Intentional Hit & Run
#101
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,452
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,448 Times
in
1,822 Posts
In fact, in this case there is a very simple solution which the rider decided not to employ Twice----don't cut in front of a car in a sketchy situation. The first time the rider had to almost enter the road way, while other cyclists found it convenient and safe to go behind, while still pretty much staying on the MUP.
Trying to physically dominate a car while riding a bike is not real bright.
The second time, the rider tried to beat a Moving car across an intersection. That is just stupid.
I am very aware every time I cross the path of a car perpendicularly that the driver could hit me. I don't care what the traffic light says---that won't stop a car. I don't care if there is a stop sign. I don't care if the driver seems to be making eye contact and waving at me. In just about every imaginable case, I have had a car pull out and almost hit me.
As I said in another thread, it is always a gamble. Deliberately riding in Front of a moving car, trying to beat it across an intersection, is a stupider gamble than playing the lottery.
A lot of people are talking about how the driver Wanted to hit the cyclist ... but there is zero evidence of that. Not impossible, but not supported by the video.
What the video does show is an arrogant young cyclist who thinks that the rules of the road protect him from human stupidity and the laws of physics. The cyclist, in the first encounter, demonstrated that he felt entitled to the lane even if it was supposed to be shared---the cyclist felt that the intersection was His lane, even though the MUP technically ends at those yellow bollards.
The second encounter shows that the cyclist felt that he could squeeze across an intersection ahead of a moving car because the car would have to stop.
That is no different that someone in a car cutting off a cyclist because, in the driver's mind, it was just a bicycle and bikes have to make way for cars, right?
Simple solution---don't joust with cars.
There are accidents/ incidents where I cannot say if I could have avoided the collision/crash even using all my years of experience. There are others where I can say immediately, "I wouldn't have done that."
A perfect example is the video I think @jim_from_Boston posted of a female university professor getting right-hooked by a semi. I, and many other experienced traffic riders, posted that they felt sick when they saw the cyclist in the right lane pulling up to and trying to pass the truck in the left lane. Too many of us have seen trucks make wide turns, and too many of us have seen that trucks cannot see everything in their mirrors all the time, and that a bike can sneak into a blind spot.
That one, I can say For Sure wouldn't have happened to me ... too many scary situations have drilled the proper response into my mind.
Same here. I Know without a doubt I would have avoided this, because trying to beat a moving car across an intersection is Always a bad idea. This guy was unwilling to even touch his brakes ... so he wrecked his bike. And he was very lucky that everything happened at really low speeds. If he had three connected neurons, he would learn from this. If not, ... I hope we don't have to watch video of him learning a harsher lesson.
Trying to physically dominate a car while riding a bike is not real bright.
The second time, the rider tried to beat a Moving car across an intersection. That is just stupid.
I am very aware every time I cross the path of a car perpendicularly that the driver could hit me. I don't care what the traffic light says---that won't stop a car. I don't care if there is a stop sign. I don't care if the driver seems to be making eye contact and waving at me. In just about every imaginable case, I have had a car pull out and almost hit me.
As I said in another thread, it is always a gamble. Deliberately riding in Front of a moving car, trying to beat it across an intersection, is a stupider gamble than playing the lottery.
A lot of people are talking about how the driver Wanted to hit the cyclist ... but there is zero evidence of that. Not impossible, but not supported by the video.
What the video does show is an arrogant young cyclist who thinks that the rules of the road protect him from human stupidity and the laws of physics. The cyclist, in the first encounter, demonstrated that he felt entitled to the lane even if it was supposed to be shared---the cyclist felt that the intersection was His lane, even though the MUP technically ends at those yellow bollards.
The second encounter shows that the cyclist felt that he could squeeze across an intersection ahead of a moving car because the car would have to stop.
That is no different that someone in a car cutting off a cyclist because, in the driver's mind, it was just a bicycle and bikes have to make way for cars, right?
Simple solution---don't joust with cars.
There are accidents/ incidents where I cannot say if I could have avoided the collision/crash even using all my years of experience. There are others where I can say immediately, "I wouldn't have done that."
