Or if the cyclist runs a light in front of a car and they swerve to avoid them, hits a tree, hits someone else, flips etc. People could easily die that way.
True, but I won't wreck my car to avoid hitting some moron on a bike who ran the stop. If my choice on my motorcycle is between wrecking myself or wrecking myself and the cyclist, I will take the cyclist with me. I already crashed one car avoiding a douche-bag in a Porsche but since there was no contact between vehicles the insurance was very hesitant to pay out, even when I had a description of the car.
No, if I'm going down, I'm taking you with me just to prove that it wasn't a single-vehicle crash.
Wrong, it is - theoretically. Red lights, like all other regulations, are just part of the situation. Act accordingly to the situation. Laws are guidelines, they are not to be taken as absolutes - not ever. If no harm is done by breaking them, and there is no danger of being caught, laws can and should be ignored. If you can be absolutely sure that no harm will be done by running the red light, the it is fine to run it - if you can also be sure the cops won't catch you. Thing is, cyclists and pedestrians can be fairly sure of that, car and motorcycle drivers can not. Because of plates and because of their not-so-good view.
First of all, your attitude is
exactly that of a particular notorious driver known as DIVINEZ, who got internet fame by nearly killing a motorcyclist in the Bay Area. Google him, see what comes up. It was only because the rider was very skilled, and very experienced that he survived a near head-on collision with a speeding douchebag who thought he knew better than the law saying not to pass on that corner.
Yes, I'm comparing you to that type of behavior because your attitude is
identical.
Laws are not guidelines. Laws are laws; there is a reason we have two different words to define these different concepts.
You cannot guarantee that no harm will come from ignoring the traffic laws. As I've said in this thread and others many times, I have had too many close calls and one very serious crash that has left me with a permanent impairment because people treated laws as if they were only suggestions. You are confusing "no harm" with "not being ticketed."
Cyclists and pedestrians cannot be relatively sure of anything. Don't believe me? Go look up how many vehicles strike jaywalking pedestrians. I believe a mother was recently sentenced to jail for jaywalking with her child when they were both struck by an SUV and the child was killed. I think she was found guilty of manslaughter, field of vision had nothing to do with it.
Motorcyclists have just as much field of view as cyclists, are you saying that vehicles that have good outward visibility are exempt from traffic laws?
Ok fine i just won't ride anymore on the road since its seems like the road is only for cars and motorcycle responsible road-users who obey traffic laws.
FTFY