Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

[Rich Clark]

"Don Klipstein" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Philadelphia has bike lanes on many of their streets, and the bike lanes
> are in the streets.

Yes, and a huge number of them are in the door zone. They are worse than
useless; they make cycling more dangerous because drivers feel free to
squeeze you from the left while parked drivers feel free to emerge from
their cars without looking because they don't think there will be any cars
near them.

> I feel safer with these than without them.

Just goes to show how you can feel safe without being safe.

> However, Philadelphia has
> two big issues to fix, which don't appear too related to bike lanes since
> the offenses also occur on streets that don't have them:

You go on to list problems common to urban cycling in any city. Philadelphia
is no worse than most of the cities I've ridden in, and better than many.
The solution is always the same: take the lane, hold your line, obey the
rules, be predictable, ignore assholes. Assert your rights and be visible in
doing so, and don't catch the drivers by surprise. They don't improvise
well.

RichC

 

[Don Klipstein]

In article <[email protected]>, Rich Clark wrote:
>
>"Don Klipstein" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>> Philadelphia has bike lanes on many of their streets, and the bike lanes
>> are in the streets.
>
>Yes, and a huge number of them are in the door zone. They are worse than
>useless; they make cycling more dangerous because drivers feel free to
>squeeze you from the left while parked drivers feel free to emerge from
>their cars without looking because they don't think there will be any cars
>near them.

In my experience with Philly's bike lanes, doors do not swing over the
whole bike lane. The bike lane is wide enough to squeeze by people
exiting cars.

Of course, a good loud horn helps!

The one main hazard I see from bike lanes is cars suddenly shifting onto
the lane to make a right turn. As a result, I usually do not outrun
moving cars by a speed margin greater than that which I feel I can
rear-end one without too much injury and bike damage. My only crash in a
bike lane was rear-ending someone who suddenly swerved rightward
ahead of making a right turn without signaling.

Meanwhile, I have been doored a few times in the past, never in a bike
lane. I have been rear-ended once, not in a bike lane. I have had
passing cars hit me with their side view mirrors 3 times, all of them on a
street without a bike lane. I have been clipped by a sudden-right-turner
on a street without a bike lane, although bike lanes don't solve that
particular hazard. I would say I have good reason to feel safer with bike
lanes than without them.

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])

 

[Vee]

nash wrote:
> >>?>>> It does seem that the prosecuting attorney made a very poor choice in
> > her choice of prosecution. Under U.S. law, the driver cannot be tried a
> > second time for the same crime.
>
> Seems to me like they made a very poor choice of careers!

Proving a serious crime (negligent or reckless homicide) is really
tough in these cases. There was recently a controversial case here in
Madison that ended in a hung jury:
http://www.madison.com/archives/read.php?ref=/tct/2006/08/02/0608020434.php
The driver's eyes were probably off the road for at least 12 seconds.
The jury deadlocked, and the prosecutor decided not to retry the case.

These are difficult cases because everyone talks on the phone while
driving, everyone catches himself driving badly on occasion, and
everyone has "not seen" a cyclist at one time or another. The "it was
just an accident" defense resounds with drivers/jurors. We cyclists
are always outraged, but the community at large seems awfully
ambivalent about these fatalities... I think that's why this prosecutor
didn't charge higher.

-Vee

 

[Vee]

Vee wrote:
> nash wrote:
> > >>?>>> It does seem that the prosecuting attorney made a very poor choice in
> > > her choice of prosecution. Under U.S. law, the driver cannot be tried a
> > > second time for the same crime.
> >
> > Seems to me like they made a very poor choice of careers!
>
> Proving a serious crime (negligent or reckless homicide) is really
> tough in these cases. There was recently a controversial case here in
> Madison that ended in a hung jury:
> http://www.madison.com/archives/read.php?ref=/tct/2006/08/02/0608020434.php
> The driver's eyes were probably off the road for at least 12 seconds.
> The jury deadlocked, and the prosecutor decided not to retry the case.
>
> These are difficult cases because everyone talks on the phone while
> driving, everyone catches himself driving badly on occasion, and
> everyone has "not seen" a cyclist at one time or another. The "it was
> just an accident" defense resounds with drivers/jurors. We cyclists
> are always outraged, but the community at large seems awfully
> ambivalent about these fatalities... I think that's why this prosecutor
> didn't charge higher.
>
> -Vee