A perfect example is the video I think @jim_from_Boston posted of a female university professor getting right-hooked by a semi. I, and many other experienced traffic riders, posted that they felt sick when they saw the cyclist in the right lane pulling up to and trying to pass the truck in the left lane. Too many of us have seen trucks make wide turns, and too many of us have seen that trucks cannot see everything in their mirrors all the time, and that a bike can sneak into a blind spot.
That one, I can say For Sure wouldn't have happened to me ... too many scary situations have drilled the proper response into my mind.
Same here. I Know without a doubt I would have avoided this, because trying to beat a moving car across an intersection is Always a bad idea. This guy was unwilling to even touch his brakes ... so he wrecked his bike. And he was very lucky that everything happened at really low speeds. If he had three connected neurons, he would learn from this. If not, ... I hope we don't have to watch video of him learning a harsher lesson.
Last edited by Maelochs; 10-17-18 at 12:04 AM.
#102
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
In fact, in this case there is a very simple solution which the rider decided not to employ Twice----don't cut in front of a car in a sketchy situation. The first time the rider had to almost enter the road way, while other cyclists found it convenient and safe to go behind, while still pretty much staying on the MUP.
Trying to physically dominate a car while riding a bike is not real bright.
The second time, the rider tried to beat a Moving car across an intersection. That is just stupid.
I am very aware every time I cross the path of a car perpendicularly that the driver could hit me. I don't care what the traffic light says---that won't stop a car. I don't care if there is a stop sign. I don't care if the driver seems to be making eye contact and waving at me. In just about every imaginable case, I have had a car pull out and almost hit me.
As I said in another thread, it is always a gamble. Deliberately riding in Front of a moving car, trying to beat it across an intersection, is a stupider gamble than playing the lottery.
A lot of people are talking about how the driver Wanted to hit the cyclist ... but there is zero evidence of that. Not impossible, but not supported by the video.
What the video does show is an arrogant young cyclist who thinks that the rules of the road protect him from human stupidity and the laws of physics. The cyclist, in the first encounter, demonstrated that he felt entitled to the lane even if it was supposed to be shared---the cyclist felt that the intersection was His lane, even though the MUP technically ends at those yellow bollards.
The second encounter shows that the cyclist felt that he could squeeze across an intersection ahead of a moving car because the car would have to stop.
That is no different that someone in a car cutting off a cyclist because, in the driver's mind, it was just a bicycle and bikes have to make way for cars, right?
Simple solution---don't joust with cars.
There are accidents/ incidents where I cannot say if I could have avoided the collision/crash even using all my years of experience. There are others where I can say immediately, "I wouldn't have done that."
A perfect example is the video I think @jim_from_Boston posted of a female university professor getting right-hooked by a semi. I, and many other experienced traffic riders, posted that they felt sick when they saw the cyclist in the right lane pulling up to and trying to pass the truck in the left lane. Too many of us have seen trucks make wide turns, and too many of us have seen that trucks cannot see everything in their mirrors all the time, and that a bike can sneak into a blind spot.
That one, I can say For Sure wouldn't have happened to me ... too many scary situations have drilled the proper response into my mind.
Same here. I Know without a doubt I would have avoided this, because trying to beat a moving car across an intersection is Always a bad idea. This guy was unwilling to even touch his brakes ... so he wrecked his bike. And he was very lucky that everything happened at really low speeds. If he had three connected neurons, he would learn from this. If not, ... I hope we don't have to watch video of him learning a harsher lesson.
Trying to physically dominate a car while riding a bike is not real bright.
The second time, the rider tried to beat a Moving car across an intersection. That is just stupid.
I am very aware every time I cross the path of a car perpendicularly that the driver could hit me. I don't care what the traffic light says---that won't stop a car. I don't care if there is a stop sign. I don't care if the driver seems to be making eye contact and waving at me. In just about every imaginable case, I have had a car pull out and almost hit me.
As I said in another thread, it is always a gamble. Deliberately riding in Front of a moving car, trying to beat it across an intersection, is a stupider gamble than playing the lottery.
