Another Stealth Cyclist hit.



"David L. Johnson" <[email protected]> writes:

> Most bikes come with reflectors, **** though they are. He had to go
> out of his way to remove them, then had the idea of wearing black on a
> rainy night.


Of the four bikes I have purchased at bike shops in California,
only two of them came from the shop with reflectors. This is
despite the fact that California state law requires bike shops to
sell bikes (new or used, if I recall correctly, but perhaps only
new) with a full complement of reflectors.

It doesn't excuse the bicyclist's stupidity, of course, but he
may not be *entirely* to blame on his bike's lack of reflectors.
--
Ben Pfaff
http://benpfaff.org
 
On Nov 5, 6:05 pm, "David L. Johnson" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Sir Ridesalot wrote:
> > Many drivers do not look for cyclists on the roads around here.
> > Because they are not looking for them these drivers simply do not see
> > a dark clothing wearing cyclist on a bicycle that is not lit by active
> > lighting.

>
> Of course they don't, but let's be clear, here. This is not the
> drivers' fault. Most of you are drivers. Don't try to tell me that you
> would look for a person on a bike, with no lights or reflectors, wearing
> black. You might say "What the hell is that?" as you run into it, but
> we cannot assume that drivers are clairvoyant, or have super x-ray
> vision. As sad as any traffic death is, the driver is not at fault
> under these conditions.
>
> I recall last Fall driving along, in the rain, and just barely avoiding
> an idiot riding, without lights, without reflectors, wearing black, at
> night, in the rain. Now, natural selection should weed this out of the
> gene pool, but until that happens it's gonna **** me off. Had I hit the
> guy, I would have felt like **** --- even though there was no way I
> could have prevented it. As it was, that guy is alive through dumb luck.
>
> Most bikes come with reflectors, **** though they are. He had to go out
> of his way to remove them, then had the idea of wearing black on a rainy
> night.
>
>
>
> > I urge all my friends to have a permanently mounted front and rear
> > blinky as a mininum for riding *IN CASE THEY GET CAUGHT BY DARKNESS*
> > especially during the shorter day-light days we are moving into.

>
> Absolutely.
>
> --
>
> David L. Johnson
>



Hi there.

I most definitely did not mean to imply that I blame the drivers in
either of these two accidents. What I was trying to say is that many
drivers are not looking for bicyclists when the driver looks to see if
there is another vehicle. If the bicyclist is wearing dark clothing
and does not have an active light of some sort that bicyclist can be
invisible to the driver.

Another thing that I notice about many "Stealth Bicyclists" riding
habits is that they ride on the sidewalks (still with the dark
clothing and no lights or even passive reflectors) which makes them
even more invisible when they suddenly decide to a) continue into an
intersection without stopping or b) exit the sidewalk onto the road
without even checking for any approaching vehicle.

I am not surprised that these stealth bicyclist get hit. I am
astounded that there are not more of them struck.

I have decided to approach the local paper to see if they are
interested in writing a short article on safe bicycling at night.

Peter
 
On Nov 5, 6:05 pm, "David L. Johnson" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Sir Ridesalot wrote:
> > Many drivers do not look for cyclists on the roads around here.
> > Because they are not looking for them these drivers simply do not see
> > a dark clothing wearing cyclist on a bicycle that is not lit by active
> > lighting.

>
> Of course they don't, but let's be clear, here. This is not the
> drivers' fault. Most of you are drivers. Don't try to tell me that you
> would look for a person on a bike, with no lights or reflectors, wearing
> black. You might say "What the hell is that?" as you run into it, but
> we cannot assume that drivers are clairvoyant, or have super x-ray
> vision. As sad as any traffic death is, the driver is not at fault
> under these conditions.
>
> I recall last Fall driving along, in the rain, and just barely avoiding
> an idiot riding, without lights, without reflectors, wearing black, at
> night, in the rain. Now, natural selection should weed this out of the
> gene pool, but until that happens it's gonna **** me off. Had I hit the
> guy, I would have felt like **** --- even though there was no way I
> could have prevented it. As it was, that guy is alive through dumb luck.
>
> Most bikes come with reflectors, **** though they are. He had to go out
> of his way to remove them, then had the idea of wearing black on a rainy
> night.
>
>
>
> > I urge all my friends to have a permanently mounted front and rear
> > blinky as a mininum for riding *IN CASE THEY GET CAUGHT BY DARKNESS*
> > especially during the shorter day-light days we are moving into.

