How many cyclists would even notice if they misjudged a crossing at a red light and nearly winged an elderly lady? Or caused someone who didn't look disabled to have to jump out of the way? The elderly lady might become agoraphobic from fear of being hit again. The person who didn't look disabled might have a balance disorder that meant they couldn't save themselves from falling (but the cyclist didn't notice, racing off) and falling caused an injury that didn't kill them but did cause major disruption to their live?
A bad cyclist would be a bad driver and would be a bad pedestrian too.
You can't compare vehicles with pedestrians because to operate either a car or a bike, you need to be at least reasonably able-bodied.
There are plenty of disabled people (eg people who are completely blind) who cannot operate any form of vehicle at all, who are solely reliant on either walking or public transport/lifts, and who are very vulnerable.
Threads like this always ignore the existence of disabled people or act like they're a nuisance, but the fact is people who aren't medically able to either drive or cycle (but still need to be able to get around!!) aren't necessarily going to me medically capable of the level of awareness you need to be in charge of a vehicle.
So there's an inherent disparity there.
If someone is completely blind, they obviously have no ability to look at a crossing to see if there's a bike about to break the red light. They are solely reliant on the crossing telling them that the green man is lit up, and hoping that no-one actively breaks the law and decides to smash into them (and if someone does decide to break the law, the blind person will be blamed for being blind).
Does crossing when the green man is lit up, without looking to see if anything is coming, make you a "bad" pedestrian"?
And it's not just blind people, plenty of people have medical conditions that cause confusion, or lack of spatial awareness, of reduced reaction time.
Those people would never be able to drive a car or a bike so why are they responsible for keeping themselves safe from able-bodied people who clearly are perfectly physically capable of not hitting someone, but choose to endanger others through sheer selfishness?
The assumption seems to be that all pedestrians are also car drivers, so fuck 'em. People forget that "sole pedestrians" who don't operate any form of transport do actually exist. The last time there was a thread like this, there were pro-cycling posters who just couldn't wrap their brains around the fact I've never driven a car in my life and hadn't been inside a car in years. (Though obviously pedestrians who do own and drive cars also deserve to not be endangered just as much!)
It feels like there's an attitude of "anyone who isn't a cyclist is a car driver and therefore bad and the enemy".