A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Some lives matter. Some don't



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old January 30th 18, 03:27 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Radey Shouman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,747
Default Some lives matter. Some don't

John B. writes:

On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 13:31:54 +0100, Sepp Ruf
wrote:

John B. wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 09:42:11 -0600, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/27/2018 11:30 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/27/2018 11:23 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 02:04:27 +0100, Sepp Ruf wrote:
John B. wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 19:07:44 -0600, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/26/2018 6:24 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/26/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote:
http://www.massbike.org/anitakurmannvideo

Yes, horrific.

The ignoramus police, too.

Certainly Sir. The logical answer is simply to eliminate
the police
force. Think of the tax savings, why the New York police
force costs
the tax payer in the neighborhood of $130,769 annually
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david...b_7659496.html


Think of how happy "Mr. Average Man" will be without the
ignoramus police and the horrendous tax bill.

I strongly support police when they're correct and competent.

I can't support a system that provides no serious punishment
when a motorist takes another's life.

At a bare minimum, the trucker should never again operate a
motor vehicle on a public road.

pffft.
How in the hell would that be enforced?

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.3783246

Well, one of the proven ways of reducing illegal acts is by an active
police presence..... The old fashioned cop on the beat is an often
mentioned example.

Of course this results


Your phantasies and examples prove no causation.

in a large number of "ignoramus police"
comments. You know, "The stupid cop. He gave me a ticket and I was
only going 15 miles over the speed limit".


You are hallucinating, aren't you? You think rbt readers don't notice your
misrepresentation of the context of "ignoramus police?" You think rbt
readers do not comprehend that you only quote the part of the Mass. law that
pertains to the cyclist's behavior, but not the trucker's?


Misrepresent the "Ignoramus police"?

Given that is the only description or example given was "ignoramus"
how is it possible not to misrepresent them?

The bicyclist was passing on the right in violation of the Mass. law.
thus in simple terms she was in violation of he law. Had she not been
in violation of the law then the accident likely wouldn't occurred.


Please read the documentation at
http://www.massbike.org/anita_kurmann_video_narrative
They make an excellent case that Dr. Kurmann was riding legally,
and that Mr. Levari violated the law. At the very least he
should have been charged for leaving the scene of an accident, the
police had to track him down many hours after the event.


If you want to argue that had the truck not also turned left there
wouldn't have been an accident fine, fine, it makes as much sense as
arguing to that if the truck driver not gotten up that morning, or had
he a flat ten miles down the road, there wouldn't have been an
accident either.

Anything can be rationalized and usually is.

Traffic rules are mostly constructed in a way that allows one party to make
a mistake, but an accident still getting avoided by the other party not
making a mistake. Even the legislators in Mass. understand that the burden
of extra diligence is upon the operator of dangerous motorized machinery,
thus truckers need a license, not cyclists lured into deadly traps by
territory-demarcating bicycle activists and dangerously contradictory
legislation from one province to another. After the homicide, did the
behavior of Boston police and DA indicate any of this is understood by them
and demonstrated by impartial "law enforcement?" I don't think so.


Traffic rules are mostly constructed in a way that allows one party to
make a mistake ??

You mean that it is safe to run red lights or ignore traffic signs?


It appears that there are two forms, and effects from, law enforcement
systems. A strict system where all laws are vigorously enforced and
penalties imposed for law breakers and, secondly, a layed back legal
system where law enforcement is lax and legal codes are loosely
applied... "Come on Herb... he only ran over two bicycles and you want
to put him in Jail?"

Take your choice. In one the public feels safe and secure and has
confidence in their law enforcement system. in the other they don't.


Someone obviously needs to simplify reality by resorting to false
dichotomies. You might have forgotten during your unamericanizing Asian
adventures, King Longhorn's Johnny, but the public's trust in government is
to be earned by control by the public and government being held accountable.

--
Cheers,

John B.


--
Ads
  #52  
Old January 30th 18, 04:31 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Some lives matter. Some don't

On 1/29/2018 8:18 PM, John B. wrote:

The bicyclist was passing on the right in violation of the Mass. law.
thus in simple terms she was in violation of he law. Had she not been
in violation of the law then the accident likely wouldn't occurred.