>
> Absolutely.
>
> --
>
> David L. Johnson
>



Hi there.

I most definitely did not mean to imply that I blame the drivers in
either of these two accidents. What I was trying to say is that many
drivers are not looking for bicyclists when the driver looks to see if
there is another vehicle. If the bicyclist is wearing dark clothing
and does not have an active light of some sort that bicyclist can be
invisible to the driver.

Another thing that I notice about many "Stealth Bicyclists" riding
habits is that they ride on the sidewalks (still with the dark
clothing and no lights or even passive reflectors) which makes them
even more invisible when they suddenly decide to a) continue into an
intersection without stopping or b) exit the sidewalk onto the road
without even checking for any approaching vehicle.

I am not surprised that these stealth bicyclist get hit. I am
astounded that there are not more of them struck.

I have decided to approach the local paper to see if they are
interested in writing a short article on safe bicycling at night.

Peter
 
On Nov 5, 9:29 pm, Sir Ridesalot <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 6:05 pm, "David L. Johnson" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Sir Ridesalot wrote:
> > > Many drivers do not look for cyclists on the roads around here.
> > > Because they are not looking for them these drivers simply do not see
> > > a dark clothing wearing cyclist on a bicycle that is not lit by active
> > > lighting.

>
> > Of course they don't, but let's be clear, here. This is not the
> > drivers' fault. Most of you are drivers. Don't try to tell me that you
> > would look for a person on a bike, with no lights or reflectors, wearing
> > black. You might say "What the hell is that?" as you run into it, but
> > we cannot assume that drivers are clairvoyant, or have super x-ray
> > vision. As sad as any traffic death is, the driver is not at fault
> > under these conditions.

>
> > I recall last Fall driving along, in the rain, and just barely avoiding
> > an idiot riding, without lights, without reflectors, wearing black, at
> > night, in the rain. Now, natural selection should weed this out of the
> > gene pool, but until that happens it's gonna **** me off. Had I hit the
> > guy, I would have felt like **** --- even though there was no way I
> > could have prevented it. As it was, that guy is alive through dumb luck.

>
> > Most bikes come with reflectors, **** though they are. He had to go out
> > of his way to remove them, then had the idea of wearing black on a rainy
> > night.

>
> > > I urge all my friends to have a permanently mounted front and rear
> > > blinky as a mininum for riding *IN CASE THEY GET CAUGHT BY DARKNESS*
> > > especially during the shorter day-light days we are moving into.

>
> > Absolutely.

>
> > --

>
> > David L. Johnson

>
> Hi there.
>
> I most definitely did not mean to imply that I blame the drivers in
> either of these two accidents. What I was trying to say is that many
> drivers are not looking for bicyclists when the driver looks to see if
> there is another vehicle. If the bicyclist is wearing dark clothing
> and does not have an active light of some sort that bicyclist can be
> invisible to the driver.
>
> Another thing that I notice about many "Stealth Bicyclists" riding
> habits is that they ride on the sidewalks (still with the dark
> clothing and no lights or even passive reflectors) which makes them
> even more invisible when they suddenly decide to a) continue into an
> intersection without stopping or b) exit the sidewalk onto the road
> without even checking for any approaching vehicle.
>
> I am not surprised that these stealth bicyclist get hit. I am
> astounded that there are not more of them struck.
>
> I have decided to approach the local paper to see if they are
> interested in writing a short article on safe bicycling at night.
>
> Peter


With all due respect here, Peter, lets say you did talk the local
paper into writing this article.

WHO would read it ????

You, me, a couple of others, maybe but definitely NOT these people you
are bent on 'helping'.