A lot of people are talking about how the driver Wanted to hit the cyclist ... but there is zero evidence of that. Not impossible, but not supported by the video.
What the video does show is an arrogant young cyclist who thinks that the rules of the road protect him from human stupidity and the laws of physics. The cyclist, in the first encounter, demonstrated that he felt entitled to the lane even if it was supposed to be shared---the cyclist felt that the intersection was His lane, even though the MUP technically ends at those yellow bollards.
The second encounter shows that the cyclist felt that he could squeeze across an intersection ahead of a moving car because the car would have to stop.
That is no different that someone in a car cutting off a cyclist because, in the driver's mind, it was just a bicycle and bikes have to make way for cars, right?
Simple solution---don't joust with cars.
There are accidents/ incidents where I cannot say if I could have avoided the collision/crash even using all my years of experience. There are others where I can say immediately, "I wouldn't have done that."
A perfect example is the video I think @jim_from_Boston posted of a female university professor getting right-hooked by a semi. I, and many other experienced traffic riders, posted that they felt sick when they saw the cyclist in the right lane pulling up to and trying to pass the truck in the left lane. Too many of us have seen trucks make wide turns, and too many of us have seen that trucks cannot see everything in their mirrors all the time, and that a bike can sneak into a blind spot.
That one, I can say For Sure wouldn't have happened to me ... too many scary situations have drilled the proper response into my mind.
Same here. I Know without a doubt I would have avoided this, because trying to beat a moving car across an intersection is Always a bad idea. This guy was unwilling to even touch his brakes ... so he wrecked his bike. And he was very lucky that everything happened at really low speeds. If he had three connected neurons, he would learn from this. If not, ... I hope we don't have to watch video of him learning a harsher lesson.
Said the same thing early in this discussion... then others said "blaming the victim." Then some said I was right... and it all comes back to this... "Simple solution---don't joust with cars."
#103
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,239
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4221 Post(s)
Liked 1,318 Times
in
914 Posts
After the first interaction, the driver turned left onto the street. Then, turned left again into the other driveway.
After the second interaction, the driver went in the opposite direction.
It's not likely that this was "coincidental".
The cyclist made some mistakes.
That doesn't let the driver off the hook for harassing people with a car. Which is dangerous even if the intent is not to hit somebody.
That is, both parties made "errors in judgement".
#104
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,239
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4221 Post(s)
Liked 1,318 Times
in
914 Posts
Also ... the driver was pulling itno a large private health/fitness facility called The Boulvard Club. The Boulevard Club - Toronto, ON - Home We have no idea if the driver was a member or not. he could have been going to the club, had the collision, and thought he would drive away and hide ... but pulled up too far and couldn't get his ID out and into the scanner. Or maybe he didn't think it was a huge deal and was just going about his business at the Boulevard Club when the rider came up to his window screaming. None of us know./QUOTE]
He left the second interaction going in the opposite direction. That suggests that he didn't have business at that facility.
He left the second interaction going in the opposite direction. That suggests that he didn't have business at that facility.
It would be odd for the driver to be so oblivious about the possibility of another interaction on the very same path a few minutes later.
If you can make weird excuses for the driver, you can make weird excuses for the cyclist.
This only applies in court. If it applied out of court, there would never be any trials.
Last edited by njkayaker; 10-19-18 at 10:05 AM.
#105
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,452
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,448 Times
in
1,822 Posts
[QUOTE=njkayaker;20622441]
Actually sir, you are wrong there.
The legal principle of “innocent until proven guilty” obviously only applies within the legal system.
The Concept of “presumed innocent until proven guilty”—that is, the idea that a person should not be condemned for action ro motivation without some evidence being offered—applies Anywhere a person chooses to apply it.
It is in fact the opposite of prejudice. So if you want to take the “pro-prejudice” side of the debate, I think I will do okay with the “prejudice is not such a good thing” argument.
