Rider responsibility on trails?

Okay, this one's been gnawing at me.

Thank goodness for another muddled case.

The following vehicle was at fault. The only possible defense he
would have is that you were not using an active tail light (if one
is required in your jurisdiction).

However "I can't believe you did that," argues that he was aware
that you were there.

If not required, was the following cyclist using a headlight, if
required.

Did you execute a signal (not a big point, but if I were the defense
I would raise it).

Generally speaking, IMHO, following too closely gets the big yawn,
because the duty of the person behind you is to exercise due care
and diligence in operation of a vehicle.

As I understand traffic law.


--

_______________________ALL AMIGA IN MY MIND_______________________
------------------"Buddy Holly, the Texas Elvis"------------------
in.edu__________

On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 05:12:13 GMT, Collin wrote:

Okay, this one's been gnawing at me. Friday night I was hit by a
bicyclist while riding my bike on a bike/pedestrian trail. It was night,
there were street lamps, traffic was light, I had a front light and rear
reflectors, and noone had passe dme for about three miles. Riding
about 13 mph, looked to my left and saw a turnoff I should have taken.
With no oncoming traffic, I braked and swung to the left...

What I don't understand is how the hell you were still in his way after his
reaction time, and "Oh hell ...".

That implies to me a good 3-4 seconds, in which time he should have been able to
gently steer right and pass you without incident.

How wide was the trail?

On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 05:12:13 GMT, Collin wrote:

Okay, this one's been gnawing at me. Friday night I was hit by a
bicyclist while riding my bike on a bike/pedestrian trail. It was night,
there were street lamps, traffic was light, I had a front light and rear
reflectors, and noone had passe dme for about three miles. Riding
about 13 mph, looked to my left and saw a turnoff I should have taken.
With no oncoming traffic, I braked and swung to the left...

What I don't understand is how the hell you were still in his way after his
reaction time, and "Oh hell ...".

That implies to me a good 3-4 seconds, in which time he should have been able to
gently steer right and pass you without incident.

How wide was the trail?

Collin wrote:

Okay, this one's been gnawing at me. Friday night I was hit by a
bicyclist while riding my bike on a bike/pedestrian trail. It was night,
there were street lamps, traffic was light, I had a front light and rear
reflectors, and noone had passe dme for about three miles. Riding
about 13 mph, looked to my left and saw a turnoff I should have taken.
With no oncoming traffic, I braked and swung to the left...

From behind, the guy who hit me had enough time to say "Oh **** I can't
believe you did that" before he hit me. I never detected him until I
heard "Oh sh..." I must weigh much more than him because he actually
bounced backward, and I just fell down. My front wheel was far out of
true, and his was tacoed.

Initially I felt really bad and thought I'd offer to get him a new
wheel. But the guy was REALLY MAD. He was trying to control his anger.
I was trying to offer help while being ready for a punch. He asked a
couple of accusatory questions about my bicycling and riding behavior.
Obviously he wasn't going to calm down so I picked up my bike and walked
away.

Then I thought about it for a moment. Isn't it your responsibility to
read the road in front of you? If we were cars, he would have been
guilty. No doubts at all. What about a bike path? He had no lights,
so we was visually limited and probably had a delayed reaction time. I
have to admit I did a stupid thing, because I know from experience other
people are like him - not paying attention to the road in front of them.
And he put all of his thought into "Oh **** I can't believe you did
that" instead of steering out of it.

So, for you experienced road cyclists out there, what do you consider
proper riding? Is the cyclist responsible for what's behind as much as
what's in front?



Both riders share responsibility, but the trailing
rider is more to blame because (1) no lights--if he
had a good headlight you would have detected him
and this wouldn't have happened; (2) it sounds like he
was passing you on the left just as you turned, and
he made no effort to announce his presence; either
that or (3) he was following you dangerously close
without being prepared for any eventuality.

You share some blame because you should have
made a thorough check before turning, and
obviously you didn't.

Any cyclist worth his/her salt would accept
personal blame for a collision like that, learn
from it, and be thankful they weren't hurt.

The other guy's anger was way outa line.

Robert

Collin wrote:

Okay, this one's been gnawing at me. Friday night I was hit by a
bicyclist while riding my bike on a bike/pedestrian trail. It was night,
there were street lamps, traffic was light, I had a front light and rear
reflectors, and noone had passe dme for about three miles. Riding
about 13 mph, looked to my left and saw a turnoff I should have taken.
With no oncoming traffic, I braked and swung to the left...

From behind, the guy who hit me had enough time to say "Oh **** I can't
believe you did that" before he hit me. I never detected him until I
heard "Oh sh..." I must weigh much more than him because he actually
bounced backward, and I just fell down. My front wheel was far out of
true, and his was tacoed.

Initially I felt really bad and thought I'd offer to get him a new
wheel. But the guy was REALLY MAD. He was trying to control his anger.
I was trying to offer help while being ready for a punch. He asked a
couple of accusatory questions about my bicycling and riding behavior.
Obviously he wasn't going to calm down so I picked up my bike and walked
away.

Then I thought about it for a moment. Isn't it your responsibility to
read the road in front of you? If we were cars, he would have been
guilty. No doubts at all. What about a bike path? He had no lights,
so we was visually limited and probably had a delayed reaction time. I
have to admit I did a stupid thing, because I know from experience other
people are like him - not paying attention to the road in front of them.
And he put all of his thought into "Oh **** I can't believe you did
that" instead of steering out of it.

So, for you experienced road cyclists out there, what do you consider
proper riding? Is the cyclist responsible for what's behind as much as
what's in front?