Since you are "astounded that there are not more of them struck", why
could you not just accept this fact of life and move on? It would
make life less stressful for you. :)

Kind regards.

Lewis.

*****
 
On Nov 5, 9:29 pm, Sir Ridesalot <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 6:05 pm, "David L. Johnson" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Sir Ridesalot wrote:
> > > Many drivers do not look for cyclists on the roads around here.
> > > Because they are not looking for them these drivers simply do not see
> > > a dark clothing wearing cyclist on a bicycle that is not lit by active
> > > lighting.

>
> > Of course they don't, but let's be clear, here. This is not the
> > drivers' fault. Most of you are drivers. Don't try to tell me that you
> > would look for a person on a bike, with no lights or reflectors, wearing
> > black. You might say "What the hell is that?" as you run into it, but
> > we cannot assume that drivers are clairvoyant, or have super x-ray
> > vision. As sad as any traffic death is, the driver is not at fault
> > under these conditions.

>
> > I recall last Fall driving along, in the rain, and just barely avoiding
> > an idiot riding, without lights, without reflectors, wearing black, at
> > night, in the rain. Now, natural selection should weed this out of the
> > gene pool, but until that happens it's gonna **** me off. Had I hit the
> > guy, I would have felt like **** --- even though there was no way I
> > could have prevented it. As it was, that guy is alive through dumb luck.

>
> > Most bikes come with reflectors, **** though they are. He had to go out
> > of his way to remove them, then had the idea of wearing black on a rainy
> > night.

>
> > > I urge all my friends to have a permanently mounted front and rear
> > > blinky as a mininum for riding *IN CASE THEY GET CAUGHT BY DARKNESS*
> > > especially during the shorter day-light days we are moving into.

>
> > Absolutely.

>
> > --

>
> > David L. Johnson

>
> Hi there.
>
> I most definitely did not mean to imply that I blame the drivers in
> either of these two accidents. What I was trying to say is that many
> drivers are not looking for bicyclists when the driver looks to see if
> there is another vehicle. If the bicyclist is wearing dark clothing
> and does not have an active light of some sort that bicyclist can be
> invisible to the driver.
>
> Another thing that I notice about many "Stealth Bicyclists" riding
> habits is that they ride on the sidewalks (still with the dark
> clothing and no lights or even passive reflectors) which makes them
> even more invisible when they suddenly decide to a) continue into an
> intersection without stopping or b) exit the sidewalk onto the road
> without even checking for any approaching vehicle.
>
> I am not surprised that these stealth bicyclist get hit. I am
> astounded that there are not more of them struck.
>
> I have decided to approach the local paper to see if they are
> interested in writing a short article on safe bicycling at night.
>
> Peter


With all due respect here, Peter, lets say you did talk the local
paper into writing this article.

WHO would read it ????

You, me, a couple of others, maybe but definitely NOT these people you
are bent on 'helping'.

Since you are "astounded that there are not more of them struck", why
could you not just accept this fact of life and move on? It would
make life less stressful for you. :)

Kind regards.

Lewis.

*****
 
On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 18:05:10 -0500, "David L. Johnson"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Sir Ridesalot wrote:
>
>> Many drivers do not look for cyclists on the roads around here.
>> Because they are not looking for them these drivers simply do not see
>> a dark clothing wearing cyclist on a bicycle that is not lit by active
>> lighting.

>
>Of course they don't, but let's be clear, here. This is not the
>drivers' fault. Most of you are drivers. Don't try to tell me that you
>would look for a person on a bike, with no lights or reflectors, wearing
>black. You might say "What the hell is that?" as you run into it, but
>we cannot assume that drivers are clairvoyant, or have super x-ray
>vision. As sad as any traffic death is, the driver is not at fault
>under these conditions.
>
>I recall last Fall driving along, in the rain, and just barely avoiding
>an idiot riding, without lights, without reflectors, wearing black, at
>night, in the rain. Now, natural selection should weed this out of the
>gene pool, but until that happens it's gonna **** me off. Had I hit the
>guy, I would have felt like **** --- even though there was no way I
>could have prevented it. As it was, that guy is alive through dumb luck.
>
>Most bikes come with reflectors, **** though they are. He had to go out
>of his way to remove them, then had the idea of wearing black on a rainy
>night.
>>


I removed the reflectors to mount real lights in their place, but
should put some reflectors on anyway.
 
