Car/Bike accident - Who is at fault?

@roger,

When I approach an intersection, I definately take the lane, unless there's a bike lane. If I'm in the lane, they are going to see me. If I'm in the "gutter lane", they usually won't, and if they don't see me before making a right turn, it can definately get interesting. I'll agree with everyone that riding on the sidewalk is insanely dangerous, and the "car door lane" isn't any better.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have survive ten plus years of riding ten of thousands of miles in one of the most dangerous cities for cyclists in the country by using judgment when the road is safer then the sidewalk or the other way around.

I love the design of placing narrow mark bike paths right by park cars where you are just waiting for some fool to open a car door on you as you are going 20 MPH.

Sidewalk are not I repeat not always more dangerous the the street it depend on any number of factors.

For the speed factor alone I prefer the street and when I used to bike to work 20 miles before daybreak the street is where I was light up like a Christmas tree.

After work I did used the sidewalk at places where it would had been insane to be in the roadway.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

It is more dangerous to ride on the sidewalk than it is the road, in most city situations. Much more so.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next time you are in Miami I will ride on the sidewalk and watch/film you during rush hour riding on SW 88 street.

You will not need a return plane ticket.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

It is more dangerous to ride on the sidewalk than it is the road, in most city situations. Much more so.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next time you are in Miami I will ride on the sidewalk and watch/film you during rush hour riding on SW 88 street.

You will not need a return plane ticket.

Look dude, there are dangerous streets that shouldn't be ridden on everywhere. If the speed limit exceeds 35 mph, it's not a good idea to ride on that street.

That doesn't mean it suddenly becomes safe to ride on the sidewalk; not even a little. And it's even more dangerous on fast-paced roads with multiple intersections, as cars don't know to look out for people on the sidewalk and will plow right into you during turns; just like the original poster did.

The fact that you can point out one fast, dangerous road in your area doesn't make you right on this issue, so could you please stop simply repeating the same thing over and over?

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Yes unstable people will run over cyclists if you annoy them enough and far more to the point there are many more car drivers then cyclists.

Getting them mad as a group will result in less rights for cyclists not more as laws are change to punish such behavior as delaying thousands from getting to work on time or to their doctor ETC for no good reason other then to be assholes on some strange group power trip.

An example of how many unstable people there are in this country in the news today a drive through closed before a order was taken and as a result a car full of not all together people being annoy waited for the crew to come out of the restaurant and shot the manager in the leg.

Care to bet that any cyclist who annoy them would also had been shot?

0 Replies

@BillRM,

Conceded. We've got a river bridge, and circumstances are such that everyone seems to be driving with a bad case of tunnel vision to and from work. It's either compete with blind drivers, ride the gutter with storm drains in either direction, or take the sidewalk.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

The fact that you can point out one fast, dangerous road in your area doesn't make you right on this issue, so could you please stop simply repeating the same thing over and over?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry when you need to go somewhere and the only choice is the sidewalk or an unsafe street then it is the sidewalk.

If you only used your bike for enjoyment and not to do day to day things that you would also used a car for such as shopping or going to the doctor or to work then you do not ride anywhere near such roads.

I am assuming that you are a pleasant rider only and therefore never wish to ride your wonderful bike to a book store located on a busy street for example but for those of us that are trying to kill a number of birds at one time by replacing our cars with our bikes as often as possible we are often going into areas that are not ideal for bike riding.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

Sorry when you need to go somewhere and the only choice is the sidewalk or an unsafe street then it is the sidewalk.

You are sorry, but that's not the point here.

If you do this in Ontario, get off and walk your bike, because if you don't you are subject to being issued a citation.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

The fact that you can point out one fast, dangerous road in your area doesn't make you right on this issue, so could you please stop simply repeating the same thing over and over?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry when you need to go somewhere and the only choice is the sidewalk or an unsafe street then it is the sidewalk.

I agree, which is why I wrote this earlier in the thread:

Quote:

Do what I, and all other good cyclists do: don't ride on the sidewalk unless you absolutely have to. It is far more dangerous than riding in the street, unless the speed limit of the road is overly high; in which case, you should first look for another street.

I sometimes ride on the sidewalk, but only when I absolutely have to. When do you have to?

When the speed limit of the road is too high or the road itself is just too dangerous. It sounds like that SW 88 you are talking about is like that. The first thing a rider should do is find another road. I see people riding on the sidewalk all the time who are too lazy to go one block to the side, where there is many times a quieter road which can be ridden on. Maybe they just don't know that other road would work, or that it's even there; but they ought to try, I do and it's the right way for bikes to behave.

Sometimes though there's only one way to get where you are going: to take the main, busy road. That's when I ride on the sidewalk, but I most certainly don't ride through crosswalks, because cars don't expect you. They don't look out for you. They don't know you are there at all. It's mega-dangerous and I don't want anything to do with it. Even while you are on the sidewalk, people come out of driveways and parking lots REAL quick - they have to peek out to see if they can go - and if you are moving at anything above walking speed, you can be right in front of them before they know it.