Both riders share responsibility, but the trailing
rider is more to blame because (1) no lights--if he
had a good headlight you would have detected him
and this wouldn't have happened; (2) it sounds like he
was passing you on the left just as you turned, and
he made no effort to announce his presence; either
that or (3) he was following you dangerously close
without being prepared for any eventuality.

You share some blame because you should have
made a thorough check before turning, and
obviously you didn't.

Any cyclist worth his/her salt would accept
personal blame for a collision like that, learn
from it, and be thankful they weren't hurt.

The other guy's anger was way outa line.

Robert

Collin wrote:
about 13 mph, looked to my left and saw a turnoff I should have taken.
With no oncoming traffic, I braked and swung to the left...

Then I thought about it for a moment. Isn't it your responsibility to
read the road in front of you? If we were cars, he would have been
guilty. No doubts at all. What about a bike path? He had no lights,

Maybe I missed something, but are you saying that if you were driving a
car on the roadway, it would be perfectly okay to stop and turn without
any warning, and without looking back?

I'm not playing the blame game -- just pointing out that I don't
understand your argument. What was the other cyclist supposed to
"read", anyway?


--
Frederic Briere *

= IS NO MO http://www.abacomsucks.com =

Collin wrote:
about 13 mph, looked to my left and saw a turnoff I should have taken.
With no oncoming traffic, I braked and swung to the left...

Then I thought about it for a moment. Isn't it your responsibility to
read the road in front of you? If we were cars, he would have been
guilty. No doubts at all. What about a bike path? He had no lights,

Maybe I missed something, but are you saying that if you were driving a
car on the roadway, it would be perfectly okay to stop and turn without
any warning, and without looking back?

I'm not playing the blame game -- just pointing out that I don't
understand your argument. What was the other cyclist supposed to
"read", anyway?


--
Frederic Briere *

= IS NO MO http://www.abacomsucks.com =

Frederic Briere wrote:
Collin wrote:

about 13 mph, looked to my left and saw a turnoff I should have taken.
With no oncoming traffic, I braked and swung to the left...


Then I thought about it for a moment. Isn't it your responsibility to
read the road in front of you? If we were cars, he would have been
guilty. No doubts at all. What about a bike path? He had no lights,


Maybe I missed something, but are you saying that if you were driving a
car on the roadway, it would be perfectly okay to stop and turn without
any warning, and without looking back?

It would have been different in a car, which is why I was interested in
getting everyone's opinion. 1) Brake lights on cars give the following
driver a warning. Bikes don't. 2) At least California and Illinois
vehicle code place the responsibility on the following driver unless the
leading driver intentionally causes and accident. 3) Yes, if I was
driving, I would have looked back. This is definitely something I should
have done. I was careless.


I'm not playing the blame game -- just pointing out that I don't
understand your argument. What was the other cyclist supposed to
"read", anyway?


Good question. If I saw someone in front of me brake I would have
considered a change in direction. But maybe not. And, if I had no
lights, I might not detect the braking. After seeing enough erratic
behavior of people on trails, I've learned to give myself enough
distance to react to most possibilities. That's why I'm always
impressed by bicyclists who run red lights with cross-traffic. They
leave themselves no margin. The same applies to driving. I think most
people leave themselves a margin for error when they're driving.

Frederic Briere wrote:
Collin wrote:

about 13 mph, looked to my left and saw a turnoff I should have taken.
With no oncoming traffic, I braked and swung to the left...


Then I thought about it for a moment. Isn't it your responsibility to
read the road in front of you? If we were cars, he would have been
guilty. No doubts at all. What about a bike path? He had no lights,


Maybe I missed something, but are you saying that if you were driving a
car on the roadway, it would be perfectly okay to stop and turn without
any warning, and without looking back?

It would have been different in a car, which is why I was interested in
getting everyone's opinion. 1) Brake lights on cars give the following
driver a warning. Bikes don't. 2) At least California and Illinois
vehicle code place the responsibility on the following driver unless the
leading driver intentionally causes and accident. 3) Yes, if I was
driving, I would have looked back. This is definitely something I should
have done. I was careless.


I'm not playing the blame game -- just pointing out that I don't
understand your argument. What was the other cyclist supposed to
"read", anyway?


Good question. If I saw someone in front of me brake I would have
considered a change in direction. But maybe not. And, if I had no
lights, I might not detect the braking. After seeing enough erratic
behavior of people on trails, I've learned to give myself enough
distance to react to most possibilities. That's why I'm always
impressed by bicyclists who run red lights with cross-traffic. They
leave themselves no margin. The same applies to driving. I think most
people leave themselves a margin for error when they're driving.

Eric S. Sande wrote:

Okay, this one's been gnawing at me.


Thank goodness for another muddled case.

The following vehicle was at fault. The only possible defense he
would have is that you were not using an active tail light (if one
is required in your jurisdiction).
Only a headlight is required, but I agree that tail lights work really well.

However "I can't believe you did that," argues that he was aware
that you were there.

If not required, was the following cyclist using a headlight, if
required.
He didn't have a headlight.

Did you execute a signal (not a big point, but if I were the defense
I would raise it).
Nope. Definitely my bad. I should switch my brakes so my front brake
lever is on my right, and I'd be more inclined to signal while
controlling the bike.

Generally speaking, IMHO, following too closely gets the big yawn,
because the duty of the person behind you is to exercise due care
and diligence in operation of a vehicle.

As I understand traffic law.

Yes, legally, but this mishap I think teaches me I need to be more aware
even when no one appears to be around.