Hell Ride crash 'inevitable'

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 3 May 2007 09:07:07 +1000
MikeyOz wrote:

rooman Wrote:
That's how I feel anyway...toss the book at him, but sadly its only
going to be a softcover!

I pretty much agree with all this and understand it is a Coronial
Enquiry, it is just what is being said that is disappointing me. I
want this guy to come out and accept full responsibility for his
actions, instead of cowering behind the fact he was riding in a group.


Dunno.. it is an interesting problem.

You are coming to a red light. you know it is common for riders in
the hell ride to run it so it's likely there's a bunch of bods going
to be coming up beside you maybe even hitting you. You yourself can't
see any reason to stop (as you can't see the ped).

Do you stop and risk someone crashing into you? Especially as people
are yelling loudly?

Risking an almost certain crash compared to a minor naughtiness which
is all it would have been if that bod (the one you didn't know was
there) wasn't crossing?

How many people have made the decision to run the red and not hit
someone?

I can see it as a difficult decision for someone who would ride in the
Hell Ride in the first place. Not easy for them at all. What's
"right" is clear, but how many make the "right" decision given the
fact that running the light has happened many times without mishap?

What would be an equivalent decision for non-HellRide cyclists to show
the dilemma? Not sure, what is a common cyclist thing that's
theoretically illegal but is often done and almost never causes a
problem?

Zebee

"Zebee Johnstone" wrote in message
...
In aus.bicycle on Thu, 3 May 2007 09:07:07 +1000
MikeyOz wrote:

rooman Wrote:
That's how I feel anyway...toss the book at him, but sadly its only
going to be a softcover!

I pretty much agree with all this and understand it is a Coronial
Enquiry, it is just what is being said that is disappointing me. I
want this guy to come out and accept full responsibility for his
actions, instead of cowering behind the fact he was riding in a group.


Dunno.. it is an interesting problem.

You are coming to a red light. you know it is common for riders in
the hell ride to run it so it's likely there's a bunch of bods going
to be coming up beside you maybe even hitting you. You yourself can't
see any reason to stop (as you can't see the ped).

Do you stop and risk someone crashing into you? Especially as people
are yelling loudly?

Risking an almost certain crash compared to a minor naughtiness which
is all it would have been if that bod (the one you didn't know was
there) wasn't crossing?

How many people have made the decision to run the red and not hit
someone?

I can see it as a difficult decision for someone who would ride in the
Hell Ride in the first place. Not easy for them at all. What's
"right" is clear, but how many make the "right" decision given the
fact that running the light has happened many times without mishap?

What would be an equivalent decision for non-HellRide cyclists to show
the dilemma? Not sure, what is a common cyclist thing that's
theoretically illegal but is often done and almost never causes a
problem?

Zebee

There's the key: "...compared to a minor naughtiness". We still (I include
myself) regard running a red as a minor naughtiness when it suits us then
bay for blood when we don't like the consequence.

me

In aus.bicycle on Wed, 02 May 2007 23:33:32 GMT
Plodder wrote:

There's the key: "...compared to a minor naughtiness". We still (I include
myself) regard running a red as a minor naughtiness when it suits us then
bay for blood when we don't like the consequence.


That's what I was thinking.

Everyone - driver, cyclist, motorcyclist, pedestrian - does minorly
naughty things. And sometimes there's someone or something unexpected
and pain ensues.

Think about the recent tragedy on the Cotter - a rider does something
they shouldn't have done but maybe did many times before without
incident but this time there was a car.

There's a stop sign near my place, a T junction where one side of the
crossbar is a dead end with one dead end road leading off it. So 99.99%
of traffic coming out of the stem is turning into the non-dead end of
the crossbar, and 99.99% of traffic along the crossbar is turning into
the stem.

On the pushie I might do either (the dead end also leads to a cycle
path) but coming out of the stem I and most traffic roll right through
because no one ever seems to cross the stem, always turning into it.

One day (on the motorcycle) I realised that a car was going straight
ahead, so I stopped. Had I been a little less awake (and he a bit
closer when I got there) then nastiness might have ensued. All my
fault for sure, but still....

I use that intersection twice a day every working day and usually at
least twice over a weekend. For 4 years now. I think I've seen one
straight-ahead vehicle - that one - in that time. So I have been
conditioned to not bother about it really. As, I suspect, many people
are conditioned to commit their minor naughtinesses to make their
lives more convenient.

Zebee

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 3 May 2007 09:22:32 +1000
rooman wrote:

MikeyOz Wrote:
chomp...

, "honestly I did not see him",
translates to:

didn't look

Not always.

can translate to "Looked, but there was a physical obstruction in
the way". I've seen a rather worrying film of a driver's view of a
roundabout from inside a late model car. The driver's side pillar was
big enough to completely obscure a motorcycle entering the roundabout.
The converging speeds and the angles were such that the bike was hidden
all the way.

It can also translate to "looked but did not expect, so did not process".
It's happened to me at an intersection where there was never any traffic.
Once day I came to the give way sign, slowed, looked (as in turned my
head) and then realised the brakes had gone on. It wasn't till I had
thought "why are the brakes on" that I saw the car. My subconscious had
put them on, the conscious mind was still sure there was nothing there
because it expected to see nothing.

