I almost hit another cyclist with my truck this morning.
#101
Cycle Year Round
That has been the point that I and several others have tried to get you to realize: with the power of the motor vehicle, just as with a gun, the operator of such tools have added responsibilities to not kill others, regardless.
Maybe this will help you see how off base your wish to blame the cyclist are. Under your premise, minimart clerks knowing they are in a dangerous job, would be 100% at fault if they are shot by a robber and the clerk did not have a bullet proof vest on. If you do as you placed blame on the cyclist, you would place 100% blame on the clerk for their own death for not wearing a bullet proof vest.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
#102
Cycle Year Round
And as for the Riley Geary analysis not supporting my assertion that riding without lights is,dangerous, just read the conclusion:
Figure 23 demonstrates that adult urban cyclists now constitute the dominant modality among bicycle traffic fatalities in general, and that nighttime fatalities comprise at least half the problem in this class. This is out of all proportion to the amount of urban cycling actually being done at night, and strongly suggests more attention needs to be given to the entire nighttime bicycle conspicuity problem. The new flashing red LED taillights that have been developed over the past decade appear to offer an excellent technological solution to the problem, but in the absence of any real effort to educate cyclists as to their need, much less any effort to enforce nighttime safety equipment standards among cyclists out riding after dark, it is questionable how much progress can actually be made in curtailing these imminently preventable fatalities.
I'll grant you the 56% figure is not in the abstract i linked, but I'll take kiefer's word for it. And it's obvious Riley's analysis supports my point.
Figure 23 demonstrates that adult urban cyclists now constitute the dominant modality among bicycle traffic fatalities in general, and that nighttime fatalities comprise at least half the problem in this class. This is out of all proportion to the amount of urban cycling actually being done at night, and strongly suggests more attention needs to be given to the entire nighttime bicycle conspicuity problem. The new flashing red LED taillights that have been developed over the past decade appear to offer an excellent technological solution to the problem, but in the absence of any real effort to educate cyclists as to their need, much less any effort to enforce nighttime safety equipment standards among cyclists out riding after dark, it is questionable how much progress can actually be made in curtailing these imminently preventable fatalities.
I'll grant you the 56% figure is not in the abstract i linked, but I'll take kiefer's word for it. And it's obvious Riley's analysis supports my point.
You and your quote are obsessed with ignoring the more likely causes: such as a much higher rate of homeless drunk and drugged cyclist riding at night, DUI motorist that lost their license and now DUI cycle, even the sober homeless cyclist tend to cross the roads mid-block without proper care - not to mention poor crossing at intersections.
We had an off duty cop in Honolulu kill a young woman while DUI running a red light at 25 mph over the speed limit. The cop continued to drink but just DUI cycled while waiting for his court case to come up. He got hit while DUI cycling. Most other DUI cyclist are just not worth the print space for us to hear about.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
#103
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SF Bay Area, East bay
Posts: 7,709
Bikes: Miyata 618 GT, Marinoni, Kestral 200 2002 Trek 5200, KHS Flite, Koga Miyata, Schwinn Spitfire 5, Mondia Special, Univega Alpina, Miyata team Ti, Santa Cruz Highball
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1624 Post(s)
Liked 2,655 Times
in
1,249 Posts
I didn't see any fault in that no accident occurred. Pretty normal process, early AM, something shows up on the road unexpected, it gets avoided, life goes on.
#104
pan y agua
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 31,320
Bikes: Willier Zero 7; Merlin Extralight; Calfee Dragonfly tandem, Calfee Adventure tandem; Cervelo P2; Motebecane Ti Fly 29er; Motebecanne Phantom Cross; Schwinn Paramount Track bike
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1461 Post(s)
Liked 737 Times
in
378 Posts
No one in this thread has disputed that possibility, but you have clearly stated your willingness to place full blame on a cyclist hit from behind without the actual scientific proof of fact. You should know better as a lawyer to place blame on someone just from supposition. You also excuse the motorist responsibility to not hit and kill things in their path by trying to blame others, as if others can control the motorist.