By the way, the Madison case I linked to above is interesting in a
couple other ways. First, the prosecutor in the case, John Norsetter,
is highly regarded and very competent. Plus, he rides his bike to work
every day. Second, the jury was split ten to two, with ten in favor of
acquittal. If he can't win one of these cases, I don't know who can.

-Vee

 

[AustinMN]

[email protected] wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 20:17:33 GMT, "nash" <[email protected]>
> wrote:

<snip>

> >Plus I am in the highest brain sex category by a British Study that you can
> >be. I am meticulous about spelling and grammar and am smarter than most
> >male brains and most female brains combined. I work 4X better than you Carl
> >Fogel
> >Too bad, you are plonked. DOA
>
> Dear Nash,
>
> Judging by your increasingly bizarre posts elsewhere, I suppose that
> your "brain sex study" was on some television show ten years ago.
>
> Possibly "The Simpsons"?

It also sounds like he's been taking humility lessons from the great
E.D.

Austin

 

[nash]

AustinMN wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 20:17:33 GMT, "nash" <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > >Plus I am in the highest brain sex category by a British Study that you can
> > >be. I am meticulous about spelling and grammar and am smarter than most
> > >male brains and most female brains combined. I work 4X better than you Carl
> > >Fogel
> > >Too bad, you are plonked. DOA
> >

> > Dear Nash,
> >
> > Judging by your increasingly bizarre posts elsewhere, I suppose that
> > your "brain sex study" was on some television show ten years ago.
> >
> > Possibly "The Simpsons"?
>


I already sent this in but please tell everyone how you do. If you can
be honest that is.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/sex/add_user.shtml

If I am bizarre it is from spending too much time on you self important
people.

 

[[email protected]]

On 4 Dec 2006 13:22:37 -0800, "nash" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>AustinMN wrote:
>> [email protected] wrote:
>> > On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 20:17:33 GMT, "nash" <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> > >Plus I am in the highest brain sex category by a British Study that you can
>> > >be. I am meticulous about spelling and grammar and am smarter than most
>> > >male brains and most female brains combined. I work 4X better than you Carl
>> > >Fogel
>> > >Too bad, you are plonked. DOA
>> >
>
>> > Dear Nash,
>> >
>> > Judging by your increasingly bizarre posts elsewhere, I suppose that
>> > your "brain sex study" was on some television show ten years ago.
>> >
>> > Possibly "The Simpsons"?
>>
>
>
>I already sent this in but please tell everyone how you do. If you can
>be honest that is.
>
>http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/sex/add_user.shtml
>
>If I am bizarre it is from spending too much time on you self important
>people.

Dear Nash,

I'd be astonished if anyone in this thread would do as poorly as
someone who's twice announced that he's plonked me, but still keeps
nattering at me.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

 

[Johnny Sunset]

richard wrote:
> The story I'd heard was, he was coming back from Sidney, and it was
> getting a bit late (although the sun was still up). IL-130 has always
> had paved shoulders (well, for the past 10 years or so since the Windsor
> Rd curve was eliminated and 130 extended straight to US-150). I've
> ridden on them many times and have felt quite secure.
>
> Whatever, given the conditions of the surfaces of 1500 and 1700, and the
> fact that if the sun did go down before he finished the ride, 130 was by
> far a more reasonable choice. Remember, those rural roads have no
> shoulder at all, and 1500 actually has a couple of hilloids. A driver
> would not need to divert from the lane at all for a cyclist to be hit.

The potholes would be hard to avoid without a headlight [1], not to
mention the loose chip seal endemic to the intersections, and I
certainly would not want to be without a rear reflector and some
reflective material.

