|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
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__________ |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
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? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
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? |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
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 = |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
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 = |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Spokane Area Trails Meetings | small change | Mountain Biking | 2 | October 15th 04 11:44 PM |
Frequently Asked Questions about Mountain Biking | BB | Mountain Biking | 31 | July 4th 04 02:35 AM |
Kansas bill threatens trails; please contact legislators | Brent Hugh | General | 1 | February 28th 04 07:41 AM |
Ghent Six Day Excursion | Ilan Vardi | Racing | 8 | November 30th 03 08:03 PM |