According to this article, that's not true. Bicycles are legally allowed
to pass on the right in Massachusetts.
http://bikexprt.com/massfacil/laws/passright.htm

Although I certainly wouldn't do it in the trucker right hook situation.
Or any other right hook situation, really.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #53  
Old January 30th 18, 06:29 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,697
Default Some lives matter. Some don't

On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 22:31:12 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/29/2018 8:18 PM, John B. wrote:

The bicyclist was passing on the right in violation of the Mass. law.
thus in simple terms she was in violation of he law. Had she not been
in violation of the law then the accident likely wouldn't occurred.


According to this article, that's not true. Bicycles are legally allowed
to pass on the right in Massachusetts.
http://bikexprt.com/massfacil/laws/passright.htm

Although I certainly wouldn't do it in the trucker right hook situation.
Or any other right hook situation, really.


Yes I read that, in its entirety it says:
"...The driver of a vehicle may, if the roadway is free from
obstruction and of sufficient width for two or more lines of moving
vehicles, overtake and pass upon the right of another vehicle when the
vehicle overtaken is (a) making of about to make a left turn, (b) upon
a one-way street, or (c) upon any roadway on which traffic is
restricted to one direction of movement."

Which would seem to disqualify a bicycle that is attempting to pass a
vehicle unless said vehicle is (a) making of about to make a left
turn, (b) upon a one-way street, or (c) upon any roadway on which
traffic is restricted to one direction of movement, as the truck
intended to make a R.H. turn, and was not on a one way street nor was
traffic restricted to one direction.

But more important, when one is planning or attempting to pass a
vehicle that due to road construction has the ability to turn directly
into or in front of the bicycle isn't it prudent to pay attention to
what is going on, is a vehicle starting a turn, relative speeds and
positions, apparent intent?

Rather like riding across Farmer Brown's field when the bull is loose
in the field. Never a thought what the Bull's thinking is? Just pedal
along. After all you have a right to use the path?

Over the years I've had good luck with the basic plan of avoiding
contact with things that are larger, heavier, faster, harder or more
aggressive then I am. It has worked well so far :-)

I have also noticed that things that go head to head with objects that
are larger, heavier, faster, harder or more aggressive then selves
are, haven't fared as well.

I've always thought that those who ride bicycles might take heed of
Henry Gray.

Here lies the body of Henry Gray
He died defending his right of way.
His way was right, his will was strong,
But he's just as dead as if he was wrong.

It IS true, you know :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

  #54  
Old January 30th 18, 10:35 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Sepp Ruf
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 454
Default Some lives matter. Some don't

Radey Shouman wrote:

http://www.massbike.org/anita_kurmann_video_narrative
They make an excellent case that Dr. Kurmann was riding legally,
and that Mr. Levari violated the law. At the very least he
should have been charged for leaving the scene of an accident, the
police had to track him down many hours after the event.


Shouldn't they focus more on precedents of careless turns? The charge of
leaving the scene of an accident seems shaky because it has been described
as possible that the trucker would not have felt the impact on the trailer
axle. At least if the road surface under the cabin was bumpy at the same
time, I can imagine it would at least be difficult. (No excuse, but another
reason why the right turn should have been prepared and executed way more
carefully, and way slower!) Post factum, the trucker could have modified
mirror angles, tire pressures, suspension settings, blood alcohol level,
phone data, whatever. Of the handful of witnesses all frantically calling
911 or attempting first aid, not one had the sense to tell one driver to
follow the truck? Well, I hope those just uselessly standing by were simply
shocked, not busy getting their cameras ready.
  #55  
Old January 30th 18, 01:36 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,374
Default Some lives matter. Some don't

Cyclist had a bout of post adrenalin/hypoglycemia whiz...

Logic: if driver sees analyzes turn approach then sees cyclist. Expects cyclist to see truck ...What's missing ?

Proximity ... lights. ..

JB, move on LED ?
  #56  
Old January 30th 18, 02:23 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Duane[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 401
Default Some lives matter. Some don't

On 29/01/2018 9:27 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
John B. writes:

On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 13:31:54 +0100, Sepp Ruf
wrote:

John B. wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 09:42:11 -0600, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/27/2018 11:30 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/27/2018 11:23 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 02:04:27 +0100, Sepp Ruf wrote:
John B. wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 19:07:44 -0600, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/26/2018 6:24 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 26 Jan 2018, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/26/2018 8:24 AM, AMuzi wrote:
http://www.massbike.org/anitakurmannvideo

Yes, horrific.

The ignoramus police, too.

