bikes are being commonly stolen from (or for that matter, places where cars are commonly broken into). That part is something I do blame them for. The fact that SF is basically synonymous with "don't leave anything in the car" is an indictment on local police.

[playingalong]

There is a market for buying used Dutch city bikes elsewhere in Europe. I guess some of them are stolen goods.

[Bluecobra]

Having a dumpy old bike helps. I have accidentally locked my cheap u-lock to the bike itself instead of the bike rack a few times at a train station and nobody took it. The worst thing that has ever happened is that someone stole my quick release skewer, so I have a screw on one now.

[kuschku]

Honestly (at least from my experiences in Düsseldorf, Hamburg, Essen, and Kiel): As long as your bike isn’t super expensive (e.g., I’ve got this: https://boc24.de/products/bocas-bari-trapez) and you’ve locked it with a lock that’s resistant to bolt cutters (even something as simple as https://www.kaufland.de/product/313003426/), it’s not going to get stolen.

Even if you’ve locked it overnight for multiple days at the main train station (tested in Düsseldorf and Kiel), it’s going to be fine.

[ClumsyPilot]

About locks - nobody ever picks locks, only brute force is used.

If the lock is a cable lock, it's worthless. If the lock is solid metal over 5mm, it can only be cut by angle grinder. Once you are in angle grinder territory, whether it's 5mm or 15mm doesn't seem to matter. So i think there is no point spending over $100 on a lock.

Additionaly, you can use a hydrawlick jack to break d-locks, but that doesnt work on chains and is very dependant on how exactly you locked up

[yonaguska]

And smaller locks are trendy now because it's much harder to use an angle grinder on a tiny u-lock without sawing through something else.

[badlucklottery]

>If anyone has recommendations for stealth theft detection/tracking devices I’m all ears.

If you have a bike lock/chain that can resist bolt cutters, you're probably fine for everything other than leaving it overnight. Casual bike thieves are looking for easy money and likely aren't going to bust out an angle grinder in the middle of the day unless your bike is obviously worth a grand+.

[antihero]

Here in the UK thieves just use portable angle grinders that go through any lock like butter.

I have a hefty Abus “sold secure” (requirement of insurance) D lock that I lock through the frame, but I’ve watched enough lock picking lawyer to know this won’t stop thieves with angle grinders (most thieves now) or ones handy with a disc detainer pick.

[badlucklottery]

In the US (at least for now) the angle grinder crews are mostly limited to nights when they can steal a lot of bikes a once and chuck them into a truck/van (ex: bike racks near student housing in college towns).

But the exception is always high-value bikes. That's why I called out bikes that aren't "obviously worth a grand+". If you leave out a nice eBike or a superlight road bike, the thieves have solid financial motivation to risk breaking out the cordless grinder and making a ruckus to steal it. Hell, sometimes thieves would straight up wait for people to come back to their bikes after brunch or whatever and mug them for it after they unlocked it in Albuquerque. No tools needed other than a knife.

[happyopossum]

What kind of society allows someone to use an incredibly noisy and obvious tool like an angle grinder in public, then ride off on a bike? Does everyone just walk by because they're afraid to get involved?

[brewdad]

Yes. Are you willing to risk your life or serious injury over a stranger's property? Very few people are.

[gpm]

I've witnessed it, called the cops and took videos, but I'm not going to physically fight the guy with an angle grinder and little to lose - not even if it was my own bike. That was the same reaction everyone else around had.

[MrFantastic]

Cover the branding labels on your bike. The thieves want to steal expensive bikes, not a walmart bike.

I used white engineering reflective tape. They'd have to be very dedicated thief to notice to the Deore XT components.

Plus, the reflective tape is very visible at night.

[olyjohn]

Yeah... this is totally wrong, or maybe it depends on where you live... Here, cheap bikes get stolen all the time. I started riding my heavy-ass, ancient, steel, suspensionless bike that I had bought 20 years prior for like $200 from Target. Not even a pawn shop would want to take the bike, because they are cheap junk. It got stolen from me in less than a week after starting a biking commute. And yes I locked it up. The lock was cut right off.

