Many drivers do not understand that the concept of parallel circulation of cyclists serves safety reasons. To find out “why” you have to travel back to the 90s, when cycling was more sporting than recreational and in any town or neighborhood there were cyclists looking for a training place on the outskirts of their city.
Already at that time, there was a bicycle culture and almost no one knew the meter and a half standard that was inherited from the Traffic Regulations (repealed in 1990). 152 fatalities.
The multiple and well-attended demonstrations of the 90s demanding protection measures and segregated roads, gave rise to the famous advertising campaign with the "1.5m" logo, the projection of architectural changes in many cities, making room for bicycles. -with more or less success- and the inclusion in 2001 of parallel circulation for bicycles with the condition that they would have to circulate in line whenever they caused a serious alteration of traffic or in those areas where visibility put jeopardize road safety.
Why is parallel traffic safer? Because the bulge they generate is larger and makes drivers take more precautions when overtaking them, both in speed and distance, reducing the Venturi effect by which the mass of air dragged by a vehicle absorbs and destabilizes the cyclist, increasing the chances of accident.
Little by little, the drivers have gotten used to the presence of the cyclist and, when it seemed that there was a balance, we have increased the statistics again. The problem is none other than the increase in the number of users of all kinds on the roads; bicycles, classics, sports, etc.; and that from social networks, the anti-cycling movement has been created.
New problems need new solutions, and just as in their day Alfonso Triviño and Javier Paniagua left their skin to create a model norm, now we need circumstances to adapt again to the moment. It is necessary to regulate cycling activity, as it is necessary to impose measures to protect lives... Things are announced, but nothing arrives and, meanwhile, the statistics go up.
From these lines I ask for sanity. We are all offenders, but I have never seen such a level of irrational hatred between peers. For someone to say that they can transform cyclists into doormats with the truck, for someone else to say that they love how cyclists creak under their wheels or that they want a truck to "do their job" instead of being administratively penalized, not only makes you think, but I think that it is enough reason to start worrying and do something to prevent this from going further. It remains in us