Certainly Sir. The logical answer is simply to eliminate
the police
force. Think of the tax savings, why the New York police
force costs
the tax payer in the neighborhood of $130,769 annually
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david...b_7659496.html


Think of how happy "Mr. Average Man" will be without the
ignoramus police and the horrendous tax bill.

I strongly support police when they're correct and competent.

I can't support a system that provides no serious punishment
when a motorist takes another's life.

At a bare minimum, the trucker should never again operate a
motor vehicle on a public road.

pffft.
How in the hell would that be enforced?

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.3783246

Well, one of the proven ways of reducing illegal acts is by an active
police presence..... The old fashioned cop on the beat is an often
mentioned example.

Of course this results

Your phantasies and examples prove no causation.

in a large number of "ignoramus police"
comments. You know, "The stupid cop. He gave me a ticket and I was
only going 15 miles over the speed limit".

You are hallucinating, aren't you? You think rbt readers don't notice your
misrepresentation of the context of "ignoramus police?" You think rbt
readers do not comprehend that you only quote the part of the Mass. law that
pertains to the cyclist's behavior, but not the trucker's?


Misrepresent the "Ignoramus police"?

Given that is the only description or example given was "ignoramus"
how is it possible not to misrepresent them?

The bicyclist was passing on the right in violation of the Mass. law.
thus in simple terms she was in violation of he law. Had she not been
in violation of the law then the accident likely wouldn't occurred.



How can she be passing on the right when the truck overtook her?


Please read the documentation at
http://www.massbike.org/anita_kurmann_video_narrative
They make an excellent case that Dr. Kurmann was riding legally,
and that Mr. Levari violated the law. At the very least he
should have been charged for leaving the scene of an accident, the
police had to track him down many hours after the event.




If you want to argue that had the truck not also turned left there
wouldn't have been an accident fine, fine, it makes as much sense as
arguing to that if the truck driver not gotten up that morning, or had
he a flat ten miles down the road, there wouldn't have been an
accident either.

Anything can be rationalized and usually is.

Traffic rules are mostly constructed in a way that allows one party to make
a mistake, but an accident still getting avoided by the other party not
making a mistake. Even the legislators in Mass. understand that the burden
of extra diligence is upon the operator of dangerous motorized machinery,
thus truckers need a license, not cyclists lured into deadly traps by
territory-demarcating bicycle activists and dangerously contradictory
legislation from one province to another. After the homicide, did the
behavior of Boston police and DA indicate any of this is understood by them
and demonstrated by impartial "law enforcement?" I don't think so.


Traffic rules are mostly constructed in a way that allows one party to
make a mistake ??

You mean that it is safe to run red lights or ignore traffic signs?


It appears that there are two forms, and effects from, law enforcement
systems. A strict system where all laws are vigorously enforced and
penalties imposed for law breakers and, secondly, a layed back legal
system where law enforcement is lax and legal codes are loosely
applied... "Come on Herb... he only ran over two bicycles and you want
to put him in Jail?"

Take your choice. In one the public feels safe and secure and has
confidence in their law enforcement system. in the other they don't.

Someone obviously needs to simplify reality by resorting to false
dichotomies. You might have forgotten during your unamericanizing Asian
adventures, King Longhorn's Johnny, but the public's trust in government is
to be earned by control by the public and government being held accountable.

--
Cheers,

John B.



  #57  
Old January 30th 18, 06:11 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Some lives matter. Some don't

On 1/30/2018 12:29 AM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 22:31:12 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/29/2018 8:18 PM, John B. wrote:

The bicyclist was passing on the right in violation of the Mass. law.
thus in simple terms she was in violation of he law. Had she not been
in violation of the law then the accident likely wouldn't occurred.


According to this article, that's not true. Bicycles are legally allowed
to pass on the right in Massachusetts.
http://bikexprt.com/massfacil/laws/passright.htm

Although I certainly wouldn't do it in the trucker right hook situation.
Or any other right hook situation, really.


Yes I read that, in its entirety it says:
"...The driver of a vehicle may, if the roadway is free from
obstruction and of sufficient width for two or more lines of moving
vehicles, overtake and pass upon the right of another vehicle when the
vehicle overtaken is (a) making of about to make a left turn, (b) upon
a one-way street, or (c) upon any roadway on which traffic is
restricted to one direction of movement."