I will have to add "hilloid" to my cycling vocabulary along with
"slopping".

> Back to your first question - it was a couple hundred yards south of
> Windsor.

The sight distances on Route 130 at that location are several times
what they would need to be for a driver to avoid a cyclist riding in
the middle of the lane, much less the shoulder.

> A bit more irony - the SA said it was not reasonable for the driver to
> expect a cyclist to be there. Yeah, right! Never mind that when the
> Wilhelm family was visiting the scene or placing a small memorial, they
> always saw cyclists and joggers along that section of road. Presumably,
> if the SA had ever gotten her useless self out there, she too would
> would probably seen them as well...

Good luck on getting rid of the incompetent SA in the next election,
though I am afraid that more people view cyclists as a nuisance than
rightful users of the road.

[1] I generally found a CatEye Micro halogen adequate on these roads.

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 09:58:25 -0600, Tim McNamara <[email protected]>
wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> Jasper Janssen <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Two orders of magnitude, really, to not be working with decrepit old
>> machines failing at random times.
>
>Oh, I dunno. I've got a Rev B iMac that is 8 years old and works very
>reliably, having served for years as a Web server and as a print server
>on my home LAN. It could easily be my only computer if I didn't need a
>laptop for work.

If you really know what you're doing, the occasional sturdy machine can
still be found.. but unless you buy it new, which is (like buying a new
car) a lot like lighting your cigarettes with $100 bills (only one or two
for a new computer, admittedly), you tend to end up with crappy castoffs.

Jasper

 

[zeez]

Don Klipstein wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, Rich Clark wrote:
> >
> >"Don Klipstein" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >
> >> Philadelphia has bike lanes on many of their streets, and the bike lanes
> >> are in the streets.
> >
> >Yes, and a huge number of them are in the door zone. They are worse than
> >useless; they make cycling more dangerous because drivers feel free to
> >squeeze you from the left while parked drivers feel free to emerge from
> >their cars without looking because they don't think there will be any cars
> >near them.
>
> In my experience with Philly's bike lanes, doors do not swing over the
> whole bike lane. The bike lane is wide enough to squeeze by people
> exiting cars.
>
> Of course, a good loud horn helps!
>

Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if you fit one of those freight train
air horns to your bike?

 

[Zoot Katz]

On 4 Dec 2006 21:49:23 -0800, "zeez" <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Of course, a good loud horn helps!
>>
>
> Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if you fit one of those freight train
>air horns to your bike?

An AirZound does an adequately comparable job at a fraction of the
weight and cost.

Pump up the plastic pop-bottle reservoir with your bicycle pump and
you get 115 attention grabbing decibels.

Mine has stopped a Jeep and a Lexus.
--
zk

 

[Michael Press]

In article
<[email protected]>,
"Rich Clark" <[email protected]> wrote:
> You go on to list problems common to urban cycling in any city. Philadelphia
> is no worse than most of the cities I've ridden in, and better than many.
> The solution is always the same: take the lane, hold your line, obey the
> rules, be predictable, ignore assholes. Assert your rights and be visible in
> doing so, and don't catch the drivers by surprise. They don't improvise
> well.

Pellucid, succinct, precise, and accurate.

--
Michael Press

 

[Notan]

Michael Press wrote:
>
> In article
> <[email protected]>,
> "Rich Clark" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > You go on to list problems common to urban cycling in any city. Philadelphia
> > is no worse than most of the cities I've ridden in, and better than many.
> > The solution is always the same: take the lane, hold your line, obey the
> > rules, be predictable, ignore assholes. Assert your rights and be visible in
> > doing so, and don't catch the drivers by surprise. They don't improvise
> > well.
>
> Pellucid, succinct, precise, and accurate.

And sometimes fatal.

