Why do cyclists think road rules don't apply to them?

I grew up in the Netherlands, so I spent the formative years of my life cycling everywhere. I still have a bicycle and still use it. Apparently I'm the only one who understands that road rules apply to cyclists too, because in this day and age, they do seem for the most part to be a menace. Frankly it's surprising more of them aren't hood ornaments because they certainly make every attempt to get into an accident.

Every morning on my pleasingly short commute, I come across people cycling three-wide, blocking the road. They refuse to cycle in-line in the cycle lane, and get really pissed off when people honk or shout at them. But then they go on to filter to the front of the line at traffic lights (which I have no problem with) before then cycling through the red light (which I very much have a problem with). Every day I get some bozo breezing through a stop sign that I've stopped at, then getting bent out of shape when the drive who had priority nearly runs them down. Every day I see these two-wheeled idiots hopping up and down kerbs menacing pedestrians one second, then blocking the road the next.

I'm sorry people but if you're going to cycle like complete assholes, then expect to be treated like complete assholes.

American roundabouts

Roundabouts are a wonderful invention. Traffic generally flows on and off without too much hassle. You wait for a gap in traffic, the hop on, and hop off at your required exit.
Here in America, they've taken that notion and ruined it by turning roundabouts into 4-way stops - sort of like traffic lights on roundabouts in England but without the lights. So rather than flowing traffic, like they're supposed to, they stop traffic. Worse, if the roundabout is big enough, rather than giving way to traffic already on the roundabout like everywhere else in the world, you have to give way to traffic entering the roundabout.

It does rather explain the following comment I saw once:
Watching Americans trying to negotiate a roundabout in England is an entertaining and embarrassing representation of the human ignorance about an intersection that does not require you to stop but does require you to yield. It seems to cause some sort of severe psychological disorder since it is neither green nor red, but requires them to steer and calculate approaching distances at the same time.

EPA Proposing new window information labels

The EPA are busy redesigning the familiar window labels that American buyers are used to seeing in car windows. They're trying to come to terms with how best to represent newer hybrids and all-electric vehicles. The simplest proposal has a slight label redesign, but essentially remains much like the labels available today. The larger redesign involves adding a prominent colour-coded grade to the vehicle, ranging from A to D, to give you a one-shot indicator as to how good or bad the vehicle is in terms of fuel economy. The US auto manufacturers aren't too keen on this last idea - probably because a lot of the vehicles would end up in the "D" category, but there's a way to go yet. If you want to get involved, the EPA have a website where you can see the new sticker designs and comment on them if you like:
New EPA fuel economy labels

A Toyota saved my wife's life.

Given all the bad press Toyota have had recently, I thought a positive note would help out. My wife drove a Yaris - a reasonable sized car in Europe but considered to be "too small" in the US. And by "too small" people equate that to "not safe". Fact: they're perfectly safe. Unfortunately my wife found that out the hard way. An early 90's Ford Explorer ran into her in an intersection last week. You know the ones - chunky, boxy, with I-beams for bumpers. My wife was able to get out and walk away because the Toyota did its job and protected her. We found out this morning that it was a total loss. So next time you have concerns about "small" cars in crashes with SUVs, look at this photo and remind yourself that the only injuries to my wife were seatbelt and airbag burns.

Get rid of Daytime Running Lights

Daytime running lights - DRLs. One of my pet peeves. Why? Well I ride a motorcycle and motorcycles are, whichever way you look at it, more vulnerable on the roads and less likely to be seen by idiot car drivers. The solution was to ride with our lights on to make ourselves more visible to everyone else - to draw attention to ourselves. Sadly, in recent years, car manufacturers the world over have started wiring headlights on cars to be always-on, calling them "Daytime Running Lights". Now, motorcyclists are lost in a sea of car headlights. And why? Because misguided politicians quoting non-existant safety reports have convinced the world that we all need our headlights on all time time.
Eeesh.
Well at least on some cars you can prevent this - see my post from a while back ("Hack Your Car") where I disabled the DRLs on my VW. Frankly I think we should all be able to prevent this and apparently I'm not the only one. An increasingly vocal group calling themselves Drivers Against Daytime Running Lights (DaDRL) are also getting alarmingly agitated about this same issue. DaDRL is a worldwide voluntary group of experienced motorists including Scientists, Engineers, Mathematicians, Lawyers and Ophthalmological experts who are supported by the leading Pedestrian, Cyclist and Motorcyclist organisations committed to improving road safety by reducing glare and distraction.
If you're interested, their various sites are listed below. Take the time to read over some of the studies that have been actually carried out as opposed to manufactured by politicians. It makes interesting reading. Then turn your bloody headlights off in the daytime!

DaDRL UK

DaDRL USA (LightsOut)

DaDRL Bulgaria

DaDRL Poland

DaDRL Lithuania

Unintended acceleration update.

The longer the NHTSA investigation into Toyota's unintended acceleration woes goes on, the more it turns out to be what we suspected all along - there's not a problem with the cars. There's a problem with the drivers. So far the NHTS has investigated over 3,000 reports of unintended acceleration in Toyotas using various techniques including EDRs - Electronic Data Recorders - the automotive 'black box' that definitively tells you what was going on before a crash. Out of the 3000 or so cases investigated so far, all but two of them have turned out to be 'pedal misapplication'. Read: the driver mashed the accelerator, not the brake. This is eerily similar to the case built against Audi between 1978 and 1986 which eventually turned out to be the exact same thing - idiot drivers.

Still - facts be damned, people are still trying to solve a problem that is entirely human operator error. The latest is an interesting pedal redesign from Masuyuki Naruse a Japanese inventor. Essentially, there is only one pedal in his design - the brake. To accelerate, you slide your foot sideways against a lever instead. It's an interesting idea - if you want to brake, you push on the pedal. To accelerate, you pivot your foot sideways. The only issue I see with this is the phantom brake light problem. If the weight of your foot is on the pedal all the time, even pivoted to the side, then your brake lights will always be on. I'm sure there's some adjustment could be made to the sensitivity of the brake light switch, but I'm not sure the single pedal idea is a good one, because once you introduce human stupidity into the equation, someone will find a way to defeat it and still manage to accelerate when they 'thought' they were braking.
Picture credit : NYT.