Which would seem to disqualify a bicycle that is attempting to pass a
vehicle unless said vehicle is (a) making of about to make a left
turn, (b) upon a one-way street, or (c) upon any roadway on which
traffic is restricted to one direction of movement, as the truck
intended to make a R.H. turn, and was not on a one way street nor was
traffic restricted to one direction.


No, John, you missed it. The section of Massachusetts law cited in the
article I linked had this, which is pertinent:

"Every person operating a bicycle upon a way...may keep to the right
when passing a motor vehicle which is moving in the travel lane of the
way..."

That specifically says it's legal for a bike to pass on the right. It's
a specific law related to bicycles. Specific laws take precedence over
more general laws. So it is legal, although dangerous. As I've said it's
a move I avoid, and it's a trap I watch out for. But the victim was not
violating the law, as you claimed.

For years I've questioned the design logic of bike lanes that put
straight-ahead bicyclists to the right of right turning traffic. No
traffic engineer would do that with motor vehicle lanes. Having it
sanctioned for bicycles by Massachusetts (or any other state's) law
doesn't make the idea any better.

And some condemnation should go to the bicycle advocates that cry out
for such designs, including the growing hoard that yells for "protected
cycle tracks" everywhere. They invariably generate this same hazard.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #58  
Old January 31st 18, 01:49 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,697
Default Some lives matter. Some don't

On Tue, 30 Jan 2018 12:11:59 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/30/2018 12:29 AM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 22:31:12 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/29/2018 8:18 PM, John B. wrote:

The bicyclist was passing on the right in violation of the Mass. law.
thus in simple terms she was in violation of he law. Had she not been
in violation of the law then the accident likely wouldn't occurred.

According to this article, that's not true. Bicycles are legally allowed
to pass on the right in Massachusetts.
http://bikexprt.com/massfacil/laws/passright.htm

Although I certainly wouldn't do it in the trucker right hook situation.
Or any other right hook situation, really.


Yes I read that, in its entirety it says:
"...The driver of a vehicle may, if the roadway is free from
obstruction and of sufficient width for two or more lines of moving
vehicles, overtake and pass upon the right of another vehicle when the
vehicle overtaken is (a) making of about to make a left turn, (b) upon
a one-way street, or (c) upon any roadway on which traffic is
restricted to one direction of movement."

Which would seem to disqualify a bicycle that is attempting to pass a
vehicle unless said vehicle is (a) making of about to make a left
turn, (b) upon a one-way street, or (c) upon any roadway on which
traffic is restricted to one direction of movement, as the truck
intended to make a R.H. turn, and was not on a one way street nor was
traffic restricted to one direction.


No, John, you missed it. The section of Massachusetts law cited in the
article I linked had this, which is pertinent:

"Every person operating a bicycle upon a way...may keep to the right
when passing a motor vehicle which is moving in the travel lane of the
way..."

That specifically says it's legal for a bike to pass on the right. It's
a specific law related to bicycles. Specific laws take precedence over
more general laws. So it is legal, although dangerous. As I've said it's
a move I avoid, and it's a trap I watch out for. But the victim was not
violating the law, as you claimed.


Ah yes. I read the paragraph that states" The more restrictive wording
about passing on the right which applies to all drivers reads

Ch. 89 § 2. Passing vehicle traveling in same direction

...The driver of a vehicle may, if the roadway is free from
obstruction and of sufficient width for two or more lines of moving
vehicles, overtake and pass upon the right of another vehicle when the
vehicle overtaken is (a) making of about to make a left turn, (b) upon
a one-way street, or (c) upon any roadway on which traffic is
restricted to one direction of movement.

I missed the point that bicycles have special privileges in Mass.,
sort of no body can turn right except them guys over there.





For years I've questioned the design logic of bike lanes that put
straight-ahead bicyclists to the right of right turning traffic. No
traffic engineer would do that with motor vehicle lanes. Having it
sanctioned for bicycles by Massachusetts (or any other state's) law
doesn't make the idea any better.

And some condemnation should go to the bicycle advocates that cry out
for such designs, including the growing hoard that yells for "protected
cycle tracks" everywhere. They invariably generate this same hazard.

--
Cheers,

John B.

  #59  
Old January 31st 18, 01:56 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B.[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,697
Default Some lives matter. Some don't

On Tue, 30 Jan 2018 12:11:59 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/30/2018 12:29 AM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 22:31:12 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/29/2018 8:18 PM, John B. wrote:

The bicyclist was passing on the right in violation of the Mass. law.
thus in simple terms she was in violation of he law. Had she not been
in violation of the law then the accident likely wouldn't occurred.

