How else would you drive without getting in a wreck most days?

…what? Have you ever driven before? This behavior causes wrecks ALL THE TIME, it’s probably the #1 cause of wrecks. It’s definitely one of the most dangerous things a driver can do. Same applies to cyclists.

She plays it for 3 hours a night

“wtf are you on about? Oranges have been banned for 10 years.”

“I’m eating one right now.”

“You’re a liar, prove it.”

“I’m not going to take a picture of myself for you. What kind of idiot thinks oranges are banned?”

“Oh yeah, prove they’re not.”

“Prove oranges aren’t banned by the government? How the fuck?”

“See, I rest my case”

“You fucking idiot…[3 hours of research and case law into it being legal to eat an orange] here you happy?”

“Oh well they banned them in my country (of 6 people).”

It was about to turn red for the cyclist. Meaning it was red for the cars.

In most of the US, there’s no separate lights for cyclists.

In any case, you’re missing that the cyclist did the equivalent of coming from an adjacent lane to cut off cars next to him. No car can anticipate that, from a cyclist or from another car.

They don’t. It’s like those “wait, bananas aren’t supposed to be spicy?” moments. You probably have a mild allergy.

I’m just glad we all moved away from the “box on wheels” design of 10 years ago. God those were hideous.

Oh man I saw a wreck just a week ago, right in front of me, because some moron decided to come to a FULL STOP on a freeway on-ramp, turn their blinker on, wait until there were literally no cars in the entire freeway, then scurry over across all lanes into the far left lane and start doing 30mph

Guess who came up behind them doing 65mph?

Guess who panicked and swerved directly in front of them?

The shitty thing is, because it’s technically a rear-end, there’s a good chance the driver doing everything right will be found at fault.

Well,

1. SF cyclists are entitled douchebag tech bros. Just unlikeable as people. Cycling (or at least, being vocal about your cycling) seems to attract the worst kinds of people.

2. No one is targeting cyclists. That’s not a thing. It’s a persecution complex dreamed up because: see above.

3. SF Bay drivers are some of the worst in the country. No, you’re not being targeted by the person running you off the road. They just do that. All the time. To everyone.

If you’re going at a slow speed maybe. A lot of cyclist infrastructure is next to roads with speeds of 40, 50, 60 mph.

So a cyclist darting out in front of oncoming traffic bears no responsibility if they get hit?

The scenario they’re talking about is in a 4-way intersection. Imagine you’re driving straight through an intersection; you have a green light, everything is fine. Then out of nowhere on your right side a cyclist zips by in front of you. You have 0.3 seconds to see them and apply the brake and have your car stop. That’s not always feasible.

In most places in the US we have pedestrians, vehicles, and bicycles all mashed together in close proximity. Statistically, there will be people killed by drivers who did nothing wrong.

Hell, there will be people killed by drivers because the pedestrian/cyclist did something stupid like run into traffic.

This law would cause a lot of harm to innocent people and I’m glad we don’t have it.

Depends on how rich you are.

Protected bike lanes. We’ve seen plenty of evidence that painted lines aren’t really good enough. Cars will just drive or park over them.

Man, cyclists/pedestrians like that crack me up

“The law says I have right of way!”

“Not the laws of physics, so you should still look both ways and be prepared.”

“REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE”

You mileage may vary. In my area, I see very few motorists run red lights or stop signs, but at least half of all cyclists do it.

Personally:

I live in the SF Bay Area, home of (imo) the 2nd worst drivers in the US (after Dallas-Ft Worth).

There’s also loads of cyclists. We have a lot of cyclist infrastructure (though not nearly enough).

Guess what, the ones doing the cycling are the same people as the ones doing the driving.

Bad driver in 4 wheels = bad driver in 2 wheels.

Or more accurately, the military wouldn’t want you if you are too smart.

You’re mixed up, that’s US police, not US military.

You’re probably one of those people who has a mild allergy or has your brain wires crossed, like those people who think cilantro tastes like soap.

MintPress News (MPN) is an American far-left[1] news website founded and edited by Mnar Adley (née Muhawesh) which was launched in January 2012[2] and also publishes the MintCast podcast. It covers political, economic, foreign affairs and environmental issues. Editorially, MintPress News supports Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, and the governments of Russia, Iran, and Syria.[3][4] It opposes the governments of Israel and Saudi Arabia,[5] and reports geopolitical events from an anti-Western perspective.[6] In one contentious article, MintPress News falsely asserted that the Ghouta chemical attack in Syria was perpetrated by rebel groups rather than by the Syrian government.[4]

Tankie propaganda. Ignore.

Does the presumption of innocence still apply even if the crime has already been confirmed to have happened?

Yes. The crime (and the criminal) legally hasn’t been “confirmed”. The point of a trial is to “confirm” it.

For example, there’s probably at least 50 million people who believe no crime occurred.

They’re WRONG, of course, but the point of the trial is to prove them wrong.