Zedoo

Man killed in bicycle accident in Roseville - WXYZ.com

I saw the area set up like a crime scene, then I saw the wrecked bike.

coominya

77, reflexes have to have slowed down by that age. He had a good innings, died doing what he loved.

Hokiedad4

From the looks of the car, it was quite a severe impact. So likely the car was driving too fast. But as is always the case, no lessons learned. Was the victim wearing a helmet? Was he riding on the road or sidewalk? Was he riding with or against traffic? If just a few more details were provided, it would provide a teaching opportunity for the police.

unterhausen

unless you have a giant balloon protecting your spleen, there is no protective device that will help in that sort of high-speed rear-end collision. I hope they check the driver's cell records.

TenSpeedV2

I hate how they say the driver stopped and he is cooperating, like that absolves him of any responsibility in this. And the whole "was the victim wearing a helmet" statement above, does it matter? If you are hit by a car at speed, a piece of styrofoam on your head won't save your life.

Chris0516

Maybe. Then again, he could have been fit like Jack LaLanne (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_LaLanne)
No mention of a helmet, reflective riding attire, or even lights.
Agreed. I was rear-ended in a dual-turn lane, almost ten years ago. While waiting to merge into S/B traffic. When a driver heading the same direction, had just come out of a local mini-mall and slammed right into me. I went flying but no broken bones or other injuries. I am athletic even in my 40's. So, Maybe my athleticism kept me from being injured, who knows.
Agreed. Cooperation doesn't absolve them of responsibility.

Hokiedad4

Yes, the specific circumstances aren't important and won't bring the poor guy back from the dead, but from a prevention point of view, all data is helpful.

TenSpeedV2

Including what the driver may have been doing while driving, right?

1989Pre 

Yes. Like whether the rider was wearing a helmet or not and whether the driver was distracted/impaired.

TenSpeedV2

Unless there are mandatory helmet laws, if they were wearing a helmet or not doesn't matter.

TenSpeedV2

Also, the title is wrong. It should read, Man killed in car vs bicycle crash. The term accident is used incorrectly so many times in cases like this. If it was vehicle vs vehicle, it would say, Man killed in car crash.

Judging by the title of the article, all blame is placed onto the cyclist, no matter if they were at fault or not.

kickstart

At least the motorist did the right thing after the fact rather than running like a coward. Perhaps its wise to give that some recognition lest it become another excuse to run? Just a thought, not an argument.

atbman

Will be that age this year. Reflexes have slowed down. On the other hand, it must be 25/30 years or more since I had to do an emergency stop - perhaps the additional experience and better traffic judgement of those years reduces the need for the quick reflexes needed for emergency stops?

And would be seriously pissed off if my present good innings were to be cut short. I'd rather continue doing the things I love for a while longer thank you very much.

Whippersnapper

coominya

I don't blame you, lets hope you have many more years. Perhaps you better practice a few emergency stops now, before you NEED to do one.

FenderTL5

In many, if not most cases, it actually does.
Unless impairment is proven or there's hit-&-run, there are no charges for killing a bicyclist or pedestrian with a car.
Ahh, yes - but they failed to inform us if the driver was wearing a seat-belt.
Maybe we should have the media inquire whether or not the driver was wearing a helmet or had on proper shoes/attire?
Maybe he/she was wearing white after Labor Day for crying out loud..

(btw.. none of it matters)

Cyclist0108

Only perfect victim status would make this problematic for most of the (driving) populace.

Journalism at its finest.

chopsteeks

Where did you gather the details of the accident ? I have not heard nor read any report that the driver of the car was at fault ?

TenSpeedV2

I cannot be the only one that sees a big problem with this, right?

FenderTL5

You are not alone.

indyfabz

Why do you infer that? It's a standard journalistic tool to convey that this was not a hit and run.

TenSpeedV2

I see what you are saying. I just hate that it is mentioned, just like "the cyclist was not wearing a helmet" and similar statements. It doesn't change anything about the incident in question.

base2 

I think it has as much to do with word count as anything else. They've gotta do something to bulk up those column inches. It would be nice if they used terms like "cyclist killed", "cyclist murdered", "driver collided with...", "driver ran over", "driver failed to pay due care and attention to (whatever traffic law they broke), etc... to accurately convey the situation as it happened. They also consistantly forget to mention the cyclists right to be on the road as traffic. This plays into the prejudice that cyclists aren't traffic, they are in the way of traffic. The ideal headline, in my mind, would be: "Road user killed by another driver violating law, again. Driver being charged with..."

As long as we're all about column inches, let's tell what actually happened in a clear and consice manner. These content free sound bite stories don't do much to inform the public. Inform the public!

coominya

We have no protection from cars and never will, and to wait for the driving public to be more alert is just wishful thinking IMO. We as cyclists need to take collective action if we want to be safe on the roads! We need a complete revolution in this area of our lives and I for one am leading the way. I do my major riding on Sunday mornings, before any traffic builds up. I never ride on main roads outside of these times and often use footpaths to avoid major intersections. I stick to the back roads and side streets as a rule and if I want more exercise I ride in hilly environments. At the end of the day personal safety is up to the individual and riding 2 abreast and 3 abreast up a road as though you were on a racetrack is not a good solution to the risks we face IMO.

KD5NRH

So drugs and alcohol were intentional?

base2 

True, but the journalists working at the news paper, or the talking heads at the media outlet can do an aweful lot to shape public opinion by presenting a whole and complete story. Canned phrases don't do anyone any service. Reporting what actually happens in a comprehensive manner obliterates prejudice.

As vulnerable road users, we have nothing to lose and lots to gain by constant journalistic attention and a fair portrayal of events. The news more often than not with these canned stories facilitates victim blaming by leaving the story open to readers anti-cycling prejudice. The lack of information leaves the reader to make up the story that fits their view.

More accurate headlines that would make drivers think twice:
"Speeding driver claims cyclist appeared out of nowhere."
"Local road known for speeding, Driver claims accident."
"Driver failed to give 3 feet per state law"
"Stop sign runner pulls out in front of cyclist, cyclist in hospital, driver cited."
"Cyclist base2, a licensed commercial driver with a CDL with haz-mat and tanker endorsements broke 3 bones when a driver made an illegal left turn." (hypothetical, didn't really happen. But if it did, I'd like the story to be run this way)

Maybe we could get a fair shake with a "how it's paid for" series on the local news to dispel any beliefs that gas tax and car tabs are the only means of paying for the road. Bill it to the broadcasters public service mandate.

My point is cyclists break the law at half the rate of automobiles yet are accused of being roadway anarchists. So, gain little sympathy. A few true words by reporters once in a while to keep drivers sense of entitlment in check wouldn't hurt.