According to this article, that's not true. Bicycles are legally allowed
to pass on the right in Massachusetts.
http://bikexprt.com/massfacil/laws/passright.htm

Although I certainly wouldn't do it in the trucker right hook situation.
Or any other right hook situation, really.


Yes I read that, in its entirety it says:
"...The driver of a vehicle may, if the roadway is free from
obstruction and of sufficient width for two or more lines of moving
vehicles, overtake and pass upon the right of another vehicle when the
vehicle overtaken is (a) making of about to make a left turn, (b) upon
a one-way street, or (c) upon any roadway on which traffic is
restricted to one direction of movement."

Which would seem to disqualify a bicycle that is attempting to pass a
vehicle unless said vehicle is (a) making of about to make a left
turn, (b) upon a one-way street, or (c) upon any roadway on which
traffic is restricted to one direction of movement, as the truck
intended to make a R.H. turn, and was not on a one way street nor was
traffic restricted to one direction.


No, John, you missed it. The section of Massachusetts law cited in the
article I linked had this, which is pertinent:

"Every person operating a bicycle upon a way...may keep to the right
when passing a motor vehicle which is moving in the travel lane of the
way..."

That specifically says it's legal for a bike to pass on the right. It's
a specific law related to bicycles. Specific laws take precedence over
more general laws. So it is legal, although dangerous. As I've said it's
a move I avoid, and it's a trap I watch out for. But the victim was not
violating the law, as you claimed.

For years I've questioned the design logic of bike lanes that put
straight-ahead bicyclists to the right of right turning traffic. No
traffic engineer would do that with motor vehicle lanes. Having it
sanctioned for bicycles by Massachusetts (or any other state's) law
doesn't make the idea any better.

And some condemnation should go to the bicycle advocates that cry out
for such designs, including the growing hoard that yells for "protected
cycle tracks" everywhere. They invariably generate this same hazard.


Yes, I missed the special bicycle portion and went right to the part
that reads:

"The more restrictive wording about passing on the right which applies
to all drivers reads

Ch. 89 § 2. Passing vehicle traveling in same direction"

Assuming, I suppose that all drivers meant "all drivers".
--
Cheers,

John B.

  #60  
Old January 31st 18, 03:21 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Radey Shouman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,747
Default Some lives matter. Some don't

Sepp Ruf writes:

Radey Shouman wrote:

http://www.massbike.org/anita_kurmann_video_narrative
They make an excellent case that Dr. Kurmann was riding legally,
and that Mr. Levari violated the law. At the very least he
should have been charged for leaving the scene of an accident, the
police had to track him down many hours after the event.


Shouldn't they focus more on precedents of careless turns? The charge of
leaving the scene of an accident seems shaky because it has been described
as possible that the trucker would not have felt the impact on the trailer
axle. At least if the road surface under the cabin was bumpy at the same
time, I can imagine it would at least be difficult. (No excuse, but another
reason why the right turn should have been prepared and executed way more
carefully, and way slower!) Post factum, the trucker could have modified
mirror angles, tire pressures, suspension settings, blood alcohol level,
phone data, whatever. Of the handful of witnesses all frantically calling
911 or attempting first aid, not one had the sense to tell one driver to
follow the truck? Well, I hope those just uselessly standing by were simply
shocked, not busy getting their cameras ready.


The reason I mention leaving the scene is that in the US, or at least in
my part of it, drivers do seem to have carte blanche to run over
cyclists or pedestrians. Unless they either (a) are provably drunk or
otherwise pharmacologically impaired or (b) flee the accident scene.
Both of those offenses seem to more or less reliably result in prosecution
for ordinary motor car drivers. I guess there is some kind of semi
truck exception.

Mr. Levari apparently contacted police ten hours later, from
Pennsylvania. I don't suppose we'll ever know what he might have
done in the meantime.
--
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
how much does frame matter? dan[_3_] Racing 2 September 2nd 12 05:55 PM
What's the matter with her? Danny Colyer UK 7 May 18th 07 06:19 PM
does weight matter in uni? onelesscar Unicycling 0 November 26th 06 11:15 PM
Does the truth matter? crit PRO Racing 8 August 24th 05 05:45 PM
Why Doping does Matter Bill C Racing 7 August 18th 05 12:06 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.