Bad bicycle reporting on Channel 5 in Kansas City

Bicyclists,

A TV news story has been making the rounds of cycling email groups in
Missouri & Kansas. The basic situation is that a pair of cyclists were
riding abreast on Blue River Road. This road runs right through Kansas
City, Missouri, along the (you guessed it!) Blue River. It's a
two-lane road that generally has a rural feel to it, with relatively
low traffic most times of the day--maybe about 500-1000 average daily
traffic.

The bicyclists were riding abreast around a curve. They said they
heard the driver approach from the rear and honk. They didn't even
have time to single up when he started to pass. The cyclists say that
as he came beside them he suddenly swerved over, hit the outside rider
with his mirror, causing both to run off the road and crash. (They
were not injured too seriously.)

Of course, the driver has a different story.

I won't comment on whose story I believe. I will encapsulate my
viewpoint on the matter by saying that it is both polite and legally
required to single up when a car approaches to pass. Yet failure to do
so does not give the motorist carte blanche to go into attack mode--or
even "must pass no matter how stupid and dangerous" mode.

But what is notable is how really, really bad the TV reporting is. It
implies the bicyclists are not allowed in the "traffic lane", they
should always ride on the shoulder (in this case a dinky little thing
about 6-12 inches wide), that the cyclists were at fault for riding
abreast whereas the motorist was not at fault at all, and so on.

Worse yet is that much of the misinformation seems to have come from
the police.

See the story (text and video) at:

http://www.kctv5.com/Global/story.as...8&nav=1PuZWWjV

Note that the text is a summary--the video has quite a lot more
details.

Local cyclists are planning to contact the TV station and the police to
try to educate them a little.

But if you should feel inclined to politely express your opinion about
this piece of reporting, here is how:

KCTV5
P.O. Box 5555
Kansas City, MO 64109

KCTV5 news email:
KCTV5 news fax: 913-677-7243
KCTV5 news phone: 913-677-7211

For reference, Missouri bicycle laws, and links to Missouri traffic
laws, can be found he

http://mobikefed.org/statutes.html

--Brent
brent [at] brenthugh.com

See the story (text and video) at:
http://www.kctv5.com/Global/story.as...8&nav=1PuZWWjV

I can't resist adding just one juicy quote from the story:

"Police say technically it was the *cyclists* who broke the law here
today because by riding two abreast with very little shoulder they were
in the traffic lane, that traffic lane belonging to the car, they say.
In the end, though, they didn't cite anyone."

So if you're riding two abreast in a lane and a motorist hits you, it's
all your fault.

Because the traffic lane belongs to the car.

See?

?!?

--Brent
brent [at] brenthugh.com

Wow,

I hope the education program is successful. Y'all should press for the
station to make amends by retracting some of those comments, specifically,
and by having a "cyclists right" segment on one or more of their broadcasts.

That is, off course, if you can come up with the appropriate statutes to
prove that they're wrong. In my state, they're wrong. Don't know if that
holds for every state.

--
Bob C.

"Of course it hurts. The trick is not minding that it hurts."
T. E. Lawrence (of Arabia)

"psycholist" wrote:

I hope the education program is successful. Y'all should press for the
station to make amends by retracting some of those comments, specifically,
and by having a "cyclists right" segment on one or more of their
broadcasts.

That is, off course, if you can come up with the appropriate statutes to
prove that they're wrong. In my state, they're wrong. Don't know if that
holds for every state.

This may not be the best case to make an issue of. In many (most?) states,
cyclists are required to ride single file when being passed. On a quiet
country road (which this apparently was), you can usually hear a car
approaching from a pretty good distance.

The motorist says he slowed down, honked, waited for them to get out of the
way and swerved when they didn't, but the sideview mirror on his vehicle
clipped one of their handlebars. The cyclists claim he swerved into them
intentionally. I suspect the truth is somewhere between those two extremes.

Now, certainly the driver saw the cyclists if he honked, and he is at fault
for hitting them. And certainly there are situations where cyclists have a
right to be "in the traffic lane." But I'm not convinced from what I read
that the cyclists really tried to single up.