As a real-world application … people here were claiming the driver obviously hit the cyclist on purpose as a symptom of road rage—but when pressed at least a couple were willing to reexamine their own positions and admit that since the windows were so darkly tinted, no one had any idea where the driver was looking or how the driver was acting, and thus had not one shred of evidence to support the idea that the driver was angry at the cyclist.
Those people presumed guilt—they decided the driver was guilty of a deliberate vehicular assault based mostly on the fact that we ride bicycles. When the Concept of “presumed innocent until proven guilty” was applied, they admitted they had jumped to unfounded conclusions.
As for why the driver pulled into the exercise center and then left—maybe he was scared that the crazed cyclist was going to lie and get him arrested.
If I had just had a crazed cyclist ride in front of me while I was crossing an intersection, and then that cyclist chased after me screaming and saying he had called the cops …. Yeah, I would cancel my workout and leave the scene, perhaps.
As far as that being any kind of “proof” of the intent of the driver, that is just ridiculous.
I am NOT saying the driver didn’t deliberately hit the cyclist. I am saying that having watched the video Several times, having done the Google Maps thing to examine the whole section of street and the various businesses involved, and the whole stretch of bike path …. I see no “evidence” that the driver tracked the cyclist, then waited at the health club driveway to hit him.
What I saw was a driver impatient to get to his workout, waiting on a pair of cyclists and a dog-walker to pass, who didn’t expect and didn’t see an idiot on a bike ignoring traffic laws and darting out of a bike path trying to race a moving car across an intersection.
The fact that after the crazed cyclist told the driver he was on his way to jail, the driver opted to depart, makes perfect sense to me. I see no “suggestion” that he hit the driver on purpose, because he decided to leave once the cyclist started threatening him.
The legal principle of “innocent until proven guilty” obviously only applies within the legal system.
The Concept of “presumed innocent until proven guilty”—that is, the idea that a person should not be condemned for action ro motivation without some evidence being offered—applies Anywhere a person chooses to apply it.
It is in fact the opposite of prejudice. So if you want to take the “pro-prejudice” side of the debate, I think I will do okay with the “prejudice is not such a good thing” argument.
As a real-world application … people here were claiming the driver obviously hit the cyclist on purpose as a symptom of road rage—but when pressed at least a couple were willing to reexamine their own positions and admit that since the windows were so darkly tinted, no one had any idea where the driver was looking or how the driver was acting, and thus had not one shred of evidence to support the idea that the driver was angry at the cyclist.
Those people presumed guilt—they decided the driver was guilty of a deliberate vehicular assault based mostly on the fact that we ride bicycles. When the Concept of “presumed innocent until proven guilty” was applied, they admitted they had jumped to unfounded conclusions.
As for why the driver pulled into the exercise center and then left—maybe he was scared that the crazed cyclist was going to lie and get him arrested.
If I had just had a crazed cyclist ride in front of me while I was crossing an intersection, and then that cyclist chased after me screaming and saying he had called the cops …. Yeah, I would cancel my workout and leave the scene, perhaps.
As far as that being any kind of “proof” of the intent of the driver, that is just ridiculous.
I am NOT saying the driver didn’t deliberately hit the cyclist. I am saying that having watched the video Several times, having done the Google Maps thing to examine the whole section of street and the various businesses involved, and the whole stretch of bike path …. I see no “evidence” that the driver tracked the cyclist, then waited at the health club driveway to hit him.
What I saw was a driver impatient to get to his workout, waiting on a pair of cyclists and a dog-walker to pass, who didn’t expect and didn’t see an idiot on a bike ignoring traffic laws and darting out of a bike path trying to race a moving car across an intersection.
The fact that after the crazed cyclist told the driver he was on his way to jail, the driver opted to depart, makes perfect sense to me. I see no “suggestion” that he hit the driver on purpose, because he decided to leave once the cyclist started threatening him.
#106
☢
There are videos on this with motorist following cyclist and harassing them for no reason. I've been egged by people in pickup trucks. And once someone threw their drink in my face.
I never had any encounter with them before, nor was I blocking their way. Cycling in a big city is a whole lot different than the tranquility of a rural mid-western road. Just thought I'd mention that.
