They would simply put into the terms and conditions of the service that it was the responsibility of the cyclist to obey the laws
Yeah I agree, but the reasoning is the inconvenience of carrying a helmet is enough to make folks not use the service at all. So not the liability issue - but just the expectation that the uptake would be so low as to make the business not viable.
Starting to get a few numbers in (some hospital data and road use data). In terms of fear of cycling and risks, cyclists have about as much risk of hospitalisation/death from stationary objects as cars (but the stationary objects are not in the hands of other people which is where the fear comes from).
For pedestrians if we take km traveled as an indicator of how much they are on the road, cyclists is almost exactly 1% of cars, however among pedestrian hospitalisations collisions with cyclists are at a rate of 2.83% of cars (95% confidence interval 1.84 to 4.2) suggesting that for hospitalisation injuries the risk to pedestrians is higher per cycle than per car.
that for hospitalisation injuries the risk to pedestrians is higher per cycle than per car.
Makes sense, we have very few car/pedestrian shared paths and even fewer uses of the phrase "we can't afford a dedicated facility" when talking about motorists.
But cyclists seem to be killed by motorists at 5x the rate per kilometre that you'd hope - 7/158 in the last 12 months rather than the 1-2 you'd expect from the 1% number.
I mean "killed by roads" since that's the major cause of death the media talk about ("New Zealand roads kill 11 during long weekend"). I wonder if that drives the focus on helmets? Cyclists are not killed by collisions with motorists, they're killed by roads.
rather than the 1-2 you’d expect from the 1% number.
The expect really hinges on how much damage you expect people to take in an accident- giving the prevailing wisdom that the short term risk is balanced by the long term health benefits it starts to devolve into arguments about what a reasonable rate is.
Broadly speaking I would say everyone is safer in their own custom transport space, and pretty much all the risk is at shared spaces (i.e. intersections where all three groups intermix unavoidably).
And in the spirit of the discussion, proposed new cycle lanes on Pt Chevalier and Meola roads:
....some of which is shared with pedestrians and some of which is separate.