The thing is people aren't stealing them to always sell them. Sometimes it's just easier to quickly grab a bike when the thief needs to get across town for some other reason. When they get to where they want to go, they just ditch the bike. Sometimes I think some people just want to steal a bike for no real reason.

In Seattle, I've seen gigantic piles with hundred of bikes in them just sitting in a homeless camp. They clearly aren't selling those bikes, as they've been sitting out in the rain for months, or even years now. And I guarantee those homeless camps aren't full of multi-thousand dollar bikes.

[InCityDreams]

Amazon do bike alarms. $16? Kind of intended for motorbikes(?) but when i turn then both on - one wedged under the seat and another less permanently attached - the conversations generated guarantee me onlookers (bar/ cafe) almost look after the bike for me. Decent lock, too. Drop the chain off and whack it out of gear (it hurts if you forget). If im inside and i see someone checking out thd bike i 'test' the alarm.

[ClumsyPilot]

there are quite a few trackers, but I don't know how much they help you in recovering the bike

https://pimpmybikeretail.co.uk/product/sherlock-bike-tracker...

[markvdb]

Getting a good quality folding bicycle (Brompton!) may be even easier. Just take it inside with you.

[aaaaaaaaaaab]

Easy. Vote for politicians who promise punishing bike theft with multi-year prison sentences.

The reasoning is simple: bike thieves disproportionately contribute to climate change by discouraging large-scale bike use. This must be punished.

[ClumsyPilot]

> Vote for politicians who promise punishing bike theft with multi-year prison sentences

Please don't - this is typical 'tough on crime' trick: promise long sentences, so easy - longer sentence-less crime, right? Wrong. Sentenses are useless if no-one ever gets caught. Look at countries with the toughest sentenses in the world, and you will find they have loads of crime

You actually have to use your brain, and think and plan, on how to make sure criminals are caught. You have to take real action like training investigators, installing trackers, registering property, etc.

For example in UK concervatives have been in power for 12 years, punishment got much harsher but crime is growing because they have cut police numbers, and you chance of getting caught is ~0%. The longer people get away with crime, the better they become at crime. Now we have a large 'talent pool' of highly trained thieves.

[The-Bus]

(I think the poster was being facetious)

[amadeuspagel]

> Please don't - this is typical 'tough on crime' trick: promise long sentences, so easy - longer sentence-less crime, right? Wrong. Sentenses are useless if no-one ever gets caught. Look at countries with the toughest sentenses in the world, and you will find they have loads of crime

Perhaps the causality goes the other way here? Perhaps suffering under loads of crime makes people vote for tough sentences?

[bluecalm]

Idk, it seems theft is low in countries where they cut hands for it.

Bike theft is a very harmful crime. It stops the move to healthier lifestyle, it leaves people, often poor ones who don't have cars without means of transportation and it cause many to not commute by bike.

I want aggressive policing, including trap bikes set up by the police to fish out potential thieves and lock them for years once caught, alternatively make them wear GPS locator all the time. I want them to feel fear every time they think about stealing. Maybe empty "tough on crime" promise isn't enough but it's surely better than typical approach of "let's all think about those poor thieves" or victim blaming (just lock your bike with 2 U-locks and keep your eyes on it all the time if you don't want it stolen).

[ClumsyPilot]

> Bike theft is a very harmful crime.

Yes it is, but I disagree that turning bike theft into a 20-year sentence is going to help.

> Idk, it seems theft is low in countries where they cut hands for it.

Russia has 99% conviction rate, long sentences and torture in prisons, yet crime rate is sky high. US has more prisoner and tougher sentenses than UK, but UK has less crime

Half the people here are engineers, think like one, about systemic solutions and not revenge. Crime is a business, it only happens because its profitable.

You could setup a city-wide LoRaWAN bike tracking network for $100,000, you could hand out $20 trackers to every cyclist and weld them to the frame, from the inside if you have to. You could produce airtags-compatiable trackers, register every bike and check them periodically, etc.