#107
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,452
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,448 Times
in
1,822 Posts
Decade and a half in the Greater Orlando area, before bike lanes---and while it was voted most deadly cycling city year after year. I know what I am talking about.
#108
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
Things are seldom always that simple. They will follow you. Or attack you for no reason whatsoever except that you represent some one or thing that they dislike.
There are videos on this with motorist following cyclist and harassing them for no reason. I've been egged by people in pickup trucks. And once someone threw their drink in my face.
I never had any encounter with them before, nor was I blocking their way. Cycling in a big city is a whole lot different than the tranquility of a rural mid-western road. Just thought I'd mention that.
There are videos on this with motorist following cyclist and harassing them for no reason. I've been egged by people in pickup trucks. And once someone threw their drink in my face.
I never had any encounter with them before, nor was I blocking their way. Cycling in a big city is a whole lot different than the tranquility of a rural mid-western road. Just thought I'd mention that.
But what I saw in the vid was a cyclist that twice put themselves right in front of a car about to go... that, I don't get.
#109
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,384
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 800 Post(s)
Liked 218 Times
in
171 Posts
…Cycling in a big city is a whole lot different than the tranquility of a rural mid-western road. Just thought I'd mention that.
… In Ann Arbor MI in the 70’s I really realized the utility of bicycles for commuting, and began touring…
My experience is that people drive differently in every city and treat cyclists very differently. The best advice often comes from cyclists that live the closest to you …
The exception here would also be Jim from Boston--anyone that can successfully commute around Boston has my full respect and probably knows how to deal with about every intersection imaginable!
The exception here would also be Jim from Boston--anyone that can successfully commute around Boston has my full respect and probably knows how to deal with about every intersection imaginable!
...A perfect example is the video I think @jim_from_Boston posted of a female university professor getting right-hooked by a semi. I, and many other experienced traffic riders, posted that they felt sick when they saw the cyclist in the right lane pulling up to and trying to pass the truck in the left lane.
Too many of us have seen trucks make wide turns, and too many of us have seen that trucks cannot see everything in their mirrors all the time, and that a bike can sneak into a blind spot.
That one, I can say For Sure wouldn't have happened to me ... too many scary situations have drilled the proper response into my mind…
Too many of us have seen trucks make wide turns, and too many of us have seen that trucks cannot see everything in their mirrors all the time, and that a bike can sneak into a blind spot.
That one, I can say For Sure wouldn't have happened to me ... too many scary situations have drilled the proper response into my mind…
Originally Posted by ninety5rpm
(from a now-closed thread on A&S, 1-25-18) "Bike advocates push for charges against trucker in cyclists death"
This is horrific to watch, but it's important:
Bike advocates push for charges against trucker in cyclist’s death
This is horrific to watch, but it's important:
Bike advocates push for charges against trucker in cyclist’s death
Originally Posted by Jim from Boston
I live about one block from the scene of this accident. Just this past week an acquaintance who knows me as cycle commuter mentioned he saw a news feature about this on local TV, and then I read about it in the Boston Globe.
These types of accidents have happened before in the vicinity of my neighborhood.
I have posted a few times about how I register such disasters, and others, in my head to keep myself safe.
These types of accidents have happened before in the vicinity of my neighborhood.
I have posted a few times about how I register such disasters, and others, in my head to keep myself safe.
…Over the past few months I have come to realize that my safety aphorisms, collected over the years by personal or vicarious experience,are my way of actively aligning the stars in my favor, to anticipate those unseen and otherwise unanticipated dangers.
FWIW, for my own information at least [to include]...:
FWIW, for my own information at least [to include]...:
-Truck at corner in sight, don't go right [from a few local fatalities]…
PS: FWIW, I also posted earlier on this thread:
Pope @Jim from Boston often notes...
Paise the Lord, Brother @Maelochs.
