I just don’t understand drinking and driving

please make mine a harley, bill.

I promise to remove all the lights.

thanks...

You must have quite poor night vision.

I do have a bit of an advantage as I'm near-sighted in 1 eye and far-sighted in the other. My optometrist is always quite impressed by the distances I can see with my left eye.

But really, it's not that unusual to be able to see animals, people, bicycles, other objects on the road at night.

If everyone sees as poorly as you seem to, it would be nothing but human bowling pins on the roads every night.

Did you read what ehBeth wrote?

You just ignore what other people say, don't you? You're the only one who can be right?

There are a lot of lousy drivers out there, and their poor, or irresponsible, or inattentive driving, might be even worse at night because diminished visibility requires an even higher degree of attentiveness, and concentration, and care, and judgment, from a driver.

And some of those drivers are drunk.

Sure, cyclists should try to protect themselves. But that has nothing to do with the responsibility of those who drive cars.

Alcohol had an affect but the overriding cause of death with cyclists at night is not being lite up.

----------------------------------------------------

Bicycle Fatality Report 1998 - 2000

David Smith Seattle, Washington [email protected]

The first is a report on 6 fatals reported in The Seattle Times.

The second is a summary of fatals reported by the Washington Traffic Safety Commission.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Seattle Times plus WTSC:

10 adult fatals, 8 at night, all without front light. All (4) rear end fatals were at night and without rear reflector.6 child fatals, all failure to yield, 4 at stop sign, 2 along road

About 50% of motorists speeding, drunk, or inattentive.

With lights, and yielding about 90% of cycling fatals could have avoided collision and any injury. 30% of fatals had helmet.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


FOLLOWING UP ON CYCLING DEATHS REPORTED IN THE SEATTLE TIMES: SHINING A LIGHT ON CYCLING SAFETY

FOREWORD

This report shows a shockingly high correspondence of adult cycling deaths and their failure to take the most simple and obvious safety measures. All the adults (100%) reported killed in The Seattle Times were riding at night without proper lighting, which the newspaper failed to report, as well as other significant safety failures. Others have researched cycling accidents by examining police reports of bicycle/motor vehicle collisions for who was at fault and, apparently, assumed that a cyclist not at fault was innocent and incapable of avoiding the accident. The Washington State Vehicle Collision Report form and the form used by police do not have boxes to check for the cyclist errors that were involved with all the adult deaths – front light and, or rear reflector. This report shows that all the cyclists killed, without regard for fault, were not innocent and it appears that all of these cyclists could easily have avoided their accident and death. Also, cyclists can be killed without the involvement of a motor vehicle.

When a cyclist death is reported, the authorities who investigated the death are contacted without delay about motorist and cyclist behavior. This eliminates the limitations of inadequate forms (with regard to cycling) and can provide additional information directly from their memory of the accident investigation. This method of collecting data followed by an effort to analyze the interaction between the colliding vehicles (and their drivers) revealed, accident-by-accident, a disturbing pattern and provided the compelling results documented here.

Anyone concerned with cycling (cyclists, cycling advocates, government cycling programs, as well as motorists who would like to avoid accidents with cyclists) should carefully consider the contents of this report. We should reflect on the different methods and their results when accident statistics are used.

The Seattle Times reported the deaths of six cyclists from June 1998 to May 2000, a two-year period. (I may have missed child deaths, as my focus is adult transportation.) All the cyclists reported killed appeared to be violating the rules of the road (traffic procedures and required lighting). Five out of six cyclists, and all the adults (100%), were riding at night without lights, according to the authorities answering my questions. Bicyclists who were following the rules of the road had none (0 %) of the deaths reported in this period. Motor vehicles were involved in five out of six deaths and motorist culpability was potentially significant in four deaths. Four motorists were hit-and-run, and two of those were turned in later. I did not ask who was at fault. No motorists were reported injured in these collisions.