That has been the point that I and several others have tried to get you to realize: with the power of the motor vehicle, just as with a gun, the operator of such tools have added responsibilities to not kill others, regardless.
Maybe this will help you see how off base your wish to blame the cyclist are. Under your premise, minimart clerks knowing they are in a dangerous job, would be 100% at fault if they are shot by a robber and the clerk did not have a bullet proof vest on. If you do as you placed blame on the cyclist, you would place 100% blame on the clerk for their own death for not wearing a bullet proof vest.
That has been the point that I and several others have tried to get you to realize: with the power of the motor vehicle, just as with a gun, the operator of such tools have added responsibilities to not kill others, regardless.
Maybe this will help you see how off base your wish to blame the cyclist are. Under your premise, minimart clerks knowing they are in a dangerous job, would be 100% at fault if they are shot by a robber and the clerk did not have a bullet proof vest on. If you do as you placed blame on the cyclist, you would place 100% blame on the clerk for their own death for not wearing a bullet proof vest.
Any reasonable person knows it is in fact dangerous, and your continuing to quibble over that is just silly.
I'm not going to waste any more time with it.
__________________
You could fall off a cliff and die.
You could get lost and die.
You could hit a tree and die.
OR YOU COULD STAY HOME AND FALL OFF THE COUCH AND DIE.
You could fall off a cliff and die.
You could get lost and die.
You could hit a tree and die.
OR YOU COULD STAY HOME AND FALL OFF THE COUCH AND DIE.
#105
Cycle Year Round
In our society, the current "Any reasonable person knows" standard is that cycling is extremely dangerous at any time and no one should do it, period (except in a park maybe). Some parents get threatened with arrest or worse having their kids taken away for allowing them to ride their bicycles to school.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
#106
Still spinnin'.....
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Whitestown, IN
Posts: 1,208
Bikes: Fisher Opie freeride/urban assault MTB, Redline Monocog 29er MTB, Serrota T-Max Commuter, Klein Rascal SS, Salsa Campion Road bike, Pake Rum Runner FG/SS Road bike, Cannondale Synapse Road bike, Santana Arriva Road Tandem, and others....
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
In our society, the current "Any reasonable person knows" standard is that cycling is extremely dangerous at any time and no one should do it, period (except in a park maybe). Some parents get threatened with arrest or worse having their kids taken away for allowing them to ride their bicycles to school.
The statement that "In our society, the current "Any reasonable person knows" standard is that cycling is extremely dangerous at any time and no one should do it..." is just as patently absurb and untrue (and it lacks any "true scientific evidence" as you yourself demand), and just reinforces that fact that maybe anyone who believes that to be true should not be allowed on a bike at any time.
You cannot compare those two unrelated concepts here and not be called on it, as there are adults involved in these discussions......
Ride Safe! ...... ...........and use a light at night.
#107
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Incheon, South Korea
Posts: 2,835
Bikes: Nothing amazing... cheap old 21 speed mtb
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I've almost run down bike Ninjas on the predawn bike paths with 1600lumens of light ahead of me. They are almost impossible to see. In a car with less reaction time it has to be harder.
#108
Cycle Year Round
"Any reasonable person knows" that putting your hand over a flame will burn you, no "true scientific evidence" is required. The same holds true for riding ninja, and anyone who doesn't understand that is simply too dense to be allowed on a bike after dark.
The statement that "In our society, the current "Any reasonable person knows" standard is that cycling is extremely dangerous at any time and no one should do it..." is just as patently absurb and untrue (and it lacks any "true scientific evidence" as you yourself demand), and just reinforces that fact that maybe anyone who believes that to be true should not be allowed on a bike at any time.
You cannot compare those two unrelated concepts here and not be called on it, as there are adults involved in these discussions......
Ride Safe! ...... ...........and use a light at night.
The statement that "In our society, the current "Any reasonable person knows" standard is that cycling is extremely dangerous at any time and no one should do it..." is just as patently absurb and untrue (and it lacks any "true scientific evidence" as you yourself demand), and just reinforces that fact that maybe anyone who believes that to be true should not be allowed on a bike at any time.
You cannot compare those two unrelated concepts here and not be called on it, as there are adults involved in these discussions......