The article DOES NOT say cyclists are never allowed in the traffic lane.

It says, "Technically the bicyclists were at fault because they weren't
supposed to ride two abreast on such a narrow shoulder." I would have
phrased it slightly differently: Technically, the bicyclists were partially
at fault because they were riding two abreast in the traffic lane while
being passed.

Art Harris

This may not be the best case to make an issue of. In many (most?) states,
cyclists are required to ride single file when being passed. On a quiet
country road (which this apparently was), you can usually hear a car
approaching from a pretty good distance.

I'd like to see some citations of the code sections which might be
applicable in this case. In my scan of what I believe is the VC for Missouri
(http://www.moga.mo.gov/STATUTES/STATUTES.HTM) I can find no mention of the
typical "bicyclist must ride single file except when passing" language.

Equally surprising, the Online version of Missouri Drivers Guide makes no
mention of this either (http://www.dor.mo.gov/mvdl/drivers/dlguide/)

So at this point, I can't verify that the cyclists were at fault in any
manner....at least in Missouri.


Chris Neary


"Science, freedom, beauty, adventu what more could
you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I
loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh

Chris Neary wrote:

Equally surprising, the Online version of Missouri Drivers Guide makes no
mention of this either (http://www.dor.mo.gov/mvdl/drivers/dlguide/)

From that link:

"WHERE TO RIDE MOPEDS AND BICYCLES

On public streets and highways, you have the same rights and
responsibilities as a motor vehicle operator. Always ride with traffic,
never against it. When operating at less than the posted speed or
traffic flow, generally ride as near to the right side of the roadway as
safe."

If they were two abreast, one was NOT riding as near to the right side
of the roadway as safe.

Rich

Equally surprising, the Online version of Missouri Drivers Guide makes no
mention of this either (http://www.dor.mo.gov/mvdl/drivers/dlguide/)

From that link:

"WHERE TO RIDE MOPEDS AND BICYCLES

On public streets and highways, you have the same rights and
responsibilities as a motor vehicle operator. Always ride with traffic,
never against it. When operating at less than the posted speed or
traffic flow, generally ride as near to the right side of the roadway as
safe."

If they were two abreast, one was NOT riding as near to the right side
of the roadway as safe.

Thanks for the ref, my brain must have zoned out when originally reading the
page.

Actually, the initial post contains a link with VC references:
http://mobikefed.org/files/biketips_bikelaws.pdf

VC section 307.190 is the relevant cite. Note that riding two abreast is
specifically permitted in Missouri "when not impeding other vehicles".

Based on the accounts in news article, the riders were not at fault for
riding two abreast, but would be at fault for not "singling up" once they
were aware a vehicle was behind them.

The vehicle would be at fault for unsafe passing.


Chris Neary


"Science, freedom, beauty, adventu what more could
you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I
loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh

On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 10:36:45 -0800, Chris Neary
wrote:

Equally surprising, the Online version of Missouri Drivers Guide makes no
mention of this either (http://www.dor.mo.gov/mvdl/drivers/dlguide/)

From that link:

"WHERE TO RIDE MOPEDS AND BICYCLES

On public streets and highways, you have the same rights and
responsibilities as a motor vehicle operator. Always ride with traffic,
never against it. When operating at less than the posted speed or
traffic flow, generally ride as near to the right side of the roadway as
safe."

If they were two abreast, one was NOT riding as near to the right side
of the roadway as safe.

Thanks for the ref, my brain must have zoned out when originally reading the
page.

Actually, the initial post contains a link with VC references:
http://mobikefed.org/files/biketips_bikelaws.pdf

VC section 307.190 is the relevant cite. Note that riding two abreast is
specifically permitted in Missouri "when not impeding other vehicles".

Based on the accounts in news article, the riders were not at fault for
riding two abreast, but would be at fault for not "singling up" once they
were aware a vehicle was behind them.

What's interesting to me is that there's no provision for how long the
riders have to 'single up'. If you take two relatively uncoordinated riders
who have not to this point practiced this, it could take quite a while.

First one rider has to be aware of the vehicle, then the other rider, then
they have to communicate to each other there's a car there. Then they have
to ascertain if it's safe for the car to pass so as not to be squeezed off
the road should the driver passing encounter a car coming the other way
around the bend.

