Accident's involving Bicycles....

[Vuflanovsky]

My opinion, and it's just that, is that cars and bicycles do not mix dependent on the environment. Pedestrian-only with bikes is different. If an urban core street that formerly had three traffic lanes is converted to two traffic lanes and a green painted bike lane, then it's basically a judgement against vehicles that likely hinges on politicians getting Federal monies versus what optimally works. If you live in a congested area that is already a traffic clusterf***, and public servants deem it appropriate to institute their 20 year plan for downtown with these bike lanes, it engenders frustration for drivers and oftentimes an entitlement level from bicyclists that uhhh...doesn't fit their status in relation to the laws of physics.

To some extent, it's like an urban cock fight that's only missing the betting...unless the betting is construed as personal entitlement, lawsuits, Federal bike lane/transportation monies, and an addition to the drop in quality of life. I think sometimes it really IS that simple as implemented in many urban areas. Accidents are inevitable versus something that can always be mitigated by people looking out for each other.

 

[Silk]

I can usually avoid going anywhere near cars riding around our town. I have to cross one almost main road on the way to work, sometimes I might have to wait for a car or two. If there is a car parked, I will often go onto the footpath to pass it. I ride motorcycles and bicycles - you learn pretty quickly that your biggest problem on the road is cars.

 

[Thermo1223]

Originally Posted By: javacontour
I've been placed in greater danger by other drivers than I have by bicyclists.

I'm a bicyclist, and I'd be the first to admit that there are jerks riding bikes. I see it every day.

However, I've been placed in danger far more often by someone in a car who is a jerk. People who run red lights in two ton+ vehicles are far more dangerous than those who do so on a 20# bicycle.

I would agree with the idea that we need to obey the law. There are far more motorists who are unable to follow the law and they are far more deadly than those on a bicycle.

Originally Posted By: grampi
The problem I have with bicyclists is many of them don't obey traffic laws...not stopping at stop signs, not signaling when they turn, etc...if these people get upended, that's their fault...


I disagree, running a red light in a bicycle causes at least 2-4 vehicles to go into panic mode depending on traffic. The bicycle unless actually hit will ride away harmless with little empathy would you honestly think he/she would take fault had they caused an accident. Also drivers swerve to avoid people not cars.

With auto's it is pretty open & shut on the reasons a crashed happened. Whether it was speeding/traffic/signal or just road rage/reckless driving. The car is just property that can be repaired a person is not. Which is again why I think cops should enforce pedestrian laws a lot more than they do. I avoid countless people a day who jaywalk or just ignore the "Do not cross" sign.

Quite frankly bicycles have little to no right to share the road with cars when they are never held to the same standards in practice.

Frankly I am fighting it all the way and I will not be held liable when my car was parked and not moving. PA is a 100% at fault state when you hit someone with the front of your car why should it be any different with a bicycle? Motorcycle? His own admission was he had his head down.

So he was not paying attention which is no different if I rear-end someone because I was looking at my phone.

 

[javacontour]

Who is to say the auto running the red light doesn't get away scott free?

The numbers are not in your favor. There are relatively few bicycles on the road, meaning they are statistically unable to have the sam impact, no pun intended, as motorists. I have multiple experiences daily with motorists running lights, or changing lares cutting me off, or pulling into traffic from a business, cutting off cars, orbdriving down the center left turn lane using it to merge into traffic, breaking the law and putting those turning left in peril. I might encounter a cyclist on the road once a week and he may or may not be breaking the law or being a hazard.

It's not that cyclists are better, it's that they are less than 1 percent of the traffic out there.

Originally Posted By: Thermo1223
Originally Posted By: javacontour
I've been placed in greater danger by other drivers than I have by bicyclists.

I'm a bicyclist, and I'd be the first to admit that there are jerks riding bikes. I see it every day.

However, I've been placed in danger far more often by someone in a car who is a jerk. People who run red lights in two ton+ vehicles are far more dangerous than those who do so on a 20# bicycle.

I would agree with the idea that we need to obey the law. There are far more motorists who are unable to follow the law and they are far more deadly than those on a bicycle.

Originally Posted By: grampi
The problem I have with bicyclists is many of them don't obey traffic laws...not stopping at stop signs, not signaling when they turn, etc...if these people get upended, that's their fault...


I disagree, running a red light in a bicycle causes at least 2-4 vehicles to go into panic mode depending on traffic. The bicycle unless actually hit will ride away harmless with little empathy would you honestly think he/she would take fault had they caused an accident. Also drivers swerve to avoid people not cars.

With auto's it is pretty open & shut on the reasons a crashed happened. Whether it was speeding/traffic/signal or just road rage/reckless driving. The car is just property that can be repaired a person is not. Which is again why I think cops should enforce pedestrian laws a lot more than they do. I avoid countless people a day who jaywalk or just ignore the "Do not cross" sign.

Quite frankly bicycles have little to no right to share the road with cars when they are never held to the same standards in practice.

