People think cyclists break traffic laws more because cyclists are a minority outgroup, and like any other minority outgroup, negative behavior and attributes are exaggerated. A whole slew of observational biases come into play.
The absolute favorite thing drivers love to shriek about is cyclists not obeying stop signs and stop lights. Except that in urban cities, the most common cause of crashes is usually doorings and "hooks" - where the driver passes a cyclist, while braking and turning - something that is almost impossible to avoid because a car can out-turn and out-brake someone on a bike, and the situation was initiated by the driver. Doorings? You can tell people "ride outside the door zone" but that usually ends up subjecting you to all sorts of abuse by drivers, including "punish passes", which turn into collisions when drivers misjudge the distance and hit the cyclist instead.
The amount of hatred drivers have for people on bicycles is astounding. Even people like the head of the British Automobile Association described the attitude drivers have as being similar to racism: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/11/16/cyclists-abuse-r...
There's also the ever-popular self-loathing bicyclist who loves to criticize and victim-blame other cyclists. It may come as a surprise, but victim-blaming by members of a group is done as a psychological self defense mechanism. Being struck by a driver is something that by and large you have no control over; cyclists obeying the law, riding prudently, in a straight line, on a straight road, wearing high-visibility clothing, etc still get plowed into. That's scary, so people invent reasons why the victim was at fault - reasons that coincide with steps the victim-blamer takes that they think protects them.
Regarding the point on similarity for racism, spending years as a commuter cyclist, where I was frequently forced to the margins of the road, gave me a much deeper appreciation for marginalized people of all sorts. Some people were nice, many people were oblivious and/or didn't give a shit, and some people were hostile and dangerous. Not because of anything more than me living my life a little differently than them. Those visceral experiences made it much easier for me to empathize with people in other outgroups.
They cherry pick data (often decades old) from specific countries/regions to try to apply their claim that "A high rate of helmet use is a sign that the authorities have failed to design well for cycling" at a global level.
Which of the thirty references in that article do you feel are "cherry picking"?
What is your justification for dismissing data because it is "decades old"?
...particularly given that in the US, especially by the federal government, claims of "80%" helmet efficacy are based on one study of ER patients done in the early eighties?
Most cyclists are drivers as well. I often wonder how safe they are as drivers. Do they do all of the things as drivers that they themselves as cyclists insist drivers must do? Certainly not, in the case of the people I've seen on this very site saying that drivers should never take their eyes off the road (even to check a mirror apparently) or that they should never drive above walking speed lest someone jump out from behind a street light or mailbox in front of them. "If you hit someone it means you were driving too fast" is the usual version, ignoring these kinds of realities. Even without such hyperbole, I doubt that the bike bros I see every day on the path near my house are all that much mellower once they get behind the wheel. They're not interested in what's right or fair. They're just using the very real safety issues involving bikes to rationalize their preexisting sense of entitlement.
https://cyclingfallacies.com
Specifically, the page about red-light running, which if you scroll down lists numerous sources showing people on bicycles do not break traffic laws more than drivers: https://cyclingfallacies.com/en/11/people-break-the-rules-wh...
People think cyclists break traffic laws more because cyclists are a minority outgroup, and like any other minority outgroup, negative behavior and attributes are exaggerated. A whole slew of observational biases come into play.
The absolute favorite thing drivers love to shriek about is cyclists not obeying stop signs and stop lights. Except that in urban cities, the most common cause of crashes is usually doorings and "hooks" - where the driver passes a cyclist, while braking and turning - something that is almost impossible to avoid because a car can out-turn and out-brake someone on a bike, and the situation was initiated by the driver. Doorings? You can tell people "ride outside the door zone" but that usually ends up subjecting you to all sorts of abuse by drivers, including "punish passes", which turn into collisions when drivers misjudge the distance and hit the cyclist instead.
The amount of hatred drivers have for people on bicycles is astounding. Even people like the head of the British Automobile Association described the attitude drivers have as being similar to racism: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/11/16/cyclists-abuse-r...
There's also the ever-popular self-loathing bicyclist who loves to criticize and victim-blame other cyclists. It may come as a surprise, but victim-blaming by members of a group is done as a psychological self defense mechanism. Being struck by a driver is something that by and large you have no control over; cyclists obeying the law, riding prudently, in a straight line, on a straight road, wearing high-visibility clothing, etc still get plowed into. That's scary, so people invent reasons why the victim was at fault - reasons that coincide with steps the victim-blamer takes that they think protects them.