I have seen the same thing in a car I was a passenger in. Similar
intersection - never any traffic there. I saw on the left a small bright
yellow panel van (with its headlights on even!) but my housemate who was
driving breezed through the intersection and was startled by the brakes
and horn of the aggrieved van. I *saw* him turn his head. But he didn't
expect to see, so he didn't. "Where did he come from?" and I had to say
"he's been there all the time."

There is a big difference between can't see, didn't look, and didn't see.
The didn't see is the hardest to deal with because really honestly they
did look and they didn't see. Not because bikes (or Commodores or yellow
vans) are hard to see, but because expectations are hard to change.

Zebee

On May 3, 9:26 am, Zebee Johnstone wrote:
In aus.bicycle on Thu, 3 May 2007 09:07:07 +1000

MikeyOz wrote:

rooman Wrote:
That's how I feel anyway...toss the book at him, but sadly its only
going to be a softcover!

I pretty much agree with all this and understand it is a Coronial
Enquiry, it is just what is being said that is disappointing me. I
want this guy to come out and accept full responsibility for his
actions, instead of cowering behind the fact he was riding in a group.

Dunno.. it is an interesting problem.

You are coming to a red light. you know it is common for riders in
the hell ride to run it so it's likely there's a bunch of bods going
to be coming up beside you maybe even hitting you. You yourself can't
see any reason to stop (as you can't see the ped).

Do you stop and risk someone crashing into you? Especially as people
are yelling loudly?

Risking an almost certain crash compared to a minor naughtiness which
is all it would have been if that bod (the one you didn't know was
there) wasn't crossing?

How many people have made the decision to run the red and not hit
someone?

I can see it as a difficult decision for someone who would ride in the
Hell Ride in the first place. Not easy for them at all.


They made the decision earlier, when a cyclist decides to participate
in that ride. What happens in that ride is no secret.

On May 3, 10:15 am, Zebee Johnstone wrote:
In aus.bicycle on Thu, 3 May 2007 09:22:32 +1000

rooman wrote:

MikeyOz Wrote:
chomp...

, "honestly I did not see him",
translates to:

didn't look

Not always.

can translate to "Looked, but there was a physical obstruction in
the way". I've seen a rather worrying film of a driver's view of a
roundabout from inside a late model car. The driver's side pillar was
big enough to completely obscure a motorcycle entering the roundabout.
The converging speeds and the angles were such that the bike was hidden
all the way.

A pillars (the part of a car you're describing as a vision blocker,
there's 3, A pillar, B pillar and C pillar, in most car designs) are
big. If you can't see the drivers face, they can't see you.

Plodder Wrote:

Picky bit: It's "arse" here in Oz.


as in "You are a pain in" ?

I can't be assed writing arse, so I write ass..... ooops sorry.


--
MikeyOz

Zebee Johnstone Wrote:
What would be an equivalent decision for non-HellRide cyclists to show
the dilemma? Not sure, what is a common cyclist thing that's
theoretically illegal but is often done and almost never causes a
problem?
Zebee

I understand what you are saying, but you missed my point.

My point was take responsibility for your actions, instead of hiding
behind the guise of "I was riding in a group, it was going to happen,
it just happened to be me, but because I was riding in a group, nothing
should happen to me"

Total bullsh*t

Put your hand up and say, it was my fault I decided to run the red
light and I Killed someone, not the group, not the person behind me or
in front of me. But me because "I" decided to run the red light.


--
MikeyOz

On 2007-05-03, MikeyOz (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
Zebee Johnstone Wrote:
What would be an equivalent decision for non-HellRide cyclists to show
the dilemma? Not sure, what is a common cyclist thing that's
theoretically illegal but is often done and almost never causes a
problem?
Zebee

I understand what you are saying, but you missed my point.

My point was take responsibility for your actions, instead of hiding
behind the guise of "I was riding in a group, it was going to happen,
it just happened to be me, but because I was riding in a group, nothing
should happen to me"

Total bullsh*t

Put your hand up and say, it was my fault I decided to run the red
light and I Killed someone, not the group, not the person behind me or
in front of me. But me because "I" decided to run the red light.

Particularly since there are (unsubstantiated) allegations he rode
around a part of the bunch that had already stopped. Of course, they
are going to say that to get themselves out of trouble, but who do you
believe?


My other point of view is that I really hope the coroner doesn't place
any weight on that particular argument of this cyclist, since we would
be absolutely screwed if such an argument was ever made at a coroner's
court for cars in a line of traffic -- you'd never stop a line of
traffic at a red light or for any obstacle on the road.

--
TimC
Error in operator: add beer

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 3 May 2007 16:35:17 +1000
MikeyOz wrote:

Zebee Johnstone Wrote:
What would be an equivalent decision for non-HellRide cyclists to show
the dilemma? Not sure, what is a common cyclist thing that's
theoretically illegal but is often done and almost never causes a
problem?
Zebee

I understand what you are saying, but you missed my point.

Yes, I was riffing on it really.


IN that there is certainly personal responsibility but why are people
"not responsible"? Do they think "I will be irresponsible"? Do they
think "I'll kill someone but I don't care"?

Nope... more likely to be normal people doing something that has
ceased to be "wrong" because there have been no consequences. TIll
now.

Zebee