Finally they have to decide who is going to speed up and who is going to
slow down and get behind. Allowing for a couple brief mistakes in who goes
behind whom and you have nearly 15-20 seconds, or more. Obviously a
well-coordinated team of riders could single up in 3-5 seconds after
sensing a car following, and a responsible team, both having mirrors would
be able to anticipate the car coming up from quite a way.

However, to my knowledge the law does not address this. In fact, in
allowing the two abreast riding, this allows for two cyclists to be almost
totally oblivious to what's behind them - there's no requirement for
cyclists to have mirrors to my knowledge - making it completely the
driver's responsibility to signal without causing undue alarm to the riders
and then pass when it's safe. (now having said this it's pretty obvious
that cyclists being aware of their vulnerablility would take steps to
anticipate and practice these maneuvers but this is not, to my knowledge,
part of the law).

So it seems to me that it's almost a given drivers are going to be
significantly delayed in passing two unaware, uncoordinated cyclists.
Obviously the people who wrote the law had to realize that once they allow
two-abreast riding they've got to take into account not the
well-coordinated team, but the least possible coordinated team.

So how do you judge when the riders are 'at fault' for not singling up.
Perhaps they just took too long for this impatient driver. In that case the
burden for passing safely has to be on the larger faster vehicle - yes even
if it takes a minute to get coordinated and allow a safe pass.

The vehicle would be at fault for unsafe passing.

In addition what about the law about hitting someone from behind? Clearly
if you're passing another car and clip them in passing, you have hit them
from behind and thus have failed to pass safely. I think the driver should
also be cited for reckless driving - sounds like he was trying to 'scare'
the cyclists.

jj


Chris Neary


"Science, freedom, beauty, adventu what more could
you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I
loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh

jj wrote:

So it seems to me that it's almost a given drivers are going to be
significantly delayed in passing two unaware, uncoordinated cyclists.

If the cyclists can't handle the responsibility of verifying they aren't
impeding traffic, then they shouldn't be riding two abreast.

And while there's no law saying they need mirrors, there's no law agaist
them getting mirrors. And if that's what it takes for them to not
impeed the flow of traffic, then that's what they need to do.


So how do you judge when the riders are 'at fault' for not singling up.

Seems pretty easy to me. If they impeed the flow of traffic, they're at
fault.

Rich

VC section 307.190 is the relevant cite. Note that riding two abreast is
specifically permitted in Missouri "when not impeding other vehicles".

Based on the accounts in news article, the riders were not at fault for
riding two abreast, but would be at fault for not "singling up" once they
were aware a vehicle was behind them.

What's interesting to me is that there's no provision for how long the
riders have to 'single up'. If you take two relatively uncoordinated riders
who have not to this point practiced this, it could take quite a while.

It can be argued that under some conditions, the riders are *never* required
to "single up". VC 307.190 states that the rider shall exercise "due care
.... when the lane is too narrow to share with another vehicle".

I read this to mean that if the lane is too narrow to share, you may "take
the lane" and overtaking traffic must wait until it is safe to move into the
other lane and pass.

Did the road conditions in this incident meet this criteria? I don't know.


So it seems to me that it's almost a given drivers are going to be
significantly delayed in passing two unaware, uncoordinated cyclists.
Obviously the people who wrote the law had to realize that once they allow
two-abreast riding they've got to take into account not the
well-coordinated team, but the least possible coordinated team.

In my personal experience, I try to keep the big perspective. I can't
remember the last time I was delayed by a cyclist, "significantly" or
otherwise (and I live in a cycling hotspot). But I am delayed
"significantly" by motor vehicles on a daily basis.

So how do you judge when the riders are 'at fault' for not singling up.
Perhaps they just took too long for this impatient driver. In that case the
burden for passing safely has to be on the larger faster vehicle - yes even
if it takes a minute to get coordinated and allow a safe pass.

Agreed, You cannot be "forced" into performing an unsafe pass.



Chris Neary


"Science, freedom, beauty, adventu what more could
you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I
loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh