We'll never be safe...
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,201
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked 289 Times
in
177 Posts
We'll never be safe...
Police looking for cyclist who was clipped by car in downtown Victoria
A few things struck me about this story, firstly there is no mention of the police charging the driver with dangerous driving or anything but they want to talk to the cyclist. They may end up charging the driver but it seems odd that they haven't done so already. Secondly it's not a surprise, but it's a little disheartening to read the comments; I estimate about 90% of the readers think the cyclist is at fault for leaving the red light early. In their mind somehow the cyclists's previous actions make him fair game. Finally, notice how the vehicle had at least 6 ft between his car and the one on his left yet he chose to drive within 6 inches of the cyclist, driver was likely focusing on the cyclist rather than the space between the cyclist and car on the left.
Edit: The original story link I included was a facebook link which it appears is not allowed so the comments I referred to were on the facebook page.
A few things struck me about this story, firstly there is no mention of the police charging the driver with dangerous driving or anything but they want to talk to the cyclist. They may end up charging the driver but it seems odd that they haven't done so already. Secondly it's not a surprise, but it's a little disheartening to read the comments; I estimate about 90% of the readers think the cyclist is at fault for leaving the red light early. In their mind somehow the cyclists's previous actions make him fair game. Finally, notice how the vehicle had at least 6 ft between his car and the one on his left yet he chose to drive within 6 inches of the cyclist, driver was likely focusing on the cyclist rather than the space between the cyclist and car on the left.
Edit: The original story link I included was a facebook link which it appears is not allowed so the comments I referred to were on the facebook page.
Last edited by gregf83; 07-16-19 at 07:30 AM.
#2
Half way there
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,957
Bikes: Many, and the list changes frequently
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 986 Post(s)
Liked 880 Times
in
527 Posts
That the news media did not mention the driver being charged does not mean that he or she will not be. It's probable that charges are pending and to determine the level of citation depends on what the cyclist says.
If you learn of any developments, please post an update.
If you learn of any developments, please post an update.
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,992
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2495 Post(s)
Liked 738 Times
in
522 Posts
The distance the driver had to the car in the next lane isn't really that important. The fact that they had a good 2' of room to the left of their own lane IS important. They never deviated from a lane center position even while overtaking that cyclist! It's maddening when they do that. But ... and you know that with Leisesturm there is a but coming ... I KNOW when I do something like toast a stop sign or roll early on a red signal that it is going to piss off the drivers near me. I'm not expecting ANY sort of goodwill after that. Given that, I would have been less worried about the freaking door zone and would have stayed well to the right until that fool went past me. They did stop at the end of the block, but moved off after seeing that (assuming that) the cyclist wasn't badly hurt. That's my take.
Likes For Leisesturm:
#5
Senior Member
Lane position is important. I'd be on the left side of the lane to allow cars to turn right. As I cross the intersection, I'd look over my right shoulder first before making my way to the right side of the lane. But I recognize that once I'm on the right side, there's still nothing stopping that car from doing the sideswipe no matter how far to the centre I am. So the best thing to do is to take the lane and force him to follow or change lanes.
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,439
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 624 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 396 Times
in
274 Posts
But, if the driver is under-the-influence and hits a cyclist who is riding in the middle of the lane; the cylist would be run-over and grinded up by the bottom of the car and get serious injury.
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,992
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2495 Post(s)
Liked 738 Times
in
522 Posts
Lane position is important. I'd be on the left side of the lane to allow cars to turn right. As I cross the intersection, I'd look over my right shoulder first before making my way to the right side of the lane. But I recognize that once I'm on the right side, there's still nothing stopping that car from doing the sideswipe no matter how far to the centre I am. So the best thing to do is to take the lane and force him to follow or change lanes.
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,439
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 624 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 396 Times
in
274 Posts
There is no case to be made for doing anything other than what that cyclist did. The only thing he did wrong was to be a little too close to that car when it went past and got clipped by its passenger side mirror.
Likes For Rick:
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,992
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2495 Post(s)
Liked 738 Times
in
522 Posts
If the bicyclist would have controlled that lane, instead of cowering to the right edge. The motorist would not have clipped him with the mirror. The bicyclist had every right to do this under the law. That lane is to narrow to share it with other traffic. I have discussed this subject many times with friends and people on forums. When people insist on endangering themselves like this I have to chalk it up to natural selection.
#10
Senior Member
You'd be more than welcome to come over to observe if you don't believe me.
Last edited by Daniel4; 07-16-19 at 07:47 PM.
#11
Senior Member
So what else is new? Pedestrians get run over by motorists just waiting for the bus too.
#12
WGB
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Niagara Region
Posts: 2,917
Bikes: Panasonic PT-4500
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1800 Post(s)
Liked 2,334 Times
in
1,378 Posts
I would expect no charges until they have a victim. True, they have a complainant who videotaped it and can testify. It would be a whole lot easier prove the case at trial if the struck cyclist provided a statement. No Canadian police officer in his or right mind will charge without a statement if one is available. Defence counsel would argue that I am sure, and I strongly doubt any Crown Attorney would proceed without that statement. I'd expect that they wouldn't charge Dangerous Operation but proceed by a Provincial Statute for the driving as they would have to show that the driver operated the motor vehicle in a manner that was dangerous to the public and it’s easier to prove the offence of failing to remain (assuming that the driver didn’t actually return off camera).
Criminal Code of Canada
Dangerous operation
320.13(1) Everyone commits an offence who operates a conveyance in a manner that, having regard to all of the circumstances, is dangerous to the public.
Basically they’d have to prove that the driver’s actions were dangerous to the public due to the nature, condition and use of the place at which the conveyance was operated. It looks to me like the side mirror clipped the cyclist and I don't think that will prove intent.
Failure to stop after accident
320.16(1) Everyone commits an offence who operates a conveyance and who at the time of operating the conveyance knows that, or is reckless as to whether, the conveyance has been involved in an accident with a person or another conveyance and who fails, without reasonable excuse, to stop the conveyance, give their name and address and, if any person has been injured or appears to require assistance, offer assistance.
I suspect that the actions of the driver (stopping 100m or so from the collision, checking the scene in the rear view mirror, and then leaving without offering assistance or give their name and address) would be easier to prove than Dangerous and it carries the same penalty.
As to the cyclist, what if there was an injury and the police made no attempt to check on the cyclist’s welfare? They may well plan to issue the cyclist a ticket for disobeying the red light but if they didn’t look out for the cyclist’s welfare they might be civilly liable as well.
Criminal Code of Canada
Dangerous operation
320.13(1) Everyone commits an offence who operates a conveyance in a manner that, having regard to all of the circumstances, is dangerous to the public.
Basically they’d have to prove that the driver’s actions were dangerous to the public due to the nature, condition and use of the place at which the conveyance was operated. It looks to me like the side mirror clipped the cyclist and I don't think that will prove intent.
Failure to stop after accident
320.16(1) Everyone commits an offence who operates a conveyance and who at the time of operating the conveyance knows that, or is reckless as to whether, the conveyance has been involved in an accident with a person or another conveyance and who fails, without reasonable excuse, to stop the conveyance, give their name and address and, if any person has been injured or appears to require assistance, offer assistance.
I suspect that the actions of the driver (stopping 100m or so from the collision, checking the scene in the rear view mirror, and then leaving without offering assistance or give their name and address) would be easier to prove than Dangerous and it carries the same penalty.
As to the cyclist, what if there was an injury and the police made no attempt to check on the cyclist’s welfare? They may well plan to issue the cyclist a ticket for disobeying the red light but if they didn’t look out for the cyclist’s welfare they might be civilly liable as well.
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,439
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 624 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 396 Times
in
274 Posts
Quote:Originally Posted by Rick If the bicyclist would have controlled that lane, instead of cowering to the right edge. The motorist would not have clipped him with the mirror. The bicyclist had every right to do this under the law. That lane is to narrow to share it with other traffic. I have discussed this subject many times with friends and people on forums. When people insist on endangering themselves like this I have to chalk it up to natural selection.Are you sure we saw the same video? Cowering to the right edge of the lane? OMG. So the car came over and hit him? Because I saw plenty of daylight between him and the parked cars he was avoiding. I don't know, if the choice is between a car in motion and one that is parked ... I guess he could have been doored ... but he was not. He was not moving fast enough to have any fear of not being able to stop if a door opened in front of him. He should have been more afraid of moving traffic. But if he was to take the lane as you advise, then the only way to do it right is to do it right and get right in there. Right hand tire track at least. Lane center at best. Then if LE pulled him over he could practice his Dale Carnegie training on the officers. It's one thing you and me seeing the same video and reaching different conclusions. It's quite another when LE want to know why you did not cede the travel lane to faster traffic. Extra points if you are a POC doing the convincing.
#14
What happened?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Around here somewhere
Posts: 7,927
Bikes: 3 Rollfasts, 3 Schwinns, a Shelby and a Higgins Flightliner in a pear tree!
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1835 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times
in
255 Posts
It's as likely that somewhere there is some cholesterol with a love note to your heart.
__________________
I don't know nothing, and I memorized it in school and got this here paper I'm proud of to show it.
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,992
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2495 Post(s)
Liked 738 Times
in
522 Posts
There is no mystery here. the motorist made a bad choice and illegally passed and sideswiped the bicyclist. The bicyclist could have avoided this collision by using the lane appropriately. Meaning being further out in the lane so the motorist didn't think there was room for him and the bicyclist to occupy the same lane. This is reckless driving at its finest. If the bicyclist still rides in this manor after this collision I am still going with natural selection.
#17
Cycleway town
It doesn't matter how much room the cyclist left for the motorist, the motorist overtook a vehicle when it wasn't safe to do so. That's how it'd stand here. The motorist should've either stayed back or moved into the left hand lane to overtake.
It only takes one. I don't ride on roads and this is why. Most motorists are good and caring. Some are poorly skilled, some in poor health, and all the way at the other end of the spectrum there is one in 10,000 who will deliberately hit a cyclist. Of all the vehicles that pass you, that one is gonna pass you at some point.
