Chris0516

My maternal aunt n' uncle used to live in the Springs for 30yrs.. Before they moved back to Raleigh, North Carolina last year. I had heard about downtown in the Springs, several years ago. The Springs has gone from the oasis it once was. Almost to being in competition to, what DC became during the (Marion)Barry administration's third(he had four non-consecutively) term as Mayor. Where he was caught in a crack cocaine sting that sent him to prison for a couple years(his fourth term was after his prison term).

There is also Compton, California. That area is notorious for it's problems. The Springs could rival them, too.

Not everything can be anticipated. But being skilled enough at riding in the road. The suddenness of something. Won't catch you off guard.

BobbyG

I've been here 24 years, and while the city had grown, it it's not bad crimewise compared to Denver or even Pueblo. I grew up in Chicago and there is nothing remotely resembling that kind of urban blight.

John33702

The reporting came from Canada.

genec

Yes, correct, but the incessant desire to determine if a helmet was worn, IS an American issue... hence there was no helmet report... as it was Canadian news.

asmac

As it happens, it seems she wasn't wearing a helmet. Why that is relevant I don't know.

FBinNY 

It isn't. But the person who brought it up was probably an American.

tarwheel 

It could be a case of random bad luck, but the lack of a helmet could definitely be a factor if the cyclist indeed wasn't wearing one. This is precisely the kind of accident in which helmets are good for preventing or lessening injury. Of course, if the cyclist did a face-plant, a helmet might not have helped much.

On the bad luck side, sometimes you're just in the wrong place at the wrong time. I was riding home one afternoon when a large wheel either came loose from a truck axle or fell off a truck bed. The wheel came bounding down the street in my direction and almost hit me. It was probably traveling 45 mph and could have killed or seriously injured me if it had hit me. It wasn't just a tire but an entire wheel with a steel rim and very large.

genec

Exactly... it is irrelevant... but it is an Americanism to wonder if a helmet was involved...

Dave Cutter

+1 Everyone who reads this post... (at some point) will die. It is not fatalistic to accept the fact that this "life" is a temporary condition. Although sadly many peoples lives do seem to be cut short. I do think it is as important to live our life.... as it is to preserve it. The trash-picker obviously played a part in shortening the cyclists time here. Hopefully his part in this death was passive.

Dave Cutter

Only sort of. Americans are taught cause and effect. Often times... the results of such thinking can seem (or even be) a little detached or non-consistent with the reality of events.

If crashes and/or wrecks are a part of bicycle (or even automobile travel) then (the use of) safety equipment is paramount to the safety of travel. So whereas accidents are the nature of the beast... injuries can be the result of neglect.

FBinNY 

Some Americans are obsessed about helmets. One need only look at the helmet thread here on BF to see the intensity of feelings on the subject. Each side of the issue tries to seize on every fatality or serious head injury to bolster their opinion. Helmet advocates say "....a helmet would have prevented.....", while others will say ".... a helmet failed to prevent.....". Of course all this is pure supposition because we only know what did happen and can only guess at what might have happened.

genec

The problem with that thinking is that if there wasn't a helmet... those less studious folks amoungst us tend to believe that the collision issues are then the fault of the cyclist... whether he was hit by a bullet, by trash or by a car moving at 60MPH. About the only time those foam hats are any good, is a minor fall from about the height of a bike. And yes, for the sake of disclosure, I do often wear one.

But in this case, the question is tantamount to asking if the occupants of an auto were wearing seatbelts during a drive by shooting...

Dave Cutter

I only wear a helmet (at least originally) because my wife made me. But now I see the helmet as all part of the cycling kit/fun.

But I had a pretty serious crash 4 years ago. And I know from personal experience that a helmet makes a HUGE difference. If you don't think a thin layer of Styrofoam offers any protection... next time you get groceries just put your eggs in a bag... and leave the Styrofoam box at the store.

Did the cyclist in question suffer a head injury that caused the crash... that took her life? Sure sounds like it. Often deadly accidents have more than one failure that results in death. The proper safety equipment (a helmet) would NOT have prevented this accident... but it could have prevented the death.

Just like seatbelts don't prevent projectile penetration during a drive-by shooting.... seatbelts may help a swerving driver retain control of the car. The shooter is responsible for the shooting... the driver is responsible for the seatbelts.