I may be a prophet without honor in my own Land (Forum), but I’d like to think that one of my most valuable contribution to Bike Forums is my litany of Safety Aphorisms…:
I may be a prophet without honor in my own Land (Forum), but I’d like to think that one of my most valuable contribution to Bike Forums is my litany of Safety Aphorisms…:
Last edited by Jim from Boston; 10-19-18 at 06:23 AM. Reason: added PS
#110
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,239
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4221 Post(s)
Liked 1,318 Times
in
914 Posts
"Guilt" is a product of a court trial. This forum isn't a court.
There is evidence. You keep ignoring it.
You are ignoring a lot more stuff.
The driver got into an altercation with the "crazed cyclist". Then, drove in the same direction as the "crazed cyclist". Then, managed to get into a second altercation with the same exact "crazed cyclist". Then, the driver left going in the completely opposite direction. That's a lot of coincidences stacked up!
If you would be so oblivious to the possibility of a cyclist riding in front of you when just minutes before the same thing happened on the same path and the same direction, you should probably stop driving,
This (more or less) happened twice. A few minutes apart on the same path with the same cyclist going the same direction!
The driver got into an altercation with the "crazed cyclist". Then, drove in the same direction as the "crazed cyclist". Then, managed to get into a second altercation with the same exact "crazed cyclist". Then, the driver left going in the completely opposite direction. That's a lot of coincidences stacked up!
This (more or less) happened twice. A few minutes apart on the same path with the same cyclist going the same direction!
Last edited by njkayaker; 10-19-18 at 10:21 AM.
#111
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,452
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,448 Times
in
1,822 Posts
And as fast as I can keep ignoring it, you keep inventing more.
Let us leave this one, shall we? Neither is going to convince the other.
I mean, I addressed every point of your "evidence" and you "ignored" all that, right? We are talking past each other.
Any word on whether there was any legal follow-up here? I'd think, if the video was really dispositive, there would have been tickets, arrests, torture, executions .... any word on any follow-up?
Let us leave this one, shall we? Neither is going to convince the other.
I mean, I addressed every point of your "evidence" and you "ignored" all that, right? We are talking past each other.
Any word on whether there was any legal follow-up here? I'd think, if the video was really dispositive, there would have been tickets, arrests, torture, executions .... any word on any follow-up?
#113
☢
"Guilt" is a product of a court trial. This forum isn't a court.
There is evidence. You keep ignoring it.
You are ignoring a lot more stuff.
The driver got into an altercation with the "crazed cyclist". Then, drove in the same direction as the "crazed cyclist". Then, managed to get into a second altercation with the same exact "crazed cyclist". Then, the driver left going in the completely opposite direction. That's a lot of coincidences stacked up!
If you would be so oblivious to the possibility of a cyclist riding in front of you when just minutes before the same thing happened on the same path and the same direction, you should probably stop driving,
This (more or less) happened twice. A few minutes apart on the same path with the same cyclist going the same direction!
There is evidence. You keep ignoring it.
You are ignoring a lot more stuff.
The driver got into an altercation with the "crazed cyclist". Then, drove in the same direction as the "crazed cyclist". Then, managed to get into a second altercation with the same exact "crazed cyclist". Then, the driver left going in the completely opposite direction. That's a lot of coincidences stacked up!
If you would be so oblivious to the possibility of a cyclist riding in front of you when just minutes before the same thing happened on the same path and the same direction, you should probably stop driving,
This (more or less) happened twice. A few minutes apart on the same path with the same cyclist going the same direction!
He managed to wait and avoid everyone else on the path but somehow only hit the very same guy that he encountered just moments before? Really people? Really? This is why the legal concept of a "jury of your peers" terrifies me.
#114
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,452
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,448 Times
in
1,822 Posts
And it is precisely the opposite view that worries me. But no matter .... none of you are my peers.
#115
C*pt*i* Obvious
I would have expected this kind of behavior. (In China angry motorists usually get out of their vehicle)
The video is fairly self explanatory.
I would not call this an accident, the drivers reaction only reinforces this. ("Do you want money?")
Its always a risk passing in front of a motorist, I try to leave as much space as possible. (I usually go behind or wait if its as close as shown in the video)
Could have been much worse though, luckily there were witnesses in addition to the video.