Whether the motorist didn't care and knew how close it was, or genuinely thought there was enough room for both, or thought the cyclist would move to the right a little (i suspect there was a bit of intimidation pushing there, given how slowly it all happened)... whatever the reasons, the motorist should not have proceeded with a pass in that situation.
The attempt to find the cyclist here would be to equipe the police with more leverage in court against the motorist. Any injury or statement could reinforce the prosecution. The cyclist wouldn't need to worry about the red light as that's not an offence here.
It only takes one. I don't ride on roads and this is why. Most motorists are good and caring. Some are poorly skilled, some in poor health, and all the way at the other end of the spectrum there is one in 10,000 who will deliberately hit a cyclist. Of all the vehicles that pass you, that one is gonna pass you at some point.
Whether the motorist didn't care and knew how close it was, or genuinely thought there was enough room for both, or thought the cyclist would move to the right a little (i suspect there was a bit of intimidation pushing there, given how slowly it all happened)... whatever the reasons, the motorist should not have proceeded with a pass in that situation.
The attempt to find the cyclist here would be to equipe the police with more leverage in court against the motorist. Any injury or statement could reinforce the prosecution. The cyclist wouldn't need to worry about the red light as that's not an offence here.
Last edited by MikeyMK; 07-17-19 at 03:49 AM.
Likes For MikeyMK:
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: NE Tennessee
Posts: 917
Bikes: Giant TCR/Surly Karate Monkey/Foundry FireTower/Curtlo Tandem
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 169 Post(s)
Liked 84 Times
in
62 Posts
As for the video. I never ride that close to parked cars. That is just asking to get doored. in those situations, I take the lane.
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,439
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 624 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 396 Times
in
274 Posts
It doesn't matter how much room the cyclist left for the motorist, the motorist overtook a vehicle when it wasn't safe to do so. That's how it'd stand here. The motorist should've either stayed back or moved into the left hand lane to overtake.
The attempt to find the cyclist here would be to equipe the police with more leverage in court against the motorist. Any injury or statement could reinforce the prosecution. The cyclist wouldn't need to worry about the red light as that's not an offence here.
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 4,811
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1591 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1,018 Times
in
571 Posts
I'd have been in the center of the lane at the light. I move to right after the intersection if it's safe to allow cars to pass. If it's a short distance to the next light, I'll hold the lane. If you're in the lane at the intersection, drivers are more aware of your presence. I'll jump the light a bit when safe to do so and I don't find drivers (or cops) have any problem with that. Gets me up to speed faster and helps keep everyone moving. Police may take a different view of that in major metro areas.
#21
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,158 Posts
Yes this is the problem. The motorist had other options and still made a bad choice at the expense of yes an inexperienced bicyclist.
It matters not what a bicyclist does while riding down the road. When I am operating a motor vehicle, I do not hit them or anything else with my vehicle. If you are driving a motor vehicle you have a responsibility to do what ever is reasonably needed to do no harm.
It matters not what a bicyclist does while riding down the road. When I am operating a motor vehicle, I do not hit them or anything else with my vehicle. If you are driving a motor vehicle you have a responsibility to do what ever is reasonably needed to do no harm.
Be it cows on the road, cyclists, or pedestrians... a driver is to avoid collisions, and overtake with care. Driving should be done in a manner as to be aware and ready for such and this is part of the "basic speed law" that motorists quickly toss out the window while working to exceed the speed limit.
Hell, the smarest smart car we could make would be to simply never allow cars to exceed the speed limit. That would be a start, anyway.
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,547
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18376 Post(s)
Liked 4,511 Times
in
3,353 Posts
The car should have been able to get past the cyclist with very little disruption to traffic flow. The driver just didn't appear to move over an inch.
It looks like the handlebars were just barely clipped, sending the rider down.
The clip is cut short, but I'm guessing the cyclist got back up and rode off (car apparently didn't notice and hadn't stopped).
The person getting out of the car is likely the one with the dash cam, and I would think would have mentioned the cam, and the rider just brushed it off.
I doubt we'll see charges, other than "Minimum Passing Distance", and "Leaving the Scene".
For those advising riding in the middle of the lane, one can only hope that a driver that is oblivious to the world around the car would actually see the cyclist.
It looks like the handlebars were just barely clipped, sending the rider down.
The clip is cut short, but I'm guessing the cyclist got back up and rode off (car apparently didn't notice and hadn't stopped).
The person getting out of the car is likely the one with the dash cam, and I would think would have mentioned the cam, and the rider just brushed it off.
I doubt we'll see charges, other than "Minimum Passing Distance", and "Leaving the Scene".
For those advising riding in the middle of the lane, one can only hope that a driver that is oblivious to the world around the car would actually see the cyclist.
#24
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 27,547
Mentioned: 217 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18376 Post(s)
Liked 4,511 Times
in
3,353 Posts
It will be interesting to find out what happens, or if this is followed up upon.
What the heck was going on so the driver didn't even move over an inch?
#25
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,158 Posts
Well, you know... moving your hand a bit, or moving a foot a bit can be quite fatiguing for some motorists.