On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 18:05:10 -0500, "David L. Johnson"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Sir Ridesalot wrote:
>
>> Many drivers do not look for cyclists on the roads around here.
>> Because they are not looking for them these drivers simply do not see
>> a dark clothing wearing cyclist on a bicycle that is not lit by active
>> lighting.

>
>Of course they don't, but let's be clear, here. This is not the
>drivers' fault. Most of you are drivers. Don't try to tell me that you
>would look for a person on a bike, with no lights or reflectors, wearing
>black. You might say "What the hell is that?" as you run into it, but
>we cannot assume that drivers are clairvoyant, or have super x-ray
>vision. As sad as any traffic death is, the driver is not at fault
>under these conditions.
>
>I recall last Fall driving along, in the rain, and just barely avoiding
>an idiot riding, without lights, without reflectors, wearing black, at
>night, in the rain. Now, natural selection should weed this out of the
>gene pool, but until that happens it's gonna **** me off. Had I hit the
>guy, I would have felt like **** --- even though there was no way I
>could have prevented it. As it was, that guy is alive through dumb luck.
>
>Most bikes come with reflectors, **** though they are. He had to go out
>of his way to remove them, then had the idea of wearing black on a rainy
>night.
>>


I removed the reflectors to mount real lights in their place, but
should put some reflectors on anyway.
 

>
> It doesn't excuse the bicyclist's stupidity, of course, but he
> may not be *entirely* to blame on his bike's lack of reflectors.
> --
> Ben Pfaff


No! He is absolutely to blame for his bike's lack of reflectors! He
shouldn't have thrown a leg over the frame without being properly prepared
to ride where and when he chose to ride.

Pat in TX
 

>
> It doesn't excuse the bicyclist's stupidity, of course, but he
> may not be *entirely* to blame on his bike's lack of reflectors.
> --
> Ben Pfaff


No! He is absolutely to blame for his bike's lack of reflectors! He
shouldn't have thrown a leg over the frame without being properly prepared
to ride where and when he chose to ride.

Pat in TX
 
"Sir Ridesalot" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hi t here.
>
> I read recently in the local paper that yet another cyclist was struck
> whilst riding in the dark wearing dark-coloured clothing and without
> any lights or reflectors mounted on the bicycle.
>
> I really feel sorry for the bicyclist's family and especially the
> truck driver who most likely never even saw the bicyclist.
>
> I wonder if writing a letter to the paper imploring people to make
> more effort to be visible to other road users at night would help any?
>
> Another tragic accident that may well have been prevented with even
> very basic ligting on the bicycle.
>
> Peter
>


I wonder if there is a study done on bicycle vs. car accidents in which
types of bikes are mentioned. I have a sneaking suspicion that there maybe
a lot of hipsters on brake-less, light-less, reflector-less death traps
bonking into or being bonked by cars. Spoke cards don't count as
reflectors. There was one dumbass I saw who came rocketing down Brooklyn
Bridge one night and without slowing down plowed right into the side of a
SUV once he exited the curb. SUV, as much as I don't like them, had the
green light and had every right to go. There was the dude, his track bike
mangled, his face leaving a huge dent in the driver side door of the SUV,
Keds, spoke cards flying everywhere, messenger bag, you get the picture.
 