To avoid personal injury cyclists must avoid accidents more than the drivers and passengers of other vehicles. Injuries and deaths to drivers and passengers in motor vehicles have been reduced by improving the ability of the vehicle to protect its occupants. Seat belts, padded interiors, air bags, and impact absorbing body design have contributed to reduced deaths and injuries in motor vehicle collisions. Helmets represent a similar effort for cyclists but a helmet cannot deliver similar protection. The cyclist, due to their much greater exposure, and almost certainty of falling to the ground, must avoid accidents to provide for their safety. It is more important for a cyclist to follow the rules of the road that prevent accidents than it is for a motorist when avoiding personal injury is desired. Although cyclist deaths are very rare when compared to the number of injuries, I include only cyclist deaths here, as a sample of cycling accidents, as they are more likely to be consistently reported in The Seattle Times.

There are cyclists who enjoy good transportation by bicycle with very low accident rates while riding with reasonable comfort in almost all traffic conditions. They have no worse outcome than motorists as their accident records show they have no greater probability of injury. And there are cyclists, like those reported here, that are killed.

Is there a risk factor for involving a cyclist in an accident regardless of the primary cause of the accident? As my concern is in understanding how good transportation by bicycle may be realized given current traffic conditions, I may be much less concerned about the finding of fault than in understanding how the bicyclist may reliably avoid accidents.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

if car drivers can't see the cyclists (truly bizarre claim you're making here) how do they avoid ever avoid hitting them?

seriously, by your way of thinking I should have hit at least eight cyclists last night - not to mention the pedestrians, cats, dogs and raccoons that were on the road at various points last night (raccoons NEVER have reflectors)

do you read what you post?

Either you are misjudging the distant you can picked out cyclists or you are lying as no study I had ever seen state that drivers have that ability in regard to cyclists.

With you I will assume you are misjudging the distant.

Oh the last accident that I had was twenty years in the past and involved a very high on weed motorcyclist going 30 mph plus in a area that call for 15 mph.

why aren't all night cyclists dead?

you now have me picturing mr bill here as a wacky contestant in death race 2000...

Florida law on lighting up bikes at night and take note the distant the rear light should be able to be seen is only repeat only 600 feet roughly half the distant that Firefly is claiming to be able to see a bike by street lights alone.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lighting (see Section 316.2065, F.S.)

•A bicycle operated between sunset and sunrise must be equipped with a lamp on the front exhibiting a white light visible from 500 feet to the front and both a red reflector and a lamp on the rear exhibiting a red light visible from 600 feet to the rear.

•Additional lighting is permitted and recommended.

a suggestion...

if you're gonna do the repeat thing a lot as you seem to be attempting, try this...

I say. (repeat) I say.

it makes it easier to decipher the rest of the awkward tense twists that way.

thanks for trying...

kadaver in kansas

you do realize that is all irrelevant in a discussion of the ramifications of drunk driving

you drive the car after drinking - you will be charged if you are caught

you hit someone with your car - you will be charged if you are caught

you kill someone with your car - you will be charged if you are caught

you kill someone with your car after drinking - you will be charged if you are caught


that's how it works

all this other yammering of yours is just light entertainment for the crowd

And Florida law requires drivers of motor vehicles to be sober.

For one thing the death rate is a great great deal higher for cyclists at night then by day and cyclists can hear and see cars approaching at great distance and therefore get out of the way.

If cyclists could not hear and see cars at a far greater distant then drivers can see cyclists you would indeed have the one hell of a scene of death in short order.

that is pretty much all there is to it




(I'm just killing time waiting for hamburgboy to get home)

I read it and did you read that all of the adults kill was cycling at night without the proper lights.

In fact my statement on the head of the posting was that alcohol had an effect however the main cause seem to be not having the bikes lit up at night.

so now you're telling us cyclists go deaf at night?

the status of the cyclist has NOTHING to do with the charges against the driver - it may have an impact on the outcome of a civil suit but that is an entirely different matter

The cyclists all go deaf at night, and the drivers all have night blindness.