A driver in the UK has just been sentenced to three years for intentionally chasing after a cyclists on his car and running him over (Video link below for you gory folk). 

http://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-england-london-39871028/mobile-phone-...

This afternoon I saw the post on Pinkbike, linking to the article and noting their disgust at the ruling. 

Every time I read of one of these cases it seems like I'm missing something. Even more when I dare to venture into the comment sections.  

It seems that my confusion stems from the following logic: A bike weighs 30lbs, a car weighs 2 tons plus on average. Every commuter has a choice: Do I transport myself on a personal vehicle that weighs 30lbs or do I transport myself on a 2 ton structure of steel? Aside from the obvious differences in practicality and health benefits, there are obvious implications in terms of the extent of damage one can cause versus the other. Texting and driving, for example, can produce far worse consequences than texting and riding. It would just seem logical to me that the person deciding to transport themselves on 2 tons of steel understand the increased liability and responsibility that the decision entails. 

I really don't understand why drivers are protected so much. Am I missing something?