But this piece is totally to the advantage of cyclists.
Why? Well the definition of road cycling is unprotected humans, mixing, mingling, competing with and impeding large essential fast moving machinery which is operated by complete strangers of varying ability and mental capacity. Normally humans wouldn't ever consider such an activity.
Drivers, being human make lots of mistakes. But this piece is written to assume that it is deliberate or careless conduct by the driver. Mostly it's the perception of the cyclist, from his self imposed insecure position, that most complaints against drivers stem when the drivers action has been endorsed by no collision or incident at all. From his perspective everything was fine.
But Isaac Bober fails to explain why, in 2015, we must have road cycling at all? Society must have walkers and drivers on the road to exist but cyclists? I don't think so.
So start the conversation there please? Why must we have cyclists risking their lives? Why must we have an unnecessary hazard on the road?