"Sir Ridesalot" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hi t here.
>
> I read recently in the local paper that yet another cyclist was struck
> whilst riding in the dark wearing dark-coloured clothing and without
> any lights or reflectors mounted on the bicycle.
>
> I really feel sorry for the bicyclist's family and especially the
> truck driver who most likely never even saw the bicyclist.
>
> I wonder if writing a letter to the paper imploring people to make
> more effort to be visible to other road users at night would help any?
>
> Another tragic accident that may well have been prevented with even
> very basic ligting on the bicycle.
>
> Peter
>


I wonder if there is a study done on bicycle vs. car accidents in which
types of bikes are mentioned. I have a sneaking suspicion that there maybe
a lot of hipsters on brake-less, light-less, reflector-less death traps
bonking into or being bonked by cars. Spoke cards don't count as
reflectors. There was one dumbass I saw who came rocketing down Brooklyn
Bridge one night and without slowing down plowed right into the side of a
SUV once he exited the curb. SUV, as much as I don't like them, had the
green light and had every right to go. There was the dude, his track bike
mangled, his face leaving a huge dent in the driver side door of the SUV,
Keds, spoke cards flying everywhere, messenger bag, you get the picture.
 
On Nov 6, 2:26 pm, "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition ®"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I wonder if there is a study done on bicycle vs. car accidents in which
> types of bikes are mentioned. I have a sneaking suspicion that there maybe
> a lot of hipsters on brake-less, light-less, reflector-less death traps
> bonking into or being bonked by cars.


I really doubt there has been, or ever will be, such a study.

Bike accident studies are few and far between, from what I can tell.
Some might think that's very regrettable, but I think it's due to good
judgment about use of resources. There are about 700,000 heart
disease fatalities per year in the entire USA. There are about 40,000
motorist fatalities. But there are only about 800 cycling
fatalities.

Briefly, bicycling is too safe to worry about very much, and nobody is
likely to worry about details like "what style of bike was he
riding?" Hell, most people don't understand the differences between
types of bikes anyway.

("What??? You paid $500 for a _bicycle_????")

- Frank Krygowski
 
On Nov 6, 2:26 pm, "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition ®"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I wonder if there is a study done on bicycle vs. car accidents in which
> types of bikes are mentioned. I have a sneaking suspicion that there maybe
> a lot of hipsters on brake-less, light-less, reflector-less death traps
> bonking into or being bonked by cars.


I really doubt there has been, or ever will be, such a study.

Bike accident studies are few and far between, from what I can tell.
Some might think that's very regrettable, but I think it's due to good
judgment about use of resources. There are about 700,000 heart
disease fatalities per year in the entire USA. There are about 40,000
motorist fatalities. But there are only about 800 cycling
fatalities.

Briefly, bicycling is too safe to worry about very much, and nobody is
likely to worry about details like "what style of bike was he
riding?" Hell, most people don't understand the differences between
types of bikes anyway.

("What??? You paid $500 for a _bicycle_????")

- Frank Krygowski
 
On Nov 5, 11:33 am, Sir Ridesalot <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi t here.
>
> I read recently in the local paper that yet another cyclist was struck
> whilst riding in the dark wearing dark-coloured clothing and without
> any lights or reflectors mounted on the bicycle.
>
> I really feel sorry for the bicyclist's family and especially the
> truck driver who most likely never even saw the bicyclist.
>
> I wonder if writing a letter to the paper imploring people to make
> more effort to be visible to other road users at night would help any?
>
> Another tragic accident that may well have been prevented with even
> very basic ligting on the bicycle.
>
> Peter



Hi there.

I just saw an update in the paper regarding this collision.

The cyclist had run a red light when he was struck. Dark clothing, no
reflectors, no lights and running a red light on a very busy street
does not make for safe bicycling H was lucky he was not killed. He
has since been charged with failing to stop at a red light.

Peter
 
Sir Ridesalot wrote:
>
> I just saw an update in the paper regarding this collision.
>
> The cyclist had run a red light when he was struck. Dark clothing, no
> reflectors, no lights and running a red light on a very busy street
> does not make for safe bicycling H was lucky he was not killed. He
> has since been charged with failing to stop at a red light.


So if it had been a black cow, a black dog, an abandoned black
motorcycle, or a big dark fallen rock in the road, would the fault
have lain with those objects?