On the other hand, you jump off your bike real quick, walk it through the crosswalk, and they will see you, because people are trained to see pedestrians at walking speed in crosswalks.

Look at it this way: lots of people are stupid and unobservant. But they somehow manage to get driver's licenses. I don't want anything to do with those people, so I try and stay in zones they expect me to be in, to minimize the risk to both me, them and other drivers.

Quote:

If you only used your bike for enjoyment and not to do day to day things that you would also used a car for such as shopping or going to the doctor or to work then you do not ride anywhere near such roads.

I'm sorry sir, but you could not be more wrong.

I haven't owned a car in years. I haven't had a regular driving car in nearly a decade. I've been riding a bicycle for my transportation needs (in addition to some bus and BART trips) for over 6 years now. I have commuted to work by bicycle for over 5 years and have a trailer myself. I am a dedicated cyclist and an avid proponent of the car-free - or at the very least, car-limited - lifestyle, and have a long history on this board of advocating these very things.

Quote:

I am assuming that you are a pleasant rider only and therefore never wish to ride your wonderful bike to a book store located on a busy street for example but for those of us that are trying to kill a number of birds at one time by replacing our cars with our bikes as often as possible we are often going into areas that are not ideal for bike riding.

With almost 20k miles under my belt in the last 6 years, I feel it safe to say that I've ridden everywhere you can imagine one would ride on a bicycle. My 'wonderful bike' is a 1989 Raleigh Technium that I bought for 200 dollars on Craigslist and have fixed up myself. It is light, fast and strong - but hardly a poseur's speed machine.

---

What I don't understand is why you would assume these things about me, based on what I've written here. I only advocate that riders follow the rules of the road, which say not to ride on the sidewalk - unless you have to.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

What I don't understand is why you would assume these things about me, based on what I've written here. I only advocate that riders follow the rules of the road, which say not to ride on the sidewalk - unless you have to.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First you stated that you equipment was awesome or something to that effect and around my area awesome begin at 5 to 6 thousands dollars.

My thousand dollars trek 510 is a Wall-Mart bike compare to the ones I see circling the local golf course on the weekends and strangely I never see such bikes being used for day to day transportation of any kind.

My trek is the most expense bike I seen being used to go shopping for example.

Second you are a supporter of hoodlums that go out of their way to interfere with others peaceful used of the roadways for stated reasons that seem on their face to be just an excused to annoy others and have a good time doing so. That I link with weekend riders who does not understand or care the harm they are doing to those of us that need support for bike ways ETC from the public as a whole.

Third if you do used your bike as a workhouse then you would be well aware that riding on the sidewalk in any city is commonly needed and no more dangerous then many others risks that riders face in getting around a city on two wheels.

Frankly my main problem in so doing is not in safety but in that it force a 60 percent of so cut in speed compare to street riding and you are far more likely to have a flat tire from running over a piece of glassware such as broken beer bottles.

Only people who does not go into the heart of heavy traffic areas would or could in my opinion express your view that sidewalk riding is somehow evil or not done as a matter of course when traffic force you to do so as it very commonly does.

For you information also my home town is lay out so every 7 streets or Avenues is a main road and go through the others tend to dead end by running into canals so trying to parallel one of the main roads or street is not normally helpful for any distance.

1 Reply

@Ottawa Sean,

Quote:

He was ok so we didn't get police involved, although I have a good dent from his pedal in my bumper. Just wondering what the cops would say if we did call them.

Maybe something like this...

Quote:

Everyone seems to have a racial story that fits the spirit of the times. Let me tell you a couple of mine.

One sunny Sunday afternoon many years ago, I was out driving along Ocean Avenue in Santa Monica, enjoying a view of the Pacific. Suddenly a bicycle rider made a left turn in front of me.

I slammed on the brakes but it was too late. His body bounced off the hood of the car, hit the windshield and ricocheted off into the street, where he landed in a heap.

Horrified, I stopped the car and got out to help him. He had only a few minor bruises but I was more shaken up than he was. Soon a police car stopped at the scene and a white policeman got out.

He had only one question for me: "Are those your skid marks on the street?"

"Yes."

He turned immediately to the bicyclist, who was also white, and asked: "What were you doing out there?"

"I have every right to be there," the cyclist replied.

"No, you don't," the cop said and cited the traffic law that covered the situation. He then turned to me and said, in a reassuring tone: "You guys settle this." Then he got back into his patrol car and drove away.

He never asked to see my driver's license nor even checked the license plate on my car.

Now, suppose that the racial situation was the other way around"that the cyclist was black and the driver white. How would this episode play in the media? What would "community leaders" and civil rights activists have said? What if someone had videotaped the accident?

I keep reading stuff by deep thinkers"black and white"who tell me that every encounter between a black male and the cops is sheer hostility or humiliation. But I keep thinking back over the years to my various encounters with the police and cannot come up with examples to match theirs. Has it all been just dumb luck on my part?

To read the rest click here.

0 Replies

So you thought you'd just drag racism into a discussion of the rules of the road in Ontario, which is a hell of long way from Santa Monica, huh?

Charming.

0 Replies

Yes, because the article has nothing at all to do with a bicycle accident and no one else on this thread has brought up road laws in California

1 Reply

You see, that's why i say it's so charming. You bring up racism, which has nothing to do with what the author of this thread intended to discuss. Now, you get you back up when i criticize you for that, and ignore completely the point that this thread is not about racism.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

First you stated that you equipment was awesome or something to that effect and around my area awesome begin at 5 to 6 thousands dollars.

No, it doesn't. That's what pretty-boy weekend warriors pay for their bikes. Not those of us who really use them for living.

You don't lock up a 4K bike at the gym when you go to play racquetball...

Quote:

Second you are a supporter of hoodlums that go out of their way to interfere with others peaceful used of the roadways for stated reasons that seem on their face to be just an excused to annoy others and have a good time doing so. That I link with weekend riders who does not understand or care the harm they are doing to those of us that need support for bike ways ETC from the public as a whole.

Guilty, I guess I'm just another Young Punk.

Quote:

Third if you do used your bike as a workhouse then you would be well aware that riding on the sidewalk in any city is commonly needed and no more dangerous then many others risks that riders face in getting around a city on two wheels.

Sometimes it is necessary, but it IS more dangerous. Period. Cars don't see you coming and neither do pedestrians, it's a great way to get into a wreck - just as the original poster pointed out.

Quote:

Only people who does not go into the heart of heavy traffic areas would or could in my opinion express your view that sidewalk riding is somehow evil or not done as a matter of course when traffic force you to do so as it very commonly does.

I didn't say that it was evil, just that it's dangerous and should be avoided, which is true.

And, if you want to talk about heavy traffic, come for a ride with me in downtown SF sometime. Super-heavy traffic, aggressive drivers and pedestrians, giant hills, unpredictable light timing. You have to know what you are doing and pick the right streets, or you'll be pasted. Still, that doesn't mean it is safer to ride on the sidewalks - it isn't.

Quote:

For you information also my home town is lay out so every 7 streets or Avenues is a main road and go through the others tend to dead end by running into canals so trying to parallel one of the main roads or street is not normally helpful for any distance.

That would be a problem. I'm sure, however, that an enterprising gentleman such as yourself could find a way to get where they needed to go without riding on the sidewalk all the time.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Mexica,

Do you suppose that is related to the accident in question having occured in Canada?

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Quote:

Now, you get you back up when i criticize you for that

What are you babbling about?

Quote:

And ignore completely the point that this thread is not about racism.

That is true; this thread isn't about racism. But that's not really much of a point. That’s like me making the point you were seeking my attention with your post. If you find stating the obvious to be fulfilling, how wonderful that must be for you--you seem very adept at it. However, I saw no reason to acknowledge your "point," and acted accordingly

0 Replies

@roger,

Sure.

0 Replies

You're the one who's babbling, Mexica. This thread is about an automobile-bicycle accident, and who might be at fault. You paste an article here which is about attitudes related to race, in which the question of automobiles and bicycles using the same roads is incidental to the point of the article. Yes, it's obvious that your screed has to do with race--so why did you post in a thread that is not about race?

Possibly because you are deluded and obsessive? That's my guess.

0 Replies

Yes Setanta, you were indeed babbling.

And consider this: you are the one who once posted (in my thread about Lincoln white supremacist tendencies) that you avoided my posts and threads because of my supposed "irrationality." And yet, here you are again, responding to a post of mine that was not even directed towards you or made in response to anything you wrote. And now you want to allege that I am dulled and obsessed? Just keep telling yourself that you don't respond to my posts and that you're not obsessed with gaining my attention, and all will be right in your little mind.

But all BS aside, if you hadn't come off as such a windbag, and if you had lead with your valid question (why post that article), I'd most likely answer you. But given your propensity to behave like twit, you'll have to come to terms with my refusal to answer you.

As for the accident: based on the information presented, I'm inclined to opine the cyclist would most likely be found to be at fault. But I would like to add, the notion that he would be liable simply because he was in violation of the law (riding on the sidewalk) seems a bit premature. After all, jaywalking is illegal, but that doesn’t mean that a jaywalker would be automatically found at fault in the case of accident between a jaywalking pedestrian and a driver of a car. At least, I don't think the jaywalker would be automatically found to be at fault.

1 Reply

@Mexica,

Deluded . . . i said that you are deluded, not dulled--although, in fact that may be true, too--but i have no certain knowledge of that. Be assured that you refusal to answer my valid criticism of your pointless addition to this thread is a matter of complete indifference to me.

1 Reply

Car/Bike accident - Who is at fault?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know