|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Bicyclist Fatalities in AZ 2009
On 12/10/2010 3:21 PM, Phil W Lee wrote:
Duane considered Thu, 09 Dec 2010 08:43:41 -0500 the perfect time to write: On 12/8/2010 10:56 PM, Jay Beattie wrote: On Dec 8, 4:38 pm, Frank wrote: On Dec 8, 4:54 pm, Jay wrote: On Dec 8, 9:40 am, Frank wrote: On Dec 8, 11:26 am, wrote: On Dec 7, 7:35 pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° How does defensive driving apply? The only similar situation would be on a low-powered scooter that could not keep pace with other motorized traffic. False. When you're simply cruising down the road in your vehicle, the principles of defensive driving apply, whether you're being passed or not, because you have to be ready for encroachment from the wings, watch the road surface, etc. While you're being passed these principles of defensive driving are even more important.. Furthermore, when you're being passed, in any vehicle, the principles of defensive driving should be applied to your relationship with that anonymous driver to the extent that it is practicable to apply those principles. Obviously in passing situations the operator of the vehicle being passed must rely at least somewhat on the faculties of the passing driver. So, Robert: Of course, I know you'd be ever alert, well prepared, extremely skillful and always taking responsibility for your own safety, etc. But in a 10 foot lane, curb at the right, with an 8.5 foot truck behind you, where exactly would you ride? Probably the same place he always rides, being that very few people shift their position in the lane based on vehicles approaching from the rear. "Oh, look, its an Escalade, better get left." "No, its just a Prius, I should ride further right." "But wait, its a Kenworth, better go down the center." Really, I'm riding a bike, not a yoyo. Your hypothetical also assumes that the truck is going to try to pass you in your own lane rather than cross the centerline and pass at a safe (and legally required) distance. You can make that assumption sometimes, but not all the time. And if there is a place where everyone always tries to pass too closely (I admit, there are such places), then taking the road may be the safe thing to do. It also requires you to pull off when there are cars piled up behind you to let them pass. In that case, you are no different than the slow moving lawn tractor driving down the road. The fact that you are on a bike does not make you special and immune from the "slow moving vehicle must yield" laws. Are you aware of the Trotwood vs. Selz case, and what Bob Mionske and of course Steve Magas have explained regarding that? http://ohiobikelawyer.com/bike-law-1...ase-revisited/ http://velonews.competitor.com/2006/...aking-with-bob... AFAIK, most states do not have a "slow moving vehicle must yield" law. A few do have one, but it's restricted to situations where there are (typically) five vehicles held behind _and_ there is a safe place to pull over. If slow moving vehicles had to yield all the time, we would have no right to the road, motorhomes would never make it out of the flatlands, and commerce would become severely limited. I'm pushing the "where would you ride" question because certain posters were exaggerating the danger of bicycling, implying that one can't trust motorists not to smash you. I'm trying to see who really dives into the gutter or onto the sidewalk whenever a vehicle approaches. I chose those dimensions because they're common in my area, and there's no rational way to try to share that lane - at least, not in my view nor according to any cycling instructional material I know of. Based on that, I would control that lane and not try to share the lane to let the truck squeeze by. Do you agree? By the way, Frank, I don't necessarily disagree with your proposition that sometimes the only safe thing to do is take the lane -- or a larger part of it. I DO take a larger portion of the lane to prevent busses from passing me in certain places because they will squeeze me in to the curb, and probably with great satisfaction. There is also a down hill, off camber turn out of down town where cars tend to hug the inside curb, and I ride out in the lane there, although I'm usually going about the speed of traffic. In your truck scenario, I might ride farther out in the road if I were approaching a turn where the truck likely would cut the curve, if only innocently. On one lane roads, I just ride to the right but not in the gutter, and cars and trucks seem to get by without scaring me too often. I would never take the whole road just because some people might pass me too closely. -- Jay Beattie. Don't you find that people tend to pass you more closely when you take the whole road and tend to give you more distance when you're somewhat to the right? That's be my experience for the most part. The maniac drivers trying to terrorize me are not the norm. I find the opposite. If I'm riding close in to the edge, I'm in a position that drivers don't have to change road position to not hit me, so they don't change road position at all, even if it means them passing within a couple of inches of me. If I move out far enough that they have to make a conscious decision to either move out or hit me, they will move out, and once they get out of "just following the road" mode, they generally overtake properly, and with sufficient clearance. There is also a benefit in that if I'm not already at the edge of the road when they come uncomfortably close, I still have somewhere to go to make more space, without being forced off the road altogether. So it seems to help both with the otherwise sensible drivers who just need a slight nudge to provoke them into sensible behaviour (but may forget otherwise) and the idiots who intentionally cut too close. I agree with you generally but when I'm in the middle of the lane, the driver can pass me by moving into the left lane. I've had them come close and at speed. If I can move to the right I usually do but I'm usually in this position to avoid doors so I don't move to the right. I was interested if other had the same impression of the driver being more ticked off. Though now that I've read our local regs, I see why they are probably more likely to be ticked off here than elsewhere. I suspect if you ever encounter a real homicidal maniac, it won't make much difference either way. Not talking about homicidal maniacs. Just pricks. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Reduce fatalities or danger rates instead? | Doug[_3_] | UK | 3 | September 19th 10 08:05 AM |
Three cycling fatalities in London last month. | Daniel Barlow | UK | 4 | July 7th 09 12:58 PM |
Child cyclist fatalities in London | Tom Crispin | UK | 13 | October 11th 08 05:12 PM |
Car washes for cyclist fatalities | Bobby | Social Issues | 4 | October 11th 04 07:13 PM |
web-site on road fatalities | cfsmtb | Australia | 4 | April 23rd 04 09:21 AM |