Ride Safe! ...... ...........and use a light at night.
PS - there is significant scientific proof that holding a human hand too close over a flame will burn them. The scientific proof had even quantified the amount of thermal calories needed to cause the three different degrees of burn to the skin. And for your education:
https://www.nist.gov/fire/fire_behavior.cfm
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
Last edited by CB HI; 02-01-13 at 03:40 PM.
#109
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Green Valley AZ
Posts: 3,770
Bikes: Trice Q; Volae Century; TT 3.4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
ZING, right over this guys head.
PS - there is significant scientific proof that holding a human hand too close over a flame will burn them. The scientific proof had even quantified the amount of thermal calories needed to cause the three different degrees of burn to the skin. And for your education:
https://www.nist.gov/fire/fire_behavior.cfm
PS - there is significant scientific proof that holding a human hand too close over a flame will burn them. The scientific proof had even quantified the amount of thermal calories needed to cause the three different degrees of burn to the skin. And for your education:
https://www.nist.gov/fire/fire_behavior.cfm
#110
Banned
In our society, the current "Any reasonable person knows" standard is that cycling is extremely dangerous at any time and no one should do it, period (except in a park maybe). Some parents get threatened with arrest or worse having their kids taken away for allowing them to ride their bicycles to school.
Last edited by dynodonn; 02-02-13 at 11:05 AM.
#111
Still spinnin'.....
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Whitestown, IN
Posts: 1,208
Bikes: Fisher Opie freeride/urban assault MTB, Redline Monocog 29er MTB, Serrota T-Max Commuter, Klein Rascal SS, Salsa Campion Road bike, Pake Rum Runner FG/SS Road bike, Cannondale Synapse Road bike, Santana Arriva Road Tandem, and others....
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
ZING, right over this guys head.
PS - there is significant scientific proof that holding a human hand too close over a flame will burn them. The scientific proof had even quantified the amount of thermal calories needed to cause the three different degrees of burn to the skin. And for your education:
https://www.nist.gov/fire/fire_behavior.cfm
PS - there is significant scientific proof that holding a human hand too close over a flame will burn them. The scientific proof had even quantified the amount of thermal calories needed to cause the three different degrees of burn to the skin. And for your education:
https://www.nist.gov/fire/fire_behavior.cfm
Ride Safe! ... ...and use a light when you ride at night.
#112
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,994
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,545 Times
in
1,051 Posts
#113
Banned
Ahh yes, but it does not take an understanding of the underlying science to acknowledge that the flame will burn you, just as it does not take an understanding of the underlying science to acknowledge that riding in the dark with no source of illumination is dangerous. Only a completely delusional troll would argue otherwise.
#114
Slob
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 497
Bikes: 1970s AMF Roadmaster 3 speed, Bianchi Volpe, 2012 GT Zum City
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
It's a motorist's responsibility not to hit other road users while overtaking them from the rear. Durp!
In order to meet this responsibility, the motorist must maintain a speed and following distance that will permit them to maneuver around slower road users without hitting them, and they must watch out for such road users. Hurp!
Because motorists cannot be relied upon to meet their responsibility, a cyclist might choose to put lights on his bike, in order to make his presence more conspicuous to lazy, reckless, unvigilant motorists, so that they might avoid hitting him despite their negligence. It is not the cyclist's duty to do so, but if he thinks it might reduce the odds of getting smashed by a car, then the decision to put lights on his bike is a hurpadurp.
If a motorist hits him from behind, it is the motorist's fault, 100%, with or without bike lights and under all driving conditions. This is the diametric opposite of our lawyer friend's contention that if this occurs in the dark, and the cyclist has not assisted motorists in their duty by adding lights to his bike, it is 100% the cyclist's fault.
It's really not hard to decide between these two viewpoints.
While you would arguably be ill advised to stake your life on the vigilance of the American motorist, or even crazy not to avail yourself of lights to assist them in not hitting you, it is still 100% their responsibility not to hit you from behind with their big, stupid death machines.
What is
So HARD
About that?
Oh, but saying this is somehow not inclusive enough (sorry but wtf?) and will cause fewer Americans to buy a bicycle and have fun while burning calories.
