|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On 9/9/19 2:18 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/8/2019 11:38 PM, James wrote: On 9/9/19 10:00 am, Frank Krygowski wrote: Also, other data has shown that the usual hit-from-behind deaths happen on rural roads, to unlit night cyclists. Hang on a moment, just above you said "I wouldn't call hits from behind "such a common mode of death for cyclists" because _all_ cycling deaths are tremendously rare", and now you claim there are "usual hit-from-behind deaths". Isn't "common" and "usual" saying practically the same thing? Pay attention to the context. If we discuss the tiny group of hit-from-behind deaths, we can say what's usual within that tiny group. That doesn't make it common in any sense. The discussion is of the "mode of death for cyclists". If the proportion or percentage of all the other modes is less than that of being hit from behind, then the most _common_ mode is being hit from behind. If the next categorised mode is far less common than the "being hit from behind" mode, then being hit from behind is "such a common mode" compared with others. -- JS |
Ads |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On Mon, 9 Sep 2019 00:18:22 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 9/8/2019 11:38 PM, James wrote: On 9/9/19 10:00 am, Frank Krygowski wrote: Also, other data has shown that the usual hit-from-behind deaths happen on rural roads, to unlit night cyclists. Hang on a moment, just above you said "I wouldn't call hits from behind "such a common mode of death for cyclists" because _all_ cycling deaths are tremendously rare", and now you claim there are "usual hit-from-behind deaths". Isn't "common" and "usual" saying practically the same thing? Pay attention to the context. If we discuss the tiny group of hit-from-behind deaths, we can say what's usual within that tiny group. That doesn't make it common in any sense. I recently came across some numbers. The average annual bike deaths (10 year average - 2017) in the U.S. was 729 per annum. The average number of deaths from falling out of bed is 737 annually. https://www.indy100.com/article/kim-...ng-bed-7552691 Then I read that in 2009 there were 4 billion bicycle trips made https://www.bikeleague.org/commutingdata This appears to mean that one would have to take some 5,486,968.449 trips before one is in danger :-) The question arises... "is bicycling really dangerous?" -- cheers, John B. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On 9/9/19 2:19 pm, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 9 Sep 2019 13:24:48 +1000, James wrote: On 9/9/19 9:03 am, John B. wrote: And a number of studies have shown that as many as half, or more, of bicycle auto collisions are the fault of the cyclist... but I don't suppose that the League highlighted that :-) "California Highway Patrol data from 2012 show there were 5,090 collisions in LA County that year involving bikes and cars. In 2,759 of those cases, the CHP determined the cyclist was at fault and in 1,878 cases, they determined the car driver was to blame." Perhaps there is a cultural difference at work to explain the difference in Australia, where a number of studies have concluded that the drivers are at fault in something like 4 out of 5 cases. https://www.sbs.com.au/news/the-feed...s-report-finds It seems to depend largely on who is writing the reports. The CHP report I mentioned was written by them for (I imagine) their headquarters. I've also read a report from a couple of sites about coroner's reports showing a rather large percent of dead cyclists that "had drink taken" But when you turn to the Bicycle page it immediately becomes "t'wasn't us, it was some other guy done it", which, I guess, makes sense :-) I disagree, at least from an Australian POV. "A report released last week by the Royal Automobile Association of South Australia found that in 195 out of 277 crashes between cars and bicycles (just over 70 per cent) the cyclist was not at fault. " https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-14/cycling-collisions-should-drivers-be-held-legally-liable/8613858 -- JS |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On 9/9/19 2:55 pm, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 9 Sep 2019 00:18:22 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/8/2019 11:38 PM, James wrote: On 9/9/19 10:00 am, Frank Krygowski wrote: Also, other data has shown that the usual hit-from-behind deaths happen on rural roads, to unlit night cyclists. Hang on a moment, just above you said "I wouldn't call hits from behind "such a common mode of death for cyclists" because _all_ cycling deaths are tremendously rare", and now you claim there are "usual hit-from-behind deaths". Isn't "common" and "usual" saying practically the same thing? Pay attention to the context. If we discuss the tiny group of hit-from-behind deaths, we can say what's usual within that tiny group. That doesn't make it common in any sense. I recently came across some numbers. The average annual bike deaths (10 year average - 2017) in the U.S. was 729 per annum. The average number of deaths from falling out of bed is 737 annually. https://www.indy100.com/article/kim-...ng-bed-7552691 Then I read that in 2009 there were 4 billion bicycle trips made https://www.bikeleague.org/commutingdata This appears to mean that one would have to take some 5,486,968.449 trips before one is in danger :-) The question arises... "is bicycling really dangerous?" I guess if everyone who slept in a bed (and didn't fall out and die), got up and rode a bicycle, the two statistics might be comparable. Exposure counts. Riding a bicycle is obviously more dangerous for all people than getting out of bed, which is likely only dangerous for the old, wobbly and fragile. -- JS |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
John B. wrote:
"California Highway Patrol data from 2012 show there were 5,090 collisions in LA County that year involving bikes and cars. In 2,759 of those cases, the CHP determined the cyclist was at fault and in 1,878 cases, they determined the car driver was to blame.". That's perverse reasoning. The one who unilaterally brings on a mortal hazard is primarily to blame when something goes wrong. If some nutjob is shooting a firearm down a residential street for reasons known only to himself, and a child running around as unpredictably and harmlessly as a child gets shot, is it the child's fault? And is it really an accident? Drivers should be assessed as the moral transgressors that they are. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 23:30:29 -0700 (PDT), Chalo
wrote: John B. wrote: "California Highway Patrol data from 2012 show there were 5,090 collisions in LA County that year involving bikes and cars. In 2,759 of those cases, the CHP determined the cyclist was at fault and in 1,878 cases, they determined the car driver was to blame.". That's perverse reasoning. The one who unilaterally brings on a mortal hazard is primarily to blame when something goes wrong. If some nutjob is shooting a firearm down a residential street for reasons known only to himself, and a child running around as unpredictably and harmlessly as a child gets shot, is it the child's fault? And is it really an accident? Drivers should be assessed as the moral transgressors that they are. But your pure at heart cyclist is breaking the law. Do you mean that the traffic code should not apply to bicyclists? But fair is fair, if the code shouldn't apply to bicycles than equally it should not apply to autos. How could you penalize one road user and not another? Or perhaps you mean that bicyclists being not overly bright and not understanding the traffic laws and regulations and not able to read signs well and prone to do stupid things should be protected from themselves. Sort of like any other imbecile . Maybe only let out on a leash? -- cheers, John B. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
John B. fails to understand ethics.