Don't get me wrong! I am not blaming the cyclist (or the trash-picker). We all make our choices and the results are often random. But... your head... your head injury. Adults have to take their own share of responsibility for head injury.

genec

From the report: Perhaps if the cyclist was wearing a full face MTB style helmet it may have made a difference... but the typical foam hat... not likely, and thus irrelevant to the story.... but Americans just gotta know.

FBinNY 

But you are. You say that a helmet wouldn't have prevented the crash which was caused by the tossed trash. But you imply that the cyclist might have fared better if he had a helmet. This is slippery slope thinking, implying that those who cause collisions can argue that the damages would have mitigated if only their victims were more proactive.

I know that what follows is stretching the point, but given the slippery slope, I feel we need to look at the quicksand at the bottom.

Consider a shootout with police where an officer is struck by a gunman's bullet and dies. If it turns out he was hit in the chest, and was not wearing a bullet proof vest, is the gunman any less liable of murder? We might say that the officer takes some responsibility for his failure to protect himself, but that in no way should have us thinking that the gunman is any less responsible. Likewise I want to make sure that nobody who causes a bicycle crash can argue that it wouldn't have been as serious if only....."

BTW- let's try to be civil and not overly argumentative here, lest the mods move it to the helmet thread. To that end, this is my last post here about the helmet aspect.

Dave Cutter

You're calculating backwards (there was NO murder) ..... Say a child chokes (and dies) on hard candy. Is the sitter/parent/candy seller/distributor/transporter/manufacture, who is responsible? And if the "child" was 17?

Adults on bicycles should accept some adult responsibilities. My first question about the cyclist would have been... was she drinking?

Dave Cutter

Yeah.... helmets aren't required. Most people involved in fatal accident chose not to use them.

genec

Yer goin' down the helmet mongers path here... this part of the discussion is whether the victim in the OP was reported to have worn a helmet or not.... an item often reported in US newspapers, regardless of possible protection said helmet might provide... American reporters just have to check off that block.

As to me, yer preachin' to the choir... go back and read post 37. I wear a helmet most of the time... just not so much on very local residential streets, or park rides... I go with the attitude that "hey, it may just help, and I would wear a hat anyway."

joeyduck

@Dave Cutter. Actually in BC it's the law to wear your helmet cycling. But the helmet may not have helped.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle28053655/

https://globalnews.ca/news/2439023/va...n-the-seawall/

It seems the trash hit him and caused him to hit face first.


Anyway let's stop blaming, some unfortunate person lost their life.

Dave Cutter

I had no idea that helmets were the law there (for adults). Makes me wonder if the cyclist was also drinking.

Thousands of people lost their lives! Thousands more died today... and thousands more will die tomorrow. It's a natural process... and it is no ones fault. The natural cycle of life is anything BUT unfortunate. Blame is a mental (or maybe legal) construct... and has nothing to do with cause and effect.

Dave Cutter

We're nearly the same. I don't care what my wife says about me wearing a helmet..... I absolutely refuse to wear a helmet while riding the trainer in the basement.

John33702

Bicycle helmet laws vary from province to province. British Columbia mandates helmets for all ages.

I was once in a head-on motorcycle collision with a Vespa motor scooter in which I landed head-first in the road at 30 mph. The top of my helmet was crushed like the top of a breakfast egg. I have no doubt it saved my life. I wear a bicycle helmet because whatever the arguments are for or against them, I think some protection is better than none.

John33702

With BC's mandatory helmet use for all ages, it may now also be (or become) a Canadianism

ColaJacket

In most jurisdictions it would Voluntary Manslaughter.

Involuntary is only used when you have no other choice. The man in the bin had a choice of whether or not to throw items out of the bin. This death was caused by gross negligence of the man in the bin.

GH

FBinNY 

Not that it matters, but this is wrong.

The issue of choice or intent relates to intent to injure. Voluntary manslaughter would apply if, for instance, you punched somebody and they fell, hit their head and died. When you cause a death without a direct intent to injure, then it's involuntary manslaughter, which included death by negligence.

But calling tossing things out of a dumpster gross negligence is stretching things beyond the breaking point.