You could install safe cycle storage throughout the city, that is alarmed and has cameras and calls the police when it detects sound of angle grinder.

Thousands of different solutions are possible.

[bluecalm]

You're repeating the old trope that tough punishment doesn't work. Look at the theft statistics though:

https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/theft/

Neither USA nor UK have tough punishment for theft. Theft is different than violent crime as that is most often caused by emotions/rage/etc. While theft is more calculated. It makes sense there is little consideration to punishment when committing the former but more when engaging in the latter.

Some people want to steal. Bikes are currently one of the easiest targets but if you make those difficult to steal they will move to another attractive thing like catalytic converters or purses until you lock everything. Aggressive policing and punishment wasn't tried yet in Western countries when it comes to theft. That would involve setting traps for thieves and taking the crime seriously instead of making naive calculation about the value of stolen items and ignoring long term cost and damage to social structure.

[philwelch]

Has anyone ever called you a “radical centrist”?

[moffkalast]

> Going out for drinks? Bike.

As long as you don't actually drink anything hah. Everyone's a designated driver with bikes.

[411111111111111]

Tbf, the danger of drunk cycling is significantly lower to third parties vs driving in a car. And you're unlikely to succeed if you're too drunk as well, as you still need to balance - which drunk people can't.

It's still illegal in most places however, so your point stands

[usrusr]

Drunk cyclists can. Back in my wild years, on some occasions walking to the bike was the difficult part. Bikes are much better at self-stabilizing than legs. The main danger (outside of going too fast, if you happen to have the training) is losing track of traffic. This isn't much of a problem on deserted night-time streets, but can easily be overwhelming during the day. Don't ever consider the bike when planning for daytime drinking.

As for the law, it's good to have limits to drunk cycling, but it's important to have them tolerate a considerably higher BAC than those for driving.

[runarberg]

The potential injuries from drunk biking is in a whole other league the the injuries from drunk driving. Most bike injuries can be patched up at you local clinic (or even your home; unless your injury involves a car; so safe bike infrastructure is essential in making drunk biking safe), whereas drunk driving can cause some pretty horrendous injuries, to you, or your victims. The two modes should not be compared.

[tomjen3]

Here is Denmark there is a BAC limit for cars, motorcycles, mopeds etc of 0.5

The limit for a bicycle is if you can cycle safely, and it is only a fixed fine. You can go to prison for doing it in the other cases (though you will typically not, for a first offence).

The other advantage is that you can walk home with your bicycle if you are too drunk to drive it. You don't have that option with a car.

[wiredfool]

I'm not drunk if I can track stand.

[usrusr]

I know I can't be sober if I try

[spaetzleesser]

In Munich I almost ran over a drunk bicycle guy because he suddenly swerved into my lane.

I am ok with people killing themselves but it's not OK do something stupid that makes another person kill you. An example would be jumping in front of a train to commit suicide. These things leave deep trauma in the people this happened to. I view drunk cycling in that category.

[rocgf]

Cycling drunk is technically illegal, but often unenforced in the Netherlands. You should see the thousands of obviously 'drunk' people leaving festivals on bikes, under the eyes of the police.

[DonHopkins]

You have to be careful about where you park you bike around drunk people. I locked my bike up in Leidseplein once, and when I came back, somebody had barfed on my bike seat!

achenet: The officer will direct you to the separate bike lanes for Ketamine and LSD.

[rahkiin]

Correct. Police prefer people drunk cycling than drunk in the car.

[sebazzz]

Fun fact: you can lose your car driving license if you are drunk when cycling. But you can't lose it if you don't have one!

[rocgf]

In the Netherlands, that is not the case. The worst they can do is give you a fine.

[interestica]

Can someone easily renounce their drivers license in advance?

[achenet]

It's okay officer, I'm not drunk, I just had a bunch of ketamine and some LSD.

[acomjean]

We had a friend who got into an minor accident (fall really) after drinking and cycling. He was wearing a helmet and he’s become a helmet evangelist.