How long are we going to continue to excuse drivers for operating
dangerous machinery outside the limits of their ability to control
themselves? I support a principle like the Dutch use, which is that
the motorist is presumed to be at fault in a collision with any non-
motorist. That's probably the only way we can persuade many people to
drive with due caution.

They are the ones who chose to drive. The burden should be upon them
to mitigate the risks they impose on others, not the other way
around.

Chalo
 
In article
<fd871636-f821-403a-a1be-a2283c8de445@r60g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
Chalo <[email protected]> wrote:

> Sir Ridesalot wrote:
> >
> > I just saw an update in the paper regarding this collision.
> >
> > The cyclist had run a red light when he was struck. Dark clothing, no
> > reflectors, no lights and running a red light on a very busy street
> > does not make for safe bicycling H was lucky he was not killed. He
> > has since been charged with failing to stop at a red light.

>
> So if it had been a black cow, a black dog, an abandoned black
> motorcycle, or a big dark fallen rock in the road, would the fault
> have lain with those objects?


Do black cows run red lights? Do rocks?!?

The hazard of entering an intersection against right-of-way is that in
many cases you won't be visible to cross traffic until you are close to
or already in the intersection. A cyclist can enter an intersection at
20 km/h, no problem, or even far faster. The warning for the crossing
driver with the right of way can easily be less than that required to
react and stop from legal speeds.

> How long are we going to continue to excuse drivers for operating
> dangerous machinery outside the limits of their ability to control
> themselves? I support a principle like the Dutch use, which is that
> the motorist is presumed to be at fault in a collision with any non-
> motorist. That's probably the only way we can persuade many people to
> drive with due caution.
>
> They are the ones who chose to drive. The burden should be upon them
> to mitigate the risks they impose on others, not the other way
> around.


Mebbe. But running a red light in any state of lighting is pretty much
asking for it. It doesn't just violate the law, it violates the laws of
physics to ask crossing traffic to be able to stop in that circumstance.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing
 
But let's face it, avoiding black can be quite tricky. I don't honestly think I've ever seen any winter tights in any other color for instance. Black also works well if you want a limited set of gear to use for several different disciplines.

But avoiding reflectors and lights, well that's just plain silly.
 
In article
<rcousine-A878D0.02012230112007@[74.223.185.199.nw.nuvox.net]>,
Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:

> Do black cows run red lights?


More often than not, although it's more of a saunter.

> Do rocks?!?


significantly less often.

--
The part of betatron @ earthlink . net was played by a garden gnome
 
Chalo wrote:

> How long are we going to continue to excuse drivers for operating
> dangerous machinery outside the limits of their ability to control
> themselves?


Amen.

--

David L. Johnson

Let's not escape into mathematics. Let's stay with reality.
-- Michael Crichton
 
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>
> Chalo wrote:
> >
> > I support a principle like the Dutch use, which is that
> > the motorist is presumed to be at fault in a collision with any non-
> > motorist. That's probably the only way we can persuade many people to
> > drive with due caution.

>
> > They are the ones who chose to drive. The burden should be upon them
> > to mitigate the risks they impose on others, not the other way
> > around.

>
> Mebbe. But running a red light in any state of lighting is pretty much
> asking for it. It doesn't just violate the law, it violates the laws of
> physics to ask crossing traffic to be able to stop in that circumstance.


Not everything and everybody can be expected to know and follow the
rules of the road. Animals, children, retarded/crazy people, and
unmanned runaway objects are all likely to violate rights-of-way
without recourse. All of these things will exist regardless of
whether people drive cars or ride bikes or not.

It's no good to pretend that this is a simple matter of physics. The
imposition of traffic hazards is almost exclusively the unilateral
voluntary action of motorists, whose convenience of travel is
arbitrarily elevated to a higher importance than the safety of non-
motorists (to say nothing of the quality of life in urban areas).
There's no law of physics that says anyone who wants to travel by car
must be allowed to do so.

Chalo
 

Similar threads

S
Replies
0
Views
368
Road Cycling
Sir Ridesalot
S