The thing about aggressive cyclists is that they are absolutely a problem, but they become more of a problem the less bike infrastructure there is, because a) that's the only way to survive among cars, and b) the situation self-selects for those people, as non-aggressive cyclists would not last for very long.

So counterintuitively, to have less issues with aggressive cyclists, you need more cycling infrastructure -> more overall cyclists. Not even *less* of them, like people often claim.

(Inspired by, but *not* a subtoot of, a toot I ran across today)