1nterceptor

"According to Newsday, the cyclist was issued three summonses: one for riding a bicycle on a sidewalk (which is justified), another for riding without a helmet (which is not), and a third for reckless endangerment.

Seeing how hard the NYPD came down on the cyclist, you’d expect they’d throw the book at the SUV driver. But it doesn’t look like that’s going to happen. Why not? Because running down five children on a sidewalk is evidently legal in New York City, and, as Council Member Elizabeth Crowley sees it, this was just an accident."

Read the full article:
https://blog.tstc.org/2013/09/13/driv...n-3-summonses/

genec

While I agree with your general angst regarding the disparity between enforcement over cycling offenses verses enforcement over automobile offenses... and soundly disagree with the "it was just an accident" mentality... apparently the cyclist was something of a known paparazzo who tends to do this bike crash thing to celebrities.

None the less... It does make one wonder, eh?

vol

I just posted on the Helmet thread about this. From the video, midway into it, what I hear is:

"NYPD told us that the ...[cyclist] was ultimately given 3 summons: reckless driving, riding a bicycle on the sidewalk, and riding without a helmet".

The bold-faced parts puzzle me.

KonAaron Snake 

I'm a little bit confused about your confusion:

In one case a cyclist completely ignored the law, and common sense, and knowingly rode in an illegal, deliberately dangerous manner. I don't know if there is a law regarding helmet use, but, if there is, I'm happy to see it piled on.

The other is someone who made an unintentional mistake while attempting to operate a vehicle legally.

Once again, we have unrealistic ideologues who refuse to accept that gump happens and that everyone is capable of a driving error. They refuse to understand or accept that accidents are an understood, and accepted form of collateral damage. Had the SUV DELIBERATELY ridden on the sidewalk as part of its normal operation, there would be summonses. Apples to mangoes. I also like how the comparison is being formed based on a few blurbs about each incident.

So yes - there is more forgiveness for a mistake than there is for deliberate, repeated, illegal action. The punishment is not based on the outcome alone, but on the action. I think anyone who has interactions with urban sidewalk cyclists is glad to see the schmuck ticketed.

squirtdad

IMHO this is a stupid inflammtory argument that does nothing to furtheradvocacy and probably hurts it.

First and formost it was a Paparazzi, using a bicycle, not a bicyclist that got the summons. Big difference. Posting it as cyclist is what people in other posts have been afraid of the media doing putting cyclists in a bad light.

Had it been a little old lady riding her bicycle on the sidewalk and hitting nicole kidman, dollars to donuts, the little old lady would not have been given a summonse

As a general statement the law is very tolerant (too tolerant??? different discussion) of drivers and cyclists who 'make a mistake' and injure someone with no other mitigating circumstances.

People get summonse and hauled away when they show that they intended to cause harm, when the have history of accidents, are dui, have no license, hit and run, etc.

atbman

The question is not whether the driver's act was unintentional, but whether or not it fell far below the standard expected of a driver. I've had a car/van/small truck licence since 1967 and have never mistaken the accelerator pedal for the brake pedal, even tho' I use the same foot for both. If his standard fell far below that required and he (an adult) was in charge of a machine which can be lethal, especially to children, then the charge should be one of criminal negligence because of the consequences of failing to meet that standard.

If, according to those who've seen the video (apparently since taken off youtube) he had 3 seconds to react and failed so to do, then negligence is clear. No-one who cannot react in under 3 seconds, at the speed he was travelling, should be in charge of a motor vehicle, esp. one the size and weight of a SUV.

The idea that you should be treated the same as you would be if you were in a kid's pedal car, given the potential for injuring, crippling or killin by a mv is absurd.

lostarchitect 

I agree, these two things have nothing to do with each other.

That said, riding without a helmet is not a crime in NYC, so I don't see how he could have been cited for that. E online's video about the incident is probably incorrect on that point.

kjmillig

For the SUV driver: Failure to maintain a lane, unsafe operation of a motor vehicle, negligent driving.......
Is that a good start? Stepping on the wrong pedal thereby driving onto a sidewalk, thereby striking pedestrians on said sidewalk. The driver should absolutely be held accountable for their actions, legally and financially.

FBinNY 

I know this is a cyclo-centric forum, but not everything that happens to someone who happens to be riding a bike is about the bike. This probably would have been very different if it weren't a paparazzo, and so far. most of the media focus here in the NYC area is on that aspect, rather than about dangerous cyclists.

DX-MAN

SO it's only a ticketable offense if the driver MEANT to do it? Good luck with that.

FBinNY 

I don't know tha particulars of the SUV accident, but as a general rule accidents aren't crimes or misdemeanors, nor are they per se citeable as traffic infractions.

So it isn't a question of intent, but whether a traffic law was violated. Of course we could say that there's obviously negligence underlying fatal accidents, negligence alone doesn't rise to criminality without aggravating issues, ie drunk, knowing failure to maintain the brakes. So absent a contributing factor, like running a light, excessive speed, etc. accidents don't draw tickets. Of course the DA has time to file charges if he finds criminality.

OTOH, the paparazzo was riding on a crowded sidewalk, possibly distracted by his effort to get a good photo. In short there were traffic code violations offenses and that's what he was cited for.

gcottay

I agree.

FBinNY 

The driver will be held responsible, just not treated as a criminal. That's why we have 2 separate court systems, civil and criminal.

Not wanting to nflame anyone, but I get sick of the argument that everyone that has an accident, even a fatal one, is somehow a criminal and should go to jail. Stuff happens, and even good people, acting in good faith, including careful drivers have accidents, and in some of those accidents, people die. But I'm not willing to fill jails with people who made a mistake.

walrus1

FB, as a New Yorker surely you know that as long as the driver doesn't have a gun and is sober the NYPD does next to no investigation into whether or not a law has been broken. Look at that cabbie who severed that tourist's leg a few weeks back. No charges even though he was trying to run over a cyclist and lost control of the car in a fit of road rage. There is no accountability of dangerous drives cause frankly the NYPD don't give one flip. Why? Because One Police Plaza wants cops only to spend their time on getting guns off the street and on counter terrorism, both very reasonable and admirable goals for an urban police force, as well as babysitting tourists. However, anything else is a non-priority. If I take my bike on a NYC street I'm infinitely more likely to get run over than to get shot. I believe someone who speeds or drives aggressively in a car i.e. a deadly weapon should be held responsible for their actions. Shot or run over either way the victim is just as dead. And maybe this was simply just a terrible accident by someone unfit to drive but we will never know for sure.

rydabent

Armstrong uses drugs = banned for life. Football and baseball players use drugs = set out a couple of games, or whine about it and probably get off.

CbadRider

The SUV that hit the children has nothing to do with cycling, only bad driving.

Previous threads regarding the Nicole Kidman incident are in Trollheim.

Thread closed.