[pascalo]

While I totally understand that it must've felt menacing to nearly have been hit by a bicycle, do you _really_ think it would've killed you?

I also think that cyclists shouldn't ride at speed on the sidewalk, but even if, cyclists causing pedestrian fatalities is extremely rare. It has happened, but it's statistically insignificant when compared to cars killing pedestrians.

There is a big difference between getting hit by 90kg at 30km/h vs 1900kg at 45km/h.

[gknoy]

I think it could indeed kill you. It's rare, but certainly can happen:

""" From 1996 to 2005, 11 pedestrians across New York City died after being struck by bicyclists.... 2006 to 2013, there were just four pedestrian deaths, according to the city’s Department of Transportation. """ [0]

0: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-09-23/pedestrian...

[pascalo]

Very sad. However, you kind of made my point. That amounts to 0.8 pedestrian fatalities a year caused by cyclists, with a population of 8.4 million people.

[diyorgasms]

That could be partly because it is illegal in many jurisdictions in the United States for a cyclist to ride on the sidewalks.

It is entirely possible that the low bike-on-pedestrian fatality rate is due in part to the law mandating that cyclists and pedestrians be segregated.

[vacri]

Does something have to be fatal before it's worth doing something about? Serious injury doesn't count?

[pascalo]

In the overall road toll, hardly any fatalities are caused by cyclists. In fact, most accidents involving cyclist are caused by drivers.[1]

Don't get me wrong, all of it counts and is sad and regrettable. I do however think there is an anti-cyclist bias ingrained in the perception and reporting of it's dangers, that's out of whack with the real numbers on accidents.

[1] http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyclesafety/article3758...

[hueving]

What are you going on about? The person was complaining about bicycles on the sidewalk where it is illegal for them to be. Who cares if they don't kill people that often? It's not the point!

[pascalo]

I am talking about perceived risk of cycling as a hyperbole vs actual risks that don't get mentioned. I'm pretty sure more people get killed by cars mounting the sidewalk.

[brandonmenc]

Cripes, you win. I was using "nearly killed" as a figure of speech. Guilty as charged!

But here's the rub - people don't want to put up with even a 1-in-1000 chance of getting a broken arm just from walking on the sidewalk, and they don't want to constantly be on guard against bikes zipping all over the place on what should be a relaxing walk.

It's annoying, and that's why we have things like noise ordnances even though no one ever like, dies because the neighbors are too loud.

[brandonmenc]

> do you _really_ think it would've killed you?

I've almost been knocked into a busy 50 mph street by sidewalk cyclists, so yeah.

[kelnos]

Not really the point, I don't think. I expect to be safe from vehicles walking on a sidewalk, period (that's the point of sidewalks). People in/on vehicles, whether cars or bicycles, are taking on much more risk, at their choice.

The real solution is to separate cars and bikes, just like we separate cars and people. Dedicated, buffered bike lanes and safer intersections.