I present for your listening pleasure a raspberry sound.
In order to meet this responsibility, the motorist must maintain a speed and following distance that will permit them to maneuver around slower road users without hitting them, and they must watch out for such road users. Hurp!
Because motorists cannot be relied upon to meet their responsibility, a cyclist might choose to put lights on his bike, in order to make his presence more conspicuous to lazy, reckless, unvigilant motorists, so that they might avoid hitting him despite their negligence. It is not the cyclist's duty to do so, but if he thinks it might reduce the odds of getting smashed by a car, then the decision to put lights on his bike is a hurpadurp.
If a motorist hits him from behind, it is the motorist's fault, 100%, with or without bike lights and under all driving conditions. This is the diametric opposite of our lawyer friend's contention that if this occurs in the dark, and the cyclist has not assisted motorists in their duty by adding lights to his bike, it is 100% the cyclist's fault.
It's really not hard to decide between these two viewpoints.
While you would arguably be ill advised to stake your life on the vigilance of the American motorist, or even crazy not to avail yourself of lights to assist them in not hitting you, it is still 100% their responsibility not to hit you from behind with their big, stupid death machines.
What is
So HARD
About that?
Oh, but saying this is somehow not inclusive enough (sorry but wtf?) and will cause fewer Americans to buy a bicycle and have fun while burning calories.
I present for your listening pleasure a raspberry sound.
#115
Banned
If a motorist hits him from behind, it is the motorist's fault, 100%, with or without bike lights and under all driving conditions. This is the diametric opposite of our lawyer friend's contention that if this occurs in the dark, and the cyclist has not assisted motorists in their duty by adding lights to his bike, it is 100% the cyclist's fault.
#116
Slob
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 497
Bikes: 1970s AMF Roadmaster 3 speed, Bianchi Volpe, 2012 GT Zum City
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Not in all cases, there was one local cyclist trying to cross one of our local freeways, and was struck in the furthest right hand lane, with the cyclist having no lights, dark clothing, one standard red rear reflector. This incident occurred a stormy winter night with the motorists determined to be driving well below the speed limit. The cyclist was struck by three individual motorists before traffic could be diverted away from him, and all motorists were eventually cleared of any wrong doing.
AFAIK, cyclists are everywhere expressly prohibited from operating on any road that we would call a freeway, and there are usually posted minimum speeds in the neighborhood of 45 mph.
At freeway speeds, no driver can steer or stop. He can only aim or slow down. There can't exist a duty to do the impossible. So bikes aren't allowed on the freeway. That guy is like the occasional genius who meets his untimely demise in the jaws of a polar bear into whose zoo enclosure the genius has climbed. Sad thing, couldn't be helped.
#117
Still spinnin'.....
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Whitestown, IN
Posts: 1,208
Bikes: Fisher Opie freeride/urban assault MTB, Redline Monocog 29er MTB, Serrota T-Max Commuter, Klein Rascal SS, Salsa Campion Road bike, Pake Rum Runner FG/SS Road bike, Cannondale Synapse Road bike, Santana Arriva Road Tandem, and others....
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
......Because motorists cannot be relied upon to meet their responsibility, a cyclist might choose to put lights on his bike, in order to make his presence more conspicuous to lazy, reckless, unvigilant motorists, so that they might avoid hitting him despite their negligence. It is not the cyclist's duty to do so, but if he thinks it might reduce the odds of getting smashed by a car, then the decision to put lights on his bike is a hurpadurp.
If a motorist hits him from behind, it is the motorist's fault, 100%, with or without bike lights and under all driving conditions. This is the diametric opposite of our lawyer friend's contention that if this occurs in the dark, and the cyclist has not assisted motorists in their duty by adding lights to his bike, it is 100% the cyclist's fault......
If a motorist hits him from behind, it is the motorist's fault, 100%, with or without bike lights and under all driving conditions. This is the diametric opposite of our lawyer friend's contention that if this occurs in the dark, and the cyclist has not assisted motorists in their duty by adding lights to his bike, it is 100% the cyclist's fault......