I also find it laughable that some here think its a case of "no harm, no foul".
The video is fairly self explanatory.
I would not call this an accident, the drivers reaction only reinforces this. ("Do you want money?")
Its always a risk passing in front of a motorist, I try to leave as much space as possible. (I usually go behind or wait if its as close as shown in the video)
Could have been much worse though, luckily there were witnesses in addition to the video.
I also find it laughable that some here think its a case of "no harm, no foul".
He is facing three charges under the Highway Traffic Act: fail to remain, fail to report, and fail to yield.
The non-criminal charges come with a maximum penalty of a fine of up to $2,000, imprisonment for up to six months, a licence suspension for up to two years, and up to seven demerit points.
The non-criminal charges come with a maximum penalty of a fine of up to $2,000, imprisonment for up to six months, a licence suspension for up to two years, and up to seven demerit points.
Last edited by SHBR; 10-26-18 at 07:22 AM.
#116
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,452
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,448 Times
in
1,822 Posts
Thanks ... i asked about criminal charges, no one else followed up.
I see he was NOT charged with attempted vehicular manslaughter or attempted murder or mayhem ... not even Assault.
District Attorney obviously did not see how "Obvious" it is, that he "Deliberately' hunted down the cyclist and hit him.
Oh, I get it ... the DA drives a car and is part of the conspiracy. never mind.
I see he was NOT charged with attempted vehicular manslaughter or attempted murder or mayhem ... not even Assault.
District Attorney obviously did not see how "Obvious" it is, that he "Deliberately' hunted down the cyclist and hit him.
Oh, I get it ... the DA drives a car and is part of the conspiracy. never mind.
#117
C*pt*i* Obvious
Thanks ... i asked about criminal charges, no one else followed up.
I see he was NOT charged with attempted vehicular manslaughter or attempted murder or mayhem ... not even Assault.
District Attorney obviously did not see how "Obvious" it is, that he "Deliberately' hunted down the cyclist and hit him.
Oh, I get it ... the DA drives a car and is part of the conspiracy. never mind.
I see he was NOT charged with attempted vehicular manslaughter or attempted murder or mayhem ... not even Assault.
District Attorney obviously did not see how "Obvious" it is, that he "Deliberately' hunted down the cyclist and hit him.
Oh, I get it ... the DA drives a car and is part of the conspiracy. never mind.
I wouldn't call it attempted murder, yet if this kind of behavior goes unchecked, it won't end well.
A 2 year license suspension would send a clear message to other motorists that this kind of behavior isn't socially acceptable.
It did make the news, so its not an isolated incident, there are lots of "accidents" in that area it seems.
Like someone else said, this cyclist chose to make this "accident" public, everyone can learn something from it.
Last edited by SHBR; 10-26-18 at 07:40 PM.
#118
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,452
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,448 Times
in
1,822 Posts
Not a lot of headlines saying,. "The sun rose this s morning.. "
The idea is Not to learn the wrong lessons from life.
Good that this guy got a serious penalty. Good that the DA realized that there was no evidence that this was a deliberate, premeditated attack. Better if cyclists learn to avoid risky behavior.
I still would have ticketed the cyclist for twice running through intersections failing to use care and caution, as well as the driver for his faults.
#119
C*pt*i* Obvious
I don't see how the cyclist in this video is much of danger to anyone.
C'mon over to China, we have far worse creatures that ride 2 wheeled objects without any regard for anyone, even themselves.
The 4 wheeled beasts are fairly tame by comparison over here. (also much more accountable, license plate numbers are difficult to hide, fake plates gets your vehicle impounded)
C'mon over to China, we have far worse creatures that ride 2 wheeled objects without any regard for anyone, even themselves.
The 4 wheeled beasts are fairly tame by comparison over here. (also much more accountable, license plate numbers are difficult to hide, fake plates gets your vehicle impounded)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Angio Graham
Advocacy & Safety
302
06-13-13 03:01 PM
Andra2000
Northeast
1
02-22-13 09:58 PM