Notan

 

[Robert Coe]

On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 06:29:53 -0700, Notan <[email protected]>
wrote:
: Michael Press wrote:
: >
: > In article
: > <[email protected]>,
: > "Rich Clark" <[email protected]> wrote:
: > > You go on to list problems common to urban cycling in any city. Philadelphia
: > > is no worse than most of the cities I've ridden in, and better than many.
: > > The solution is always the same: take the lane, hold your line, obey the
: > > rules, be predictable, ignore assholes. Assert your rights and be visible in
: > > doing so, and don't catch the drivers by surprise. They don't improvise
: > > well.
: >
: > Pellucid, succinct, precise, and accurate.
:
: And sometimes fatal.

Yes, possibly. Bad things sometimes happen, and riding a bicycle isn't the
safest of activities. But how would you improve on Rich's advice?

Bob

 

[Claire Petersky]

"Robert Coe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 06:29:53 -0700, Notan <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> : Michael Press wrote:
> : >
> : > In article
> : > <[email protected]>,
> : > "Rich Clark" <[email protected]> wrote:
> : > > You go on to list problems common to urban cycling in any city.
> Philadelphia
> : > > is no worse than most of the cities I've ridden in, and better than
> many.
> : > > The solution is always the same: take the lane, hold your line, obey
> the
> : > > rules, be predictable, ignore assholes. Assert your rights and be
> visible in
> : > > doing so, and don't catch the drivers by surprise. They don't
> improvise
> : > > well.
> : >
> : > Pellucid, succinct, precise, and accurate.
> :
> : And sometimes fatal.
>
> Yes, possibly. Bad things sometimes happen, and riding a bicycle isn't the
> safest of activities. But how would you improve on Rich's advice?


I'd add, maintain a sense of humor.

--
Warm Regards,

Claire Petersky
http://www.bicyclemeditations.org/
See the books I've set free at: http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky

 

[nash]

Zoot Katz wrote:
> On 4 Dec 2006 21:49:23 -0800, "zeez" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> Of course, a good loud horn helps!
> >>
> >
> > Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if you fit one of those freight train
> >air horns to your bike?
>
> An AirZound does an adequately comparable job at a fraction of the
> weight and cost.
>
> Pump up the plastic pop-bottle reservoir with your bicycle pump and
> you get 115 attention grabbing decibels.
>
> Mine has stopped a Jeep and a Lexus.
> --
> zk

Where did you get yours ZK? Do you bring it with you when leaving the
bike?

 

[dabac]

Doesn't Sweden also have miles of highway set aside for cyclists?

Nah, not highways, generally. But usually there are separate bike paths avilable from the suburbs to the cities. Within the cities there is usually a varying degree of bike lanes available.

 

[dabac]

The best idea I have seen is counter-intuitive, take down all of the traffic
signs and street marking and make people rely on common sense!!! Street
markings and bike lanes just give the cars the false sense that they can
drive over anything that gets in their way.

That solution is limited by scale and traffic flow. It works up to a point, but when the traffic situation gets too complex it simply breaks down to anarchy.

 

[Notan]

Claire Petersky wrote:
>
> "Robert Coe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 06:29:53 -0700, Notan <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > : Michael Press wrote:
> > : >
> > : > In article
> > : > <[email protected]>,
> > : > "Rich Clark" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > : > > You go on to list problems common to urban cycling in any city.
> > Philadelphia
> > : > > is no worse than most of the cities I've ridden in, and better than
> > many.
> > : > > The solution is always the same: take the lane, hold your line, obey
> > the
> > : > > rules, be predictable, ignore assholes. Assert your rights and be
> > visible in
> > : > > doing so, and don't catch the drivers by surprise. They don't
> > improvise
> > : > > well.
> > : >
> > : > Pellucid, succinct, precise, and accurate.
> > :
> > : And sometimes fatal.
> >
> > Yes, possibly. Bad things sometimes happen, and riding a bicycle isn't the
> > safest of activities. But how would you improve on Rich's advice?
>
> I'd add, maintain a sense of humor.

Thank you! <g>

Notan

 

[dabac]

... I'd love to see a portable device that
would deactivate or jam every cell phone within, say, 100 feet of my
bike.

Go here:http://bdlsystems.com/products/ECM/index.html, but maybe you'd like something less conspicuous...