.....AFAIK, cyclists are everywhere expressly prohibited from operating on any road that we would call a freeway, and there are usually posted minimum speeds in the neighborhood of 45 mph.
At freeway speeds, no driver can steer or stop. He can only aim or slow down. There can't exist a duty to do the impossible. So bikes aren't allowed on the freeway.......
At freeway speeds, no driver can steer or stop. He can only aim or slow down. There can't exist a duty to do the impossible. So bikes aren't allowed on the freeway.......
Psssst. Maybe you should actually pickup a drivers handbook and read it when you next visit a DMV, because your opinions are polar opposite of actual written law my friend.
Ride Safe! ... ...and do a bit of research....
Last edited by Stealthammer; 02-02-13 at 01:11 PM.
#118
Slob
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 497
Bikes: 1970s AMF Roadmaster 3 speed, Bianchi Volpe, 2012 GT Zum City
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'm glad no one noticed I've changed my tune on this topic while participating in this thread. Changing your mind is a sign of weakness, perhaps even insanity or malice. But I point it out because who knew that discussing a social issue could change someone's mind about it?
#119
Slob
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 497
Bikes: 1970s AMF Roadmaster 3 speed, Bianchi Volpe, 2012 GT Zum City
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#120
Banned
#121
Still spinnin'.....
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Whitestown, IN
Posts: 1,208
Bikes: Fisher Opie freeride/urban assault MTB, Redline Monocog 29er MTB, Serrota T-Max Commuter, Klein Rascal SS, Salsa Campion Road bike, Pake Rum Runner FG/SS Road bike, Cannondale Synapse Road bike, Santana Arriva Road Tandem, and others....
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
.....unless there is no alternate roadway that cyclists can use, which was the case at the collision location.
Last edited by Stealthammer; 02-02-13 at 01:30 PM.
#122
Banned
Ok, your state may let cyclist ride on all freeways, but not here in CA.
https://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/paffairs/faq/faq67.htm
"Of the more than 4,000 miles of freeways in California, about 1,000 miles are open to bicyclists. These open sections are usually in rural areas where there is no alternate route."
#123
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,994
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,545 Times
in
1,051 Posts
I commuted legally for two years on I80N (now designated I84) in Oregon on the wide shoulder.
I commuted legally for seven years in the right travel lane of US34 with a speed limit of 55mph.
Are you arguing that the problems of bicycle-motor vehicle interactions at "freeway speeds" (45+MPH) only come into effect if the highway has a "minimum" speed posted and is called a freeway?
#124
Slob
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 497
Bikes: 1970s AMF Roadmaster 3 speed, Bianchi Volpe, 2012 GT Zum City
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#125
Senior Member
I don't care for all the pseudo-legalistic wrangling over this. I just want to know how oblivious to reality a human being has to be to ride a bicycle down a high-speed two-lane blacktop in the dark without any sort of lights or even bright colors on him.
Seriously. Imagine sitting in your dark attire astride your lightless bicycle of a crisp predawn hour and contemplating the river of SUVs and pickumups pelting down the shoulderless highway as if impelled by irritable sociopaths with severe tunnelvision-- because, hey, they are-- and you look at this, and you say to yourself, OK, and you pedal yourself into it.
Put yourself in this cyclist's shoes for a moment and see how it feels and imagine doing as he does.
You can't! Because you're not completely insane! Probably. Most of you.
Seriously. Imagine sitting in your dark attire astride your lightless bicycle of a crisp predawn hour and contemplating the river of SUVs and pickumups pelting down the shoulderless highway as if impelled by irritable sociopaths with severe tunnelvision-- because, hey, they are-- and you look at this, and you say to yourself, OK, and you pedal yourself into it.
Put yourself in this cyclist's shoes for a moment and see how it feels and imagine doing as he does.
You can't! Because you're not completely insane! Probably. Most of you.
There are people in that position in this country. Lots of them. And until you've ridden in their non-cleated shoes for a few miles, it might be worth your while to not be judgmental.
Last edited by CbadRider; 02-02-13 at 06:47 PM. Reason: Removed comments that violate forum guidelines.