|
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On Mon, 9 Sep 2019 01:07:20 -0700 (PDT), Chalo
wrote: John B. fails to understand ethics. Ah yes, the ultimate response. But I always thought that telling lies, trying to rape women and bribing people was the American Way. After all you elected a guy that does that to be your leader. -- cheers, John B. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On 9/9/2019 1:16 AM, James wrote:
On 9/9/19 2:19 pm, John B. wrote: On Mon, 9 Sep 2019 13:24:48 +1000, James wrote: On 9/9/19 9:03 am, John B. wrote: And a number of studies have shown that as many as half, or more, of bicycle auto collisions are the fault of the cyclist... but I don't suppose that the League highlighted that :-) "California Highway Patrol data from 2012 show there were 5,090 collisions in LA County that year involving bikes and cars. In 2,759 of those cases, the CHP determined the cyclist was at fault and in 1,878 cases, they determined the car driver was to blame." Perhaps there is a cultural difference at work to explain the difference in Australia, where a number of studies have concluded that the drivers are at fault in something like 4 out of 5 cases. https://www.sbs.com.au/news/the-feed...s-report-finds It seems to depend largely on who is writing the reports. The CHP report I mentioned was written by them for (I imagine) their headquarters. I've also read a report from aÂ* couple of sites about coroner's reports showing a rather large percent of dead cyclists that "had drink taken" But when you turn to the Bicycle page it immediately becomes "t'wasn't us, it was some other guy done it", which, I guess,Â* makes sense :-) I disagree, at least from an Australian POV. "A report released last week by the Royal Automobile Association of South Australia found that in 195 out of 277 crashes between cars and bicycles (just over 70 per cent) the cyclist was not at fault. " https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-14/cycling-collisions-should-drivers-be-held-legally-liable/8613858 Again, it seems different here. I can recall only four or five bike fatalities in our area going back 20 years. (Other car-bike crashes don't often make the "official" news or the word-of-mouth news.) Such a small sample isn't worth much statistically, but: The earliest was a young boy riding west on the sidewalk on the south side of the street. A truck driving north turned east at the intersection. The boy ran into the side of the truck and was run over. Supposedly the boy's bike had no brakes. I'd call that one a bicyclist fault. About five years ago, an avid cyclist trained at high speed on a rural rail-trail MUP. He was famous for not stopping at the intersections with roads. He rode out in front of a car driving on a country road. Admittedly, almost all drivers exceed the speed limit by at least a bit, so the motorist may have been doing that. But the cyclist definitely blew the stop sign. I'd assign fault to the cyclist. About three years ago, a rather weird guy who spoke to almost nobody and used his bike in sort of "homeless" fashion rode downhill and westbound under a freeway overpass in the eastbound lanes of a four lane arterial. A woman entering the arterial from an entrance ramp hit him head on. Cyclist fault. About 8 years ago, a worker on night shift at a local hospital was a hit-and-run victim. He got off work at something like four in the morning. He was known for having many lights on his bike. The driver was never caught. Almost certainly motorist fault. Probably 20 years ago, a retired physician was riding his daily loop in our large metropolitan park. The park has a weird, AASHTO-violating bike facility, a bi-directional bike lane on the west side of a road that's one way north for motor vehicles. There are about a dozen "pull off" parking areas on the west side of the road, and the designer (who knows nothing about bikes) installed six bollards at each parking area, half of them before and half of them after each pull off. At first, the designer put stop signs for the bicyclists at each bollard set, but later took them down. The bicyclist was riding downhill headed south. A northbound motorist pulled across his path into a parking spot and hit him head on. He was paralyzed, then died several years later. I suspect the motorist was at fault, but the designer may be partially at fault. (I don't think the stop signs were present then.) -- - Frank Krygowski |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Yet another cyclist killed. pH (Several, actually)
On 9/9/2019 12:19 AM, John B. wrote:
I would say, though, that I've been riding a bike for, probably, 30 years or so and I never seen a bike crash. Truck crash, airplane crash, car crash, motorcycle crash, but never a bicycle crash. I've seen plenty of bike crashes, but they've all been solo falls or, occasionally, minor bike-bike crashes (club rides or others riding together). I've seen a very few of those result in moderate injury (broken collar bone, concussion despite wearing a helmet, etc.). Almost all of them involved nothing worse than a little road rash, so they are very appropriately under the radar. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Another cyclist killed | Mentalguy2k8[_2_] | UK | 5 | December 19th 13 01:50 PM |
Cyclist killed | Anton Berlin | Racing | 2 | July 24th 10 04:08 AM |
Pedestrian killed by cyclist (BNE) and cyclist killed by car (MEL) | Adrian Cook | Australia | 26 | July 20th 06 03:55 AM |
Cyclist killed | endroll | Australia | 0 | September 24th 05 08:46 AM |
Cyclist Killed | Jimscozz | Recumbent Biking | 1 | November 28th 03 05:39 PM |