Frankly I am fighting it all the way and I will not be held liable when my car was parked and not moving. PA is a 100% at fault state when you hit someone with the front of your car why should it be any different with a bicycle? Motorcycle? His own admission was he had his head down.

So he was not paying attention which is no different if I rear-end someone because I was looking at my phone.

 

[Vuflanovsky]

As I think this thread demonstrates, you have to define what environment you're dealing with in regards to bicycle vs. vehicle or bicycle vs. pedestrian accidents. I live in suburbia, drive often in congested urban traffic, and walk on trails that are for pedestrians and bikes. There's both a different perception and reality for each of these options where a single answer doesn't necessarily apply.

Near me, parks police patrol the trail for bicyclists going over 15 mph on the trail because there have been incidents of bicyclists taking blind curves at 25 mph or above and hitting pedestrians. Most of these have been the Lycra wearing hobbyist sort who you'd think would know better.

In the urban areas I drive, cyclists will hold their hands out to tell cars that they're turning left where no vehicle or bicycle is allowed to turn left. In that environment, cyclists are well above 1% of the vehicle traffic. They're warned and/or ticketed when it's convenient or there's a particular outcry of the moment.

In my mind, urban traffic is not appropriate for recreational bicycle use but you can be sure that it will be promoted whether it's actually safe or not. You'll experience considerably more "entitled" riders in urban environments than you will on rural roads with bike lanes as there's inherently less function and purpose to get entitled about...independent if a driver or bicyclist is more conscientious than another.

 

[aquariuscsm]

Originally Posted By: Vuflanovsky
Most of these have been the Lycra wearing hobbyist sort who you'd think would know better.


Those are the turds here that cause all the problems. The other day leaving work,I took the usual four lane 45mph min posted speed limit road. Here is this douche in the middle of the road,creating a traffic hazard backing traffic up for blocks (and this was around 5:30pm rush hour). Next to the road there's a WIDE dedicated bike lane that I guess he feels is beneath him to use. I was hoping no one would get any damage to their car if they happened to run over this mobile speed bump. The only bike riders I see who have common sense are the Hispanics I see biking to and from work every day. They're always very respectful and I always give them the right of way. They always smile,wave,and go on their way.

 

[Wheel]

I think you will have a hard fight - per PA law -

Title 75 section 3705. Opening and closing vehicle doors.

No person shall open any door on a motor vehicle unless and until it is reasonably safe to do so and can be done without interfering with the movement of other traffic, nor shall any person leave a door open on a side of a vehicle available to moving traffic for a period of time longer than necessary to load or unload passengers.

Originally Posted By: Thermo1223
Frankly I am fighting it all the way and I will not be held liable when my car was parked and not moving. PA is a 100% at fault state when you hit someone with the front of your car why should it be any different with a bicycle? Motorcycle? His own admission was he had his head down.

So he was not paying attention which is no different if I rear-end someone because I was looking at my phone.

 

[javacontour]

Just this morning...

Traffic light is red. Driver in white Kia doesn't want to stop so he/she goes around me in the left turn lane and crosses the intersection, running the red light.

Didn't see a single bicyclist on the road this AM in about 40-50 miles of driving so far.

But I did have the encounter with the above mentioned Kia driver.

Kia drivers are bad, don't follow the traffic laws, and should be banned from the roads!

 

[Thermo1223]

The point you still miss is the roads were never built nor intended for cyclist use, just grandfathered in.

That Kia driver will eventually get his, they always do. Just like the woman blindly txting in Norristown I was following this weekend. Swerving back & forth in the lane, karma or more importantly natural selection.

In response to the post about PA Law, I waited for the car to pass what else would you worry about on the road?

 

[javacontour]

Actually, roads have and are evolving. I think we had bicycles on the roads before cars...

In fact, Henry Ford's first car was called the quadracycle, built using a chain drive and four bicycle wheels.

Originally Posted By: Thermo1223
The point you still miss is the roads were never built nor intended for cyclist use, just grandfathered in.

That Kia driver will eventually get his, they always do. Just like the woman blindly txting in Norristown I was following this weekend. Swerving back & forth in the lane, karma or more importantly natural selection.

In response to the post about PA Law, I waited for the car to pass what else would you worry about on the road?

 

[Thermo1223]

Which is fancy way today of saying automobile by another name.

They like many things had there moment in the past but in today's world are a hobby simple as that. Not a means of transportation, especially as I said when they are not held to the same standard as everything else that uses the road.

 

[supton]

Pretty sure bicycles came first, and cyclists were one of the driving forces to get pavement. Can't find that reference at the moment though.

Looks like bicycles vs everyone else is an old issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_law_in_the_United_States
Quote:
Until the 1890s, the bicycle had been the plaything of wealthy young men. Now, for the first time, the bicycle came within reach of the middle class, and by the end of the decade, within the reach of the working class. The resulting tidal wave of popularity meant that roads which had hitherto been the province of horses and horse-drawn carriages were now increasingly crowded with cyclists; in some large cities, recreational cyclists numbered in the hundreds of thousands on the weekends. This enormous surge in new cyclists inevitably led to chaotic conditions and conflict between cyclists, horses and horse-drawn carriages, and pedestrians. This conflict was exacerbated by the fact that few traffic laws were in place to regulate traffic.