[RWSen]

ANother anecdote from The Netherlands: when we go out to drink we go by bike so everyone can drink! Worst case scenario: you bike there and walk back again. You can't take a car with you when you're walking.

Personally, while drunk, I lose the ability to walk straight before I lose the ability to bike.

[immibis]

And presumably you can walk with your bike.

[mmcnl]

It's not enforced in The Netherlands. Better to have drunk people on bikes than in cars.

[solardev]

You can actually get "biking under the influence" tickets in some places.

[grardb]

Do you get too drunk to ride a bicycle every time you go out for drinks?

[rowanajmarshall]

When I've cycled to work and gone for drinks afterwards, I'll leave my bike at the office and pick it up the next day, using public transport to get there.

[soco]

The good thing is, "too drunk to ride a bike" happens much earlier than "too drunk". And while with a car some push it and still drive drunk (sometimes with horrendous consequences), a bike has this safety mechanism where they simply cannot be ridden when drunk.

[feet]

A bike also has the safety mechanism of not being 3000 pounds and the inability to easily drive through the walls of buildings

[SauciestGNU]

I am a practiced cyclist and an accomplished drinker, and I can tell you that I am able to operate a bicycle deeper into intoxication than I can reliably walk.

[DonHopkins]

It's as if all bikes came with their own tamper proof drunk driver detector and drunk usage preventer: a built-in continuous driver balance testing system, even more reliable than a breathalyzer, and able to detect all kinds of other drugs too.

Drunk tricycle driving and bikes with training wheels: now those much more inherently dangerous problems!

[umanwizard]

That just isn’t true. I’ve cycled while extremely drunk on multiple occasions (which, to be clear, I think is a bad idea).

[pjmlp]

Somehow the bycicles in Germany seem to lack such mechanism, given the state of some examples I have witnessed.

[philamonster]

Couldn't agree more. Not going to get into philosophical/cultural differences between life in your country and America but it cannot be ignored the gap between a cyclist's mentality and the right-to-road mentality of the average car driver, even in supposed bike friendly cities, in the US. This fundamental difference in thought is reinforced by infrastructure and the type and size of vehicles that are pervasive on American roads. Just had another white bike memorial erected on my route to work some 2 months ago that stamps out any idea of either being able to commute to work safely again myself or that this gap in thought could/is shrink/ing.

That said, I have seen and still see some questionable cyclist practices on these roads from type of bike, lane of travel, footwear (or gear in general), lack of helmet (or misfitting/unfastened helmet) and route choice though I understand, at least where I live now, there sometimes isn't a choice. In larger cities there was an unspoken agreement _most_ of the time between myself and vehicles in the road that we were "aware" of one another. I find sometimes cyclists being far too aggressive to assert that awareness on drivers here (or today?) where it could be an honest misconception that the person behind the wheel knows how to interact with a cyclist for any number of reasons.

Full disclosure; former bike messenger in Boston, Philly & Portland OR, long-time commuter when not riding for work.

[InCityDreams]

>cyclists are equal participants in traffic and are treated with care and respect.

...and you're absolutely royally fucked if you hit one, plays a part.

[navane]

Everyone is a cyclist and therefore drivers are very empathetic towards cyclists: a couple hours later or earlier they were the cyclist, and the cyclist was the driver.

[BlargMcLarg]

This is a highly idealistic myth. Most drivers are not "cyclists a few hours earlier/later", and many definitely aren't empathetic. The split between bike lanes and car lanes, as well as the law favoring cyclists, should make that obvious. Cyclists even get away not showing their direction despite this being taught from early age.

[kennend3]

This is how we can tell you are not a cyclist.

It is very difficult to use the brakes and indicate a change in direction at the same time.

While cyclists should indicate, the nature of the vehicle does make it hard under some conditions.

Here's a question for you. If i am stopped at a red light on my bike in what is clearly a left turn lane, why do cars attempt to pull up in front of me anyhow?

Cant be bothered waiting for me to make the left so they just force themselves in front of me? is this because i didn't signal?

[uoaei]

50% of my miles and 90% of my travel time is on a bike.