 

[supton]

Actually, from that same link:

Quote:
Cyclists' right to the road has also been enshrined in international law since 1968, with the accession of the Vienna Convention on Road Traffic. Under that treaty, bicycles have the legal status of vehicles, and cyclists enjoy the legal status of vehicle operators. There are over 150 contracting parties to the treaty, including the United States...


Now, bicyclists are supposed to follow most of the same rules, with some minor changes. Riding to the edge, for instance, when it is safe to do so.

Apparently only Idaho has different rules pertaining to signs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop
Quote:
The Idaho stop is the common name for a law that allows cyclists to treat a stop sign as a yield sign, and a red light as a stop sign. It first became law in Idaho in 1982, but has not been adopted elsewhere.

 

[grampi]

Originally Posted By: Thermo1223
That Kia driver will eventually get his, they always do.


Problem is, when this chump gets his, will he take out someone else who doesn't deserve it?

 

[Wheel]

OK - by the same token of no right because they break the law, 66 percent of drivers speed on a regular basis. (Perdue Study 2009). If all these drivers were off the road, commuting would be much easier.

I think you are confusing a privilege with a right (see Miller v. Reed, with regard to driving). Operating a motor vehicle is a privilege, while you have a right to travel, and a right to a hobby. One even has a right to ride a horse on public streets, as it is not a motorized vehicle.

Like I've been saying, we all need to get along or someone else will start making rules nobody likes.

Originally Posted By: Thermo1223
Which is fancy way today of saying automobile by another name.

They like many things had there moment in the past but in today's world are a hobby simple as that. Not a means of transportation, especially as I said when they are not held to the same standard as everything else that uses the road.

 

[Nate1979]

How can a bike have a right to the road when they are not allowed to be on the Interstates? Is it because the Interstate's have minimum speed limits which restrict the roads to cars/trucks and not include bikes/farm equipment, etc?

 

[supton]

Many highway onramps have a sign prohibiting bicycles among other things. Limited access highway I believe is the term for most highways where non-motorized vehicles are prohibited.

 

[Gasbuggy]

Originally Posted By: Wheel
So which way do you want it ? Cyclists can't ride where cars are parked, nor on the back roads ? To go past the parked cars, they get forced into traffic. If a cyclist wants to put in 50 to 100 miles where is that supposed to happen, circling a development ? Where I live, that's not available, it is all back roads marked 45-50. Do you think cyclists choose these routes because they like the hazard ?

I don't see a good solution to this, short of patience and politeness from both sides.

Originally Posted By: Gasbuggy
I have a bike that I ride, I have enough common sense to stick to low traffic areas and side roads, neighborhoods. I can't stand these riders who try to integrate with real traffic. Only a moron would fly past a line of parked cars, like this guy. Where I live we have endless idiots ridding on hilly, no shoulder, back roads with 45-50 mph speed limits. If you can't maintain the speed posted you are creating a hazard and have no business on the road. Then they throw the finger sometimes when you accelerate to get around them.



There is a huge difference between riding around low traffic areas where cars are parked here and there and riding in a crowded environment forcing a rider to go along the edge of lines of parked cars, which is what happened here I believe.

This shows the exact root of the problem, the rider consciously zips past parked cars and then when the obvious danger occurs, someone opens a door, the rider is oblivious and the car owner is still liable. If the area wasn't crowded then the rider should not be in the door swing zone. Entitled rider viewpoints aside, I would not have a problem with the danger if liability didn't default to the person in the car. Riders put drivers in danger for their own recreation. I take issue with that.

 

[Nate1979]

Originally Posted By: supton
Many highway onramps have a sign prohibiting bicycles among other things. Limited access highway I believe is the term for most highways where non-motorized vehicles are prohibited.


Yes, my point is that this means the govt can restrict bicycles off of roads if they see fit, i.e. danger to themselves or other drivers. Why not state highways where the speed is not much different than Interstates?

 

[Thermo1223]

Originally Posted By: Gasbuggy



There is a huge difference between riding around low traffic areas where cars are parked here and there and riding in a crowded environment forcing a rider to go along the edge of lines of parked cars, which is what happened here I believe.

This shows the exact root of the problem, the rider consciously zips past parked cars and then when the obvious danger occurs, someone opens a door, the rider is oblivious and the car owner is still liable. If the area wasn't crowded then the rider should not be in the door swing zone. Entitled rider viewpoints aside, I would not have a problem with the danger if liability didn't default to the person in the car. Riders put drivers in danger for their own recreation. I take issue with that.


Put more eloquently than I could have. Exactly what happened...

https://goo.gl/maps/QsCo6KoBcLQ2

That is my spot except that day is was a normal workday and the streets were lined with cars.

Also it is not a one way street anymore, it has two-way traffic.