Signalling a change in direction should only be done with your left hand, per manuals.

Braking can be achieved with only the right hand (rear brake, typically).

Dismounting and signalling/braking is hard to do at once though. And you're right it should be obvious that a cyclist is turning left if they are in the left turn lane.

[BlargMcLarg]

None of what you said has to do with the reality of the matter, nor does you trying to flip the script change things. Look past your own emotions instead of trying to low blow immediately.

Comment in question claims people are more empathetic because individuals seem to switch between biking and driving cars almost daily. This is not happening. Live a 30 minute drive away from work, most individuals would take the bike every weekend at best. Most individuals do in fact live that far from work. Furthermore, car usage continues to increase, and roads continue to be expanded as a result. You can say all you want, most individuals are not going to cycle after an 8 hour workday and spending at least an hour commuting.

>While cyclists should indicate, the nature of the vehicle

>why do cars attempt to pull up in front of me anyhow?

Way too focused on cyclist vs vehicle. There are plenty of roads where it isn't always obvious which way someone is going, no matter cyclist or vehicle. These are old roads, but they exist nonetheless. Vehicles are actively punished for not indicating, cyclists are not. Both are hazards for everyone else, themselves and pedestrians included. That's not exactly something that would instill empathy.

That should also make it obvious the inverse situation doesn't create empathy either. It's a two-way street and neither is particularly giving to the other. That has nothing to do with automobile vs cyclist vs pedestrian vs whatever, it has to do with.. who would've guessed, people being people.

Why do you think laws were made to accommodate cyclists in particular? Why do you think lanes are split? Why do you think many individuals have a particular distaste for sport cyclists, who go high speed through busy roads and expect everyone to adapt to them? It's not empathy, it's a lack of empathy, followed by individuals not wanting to get in trouble over petty little things, and a legal system not wanting to spend thousands of manhours covering he-said-she-said scenarios.

[gjm11]

The comment in question is (I believe) referring specifically to how things are in the Netherlands, where my understanding is that long commutes are much less common than they are in the United States, and many more people cycle as well as drive.

Is it actually true that "[motor] vehicles are actively punished for not indicating, cyclists are not"? So far as I can tell, it's extremely rare for anyone to be punished for not indicating. (Which is probably the Right Thing; the police surely have better things to spend their time on than watching for drivers or cyclists who fail to indicate.)

[josephcsible]

Would we tolerate a car on our roads with turn signals and brakes that couldn't be used at the same time?

[kuschku]

Why should cyclists, who got the roads built in the first place, be driven from the roads by motorists?

Bicycles aren't the problem, the singular focus on cars in our societies is the real problem. Roads used to be shared between horses, carriages, bicycles, vendors, and pedestrians.

The car is a monotheistic religion, there can only be one god, the car, and you have to devote your whole life and society to it.

[josephcsible]

> Why should cyclists, who got the roads built in the first place, be driven from the roads by motorists?

This feels a bit like saying that the US shouldn't have abolished slavery since it was founded by slave owners.

> Roads used to be shared between horses, carriages, bicycles, vendors, and pedestrians.

Lead used to be in paint and gas. Doctors used to perform surgery without even washing their hands first. People used to use chamber pots instead of toilets. And roads used to be disgusting from being covered in horse manure.

> The car is a monotheistic religion, there can only be one god, the car, and you have to devote your whole life and society to it.

No, we just want different spaces to be used for different means of transportation, similarly to how you wouldn't want someone riding a motorcycle on the sidewalk.

[andruby]

No we wouldn’t.

I would argue that they are not the same thing. I find it easy to tell which direction a cyclist will go even when they don’t/can’t signal. I see it in their head movement, the orientation of the bike, etc. Especially when driving behind a cyclist.

When cars don’t signal, I find it harder to guess where they are going.

[mrsuprawsm]

My experience is the complete opposite of what you describe.

[BlargMcLarg]

That's cool, but the stats continue to show wealth causes increase in driving and people continue to live pretty far away from work. Most people are not going to cycle after getting home from work or prior. The few Amsterdam anecdotes in this thread don't weight up against the masses driving 20+ minutes and the high traffic roads being expanded again.

Now add the many laws favorable towards cyclists and measurements taken to accommodate them. It's not empathy. It's saving one's own hide from causing a lot of harm, a sense of guilt and the potential lawsuit waiting to happen. There's no special empathy given to cyclists in particular, only universal respect towards any non-motorized vehicle and individuals (e.g. children, individuals with heavy groceries).

Your experience is dispelled the moment you take an hour cycling to and from work. That's pretty easy for anyone not on a SDE salary.

[dncornholio]

Amsterdam is a pretty shitty place to bike if you compare it to the rest of the Netherlands.

The point these posts are making is that you need dedicated infrastructure to get people to cycle. Roads need to be walkable as well. So NA's car centric infra is the cause. Not the cyclists.

[logifail]

> Kids cycle to school alone from a young age

Unfortunately our kids weren't allowed to cycle to school unaccompanied by an adult until they reached year 4 and had passed their cycling proficiency test (mid-way through that school year).

I've been cycling with my daughter to kindergarten for at least a year, she's fine with the cycling bit, it's the looking-out-for-other-vehicles bit that's not quite there yet :/ This obviously depends a lot on local road layouts, and unfortunately we have a junction more or less right outside the school and kindergarten that way too many car drivers come through at speed...

[andruby]

What age are kids generally in “year 4”? I assume you didn’t mean kids of age 4?

[kuschku]

The fourth year of school, the last year of primary school, is at age 10.

Depending on region, children cycling on their own to school typically starts somewhere between ages 6-10.

[wpietri]

And my understanding is that this is a historically recent development, yes? That this bike friendliness comes from a conscious shift and a lot of hard work in the last few decades?

I saw a lecture a while back by the head of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, who spent some months in Amsterdam and talked about this. It was inspiring to think how much was possible here with relatively modest changes. Changes which seem even more possible with the pandemic, as a bunch of streets here got converted to low-traffic roads.

[michiel_]

> That this bike friendliness comes from a conscious shift and a lot of hard work in the last few decades?

The infrastructure and safety comes from a conscious shift and a lot of hard work, roughly starting in the 1970s. But cycling used to be the predominant mode of personal transportation until well into the 1960s; the average Dutch person simply couldn't afford a car until then. There are films of throngs of bicyclists completely blocking the road for cars, purely by overwhelming numbers. There were campaign films "educating" bicyclists about "their proper place on the road".

(A short, easy example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTcQ9tSyUCs . It's a commercial, it's message is "It's no fun driving a car in Amsterdam; bring a bicycle!")

Bicycle-safe infrastructure was as much about clearing the main road for motorists, as it was about making bicyclists safer, and relatively speaking, bicycles have dwindled in importance since the country started building bike-safe infrastructure; correlation, not causation.

So I'm a bit uncomfortable when people mythologize the infrastructural revolution of the 1970s. Yes, impressive work was done. But it happened within a specific cultural and economic context that doesn't exist anymore.

[Vrondi]

This is what is needed. Unlike coming upon a cyclist on a highway, in a blind curve, on a mountain road with a 45 mph speed limit. Where I live, there's no bike culture or infrastructure, and the rare cyclist in this setting strikes me as rather suicidal.

[jotm]

Wait, you can ride drunk? That's a point deduction on your driver's licence in other countries lol

Tbf I stopped doing that because I fell a couple of times, last time really hard, too.

[JumpCrisscross]

> Because everyone is a cyclist and there are cyclists everywhere, cyclists are equal participants in traffic and are treated with care and respect

Dutch cyclists are also more observant of the rules. In New York, cyclists regularly blow through red lights and cross walks going through wrong way and at high speed.

[andsoitis]

My experience in Amsterdam is that the cyclists are exceptionally rude and dangerous to pedestrians.

[ghaff]

I can't say I've experienced that. But there are a lot of bicycles which you need to be aware of as a pedestrian to a much greater degree than many other places.