F
On Feb 12, 11:48 am, Bob <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> I'd guess you're right that hit & run cold cases are seldom solved.
> I'd add though that I doubt most fatal hit & runs ever achieve "cold
> case" status. Most that can be are solved well before that time.
>
....
[ and Zoot wrote:]
> > I'm not blaming systemic investigative lethargy, it's a desensitised
> > and automobile dependent society's mass shrug that's the true crime.
> > --
> > zk
>
> We must agree to disagree here because I don't see that "mass shrug"
> being given any more or less often in cases involving death by motor
> vehicle than I see it happening in any other type of homicide. I think
> it's more a matter of human nature- "It didn't happen to me or my
> loved one"- than any dependence on automobiles.
I think the "mass shrug" may occur before the fact. That is, I think
it's common for people to drive in a way that puts others at serious
risk, and not give much of a damn about it. I've certainly been put
in significant danger, purposely, by many drivers, while riding my
bike, riding my motorcycle and driving my car.
And I think those people are likely to run if they do hit someone.
But my question is, what, if anything, can be done about hit & run
drivers?
Riley Geary (an expert on bike safety data) has pointed out that a
very large percentage of bike fatalities involve hit & run motorists.
I know our last area bike fatality was a hit & run. This long-time
bike commuter was killed on a road with very wide lanes. He was
leaving work late at night as usual, well lit, riding properly. (And
his certified hat did not save his life.)
Our bike club offered a reward through the local police, but that's
made no difference.
What _can_ be done, either before or after the fact? Or must we
accept that the best way to murder someone is by motor vehicle?
- Frank Krygowski
>
>
> I'd guess you're right that hit & run cold cases are seldom solved.
> I'd add though that I doubt most fatal hit & runs ever achieve "cold
> case" status. Most that can be are solved well before that time.
>
....
[ and Zoot wrote:]
> > I'm not blaming systemic investigative lethargy, it's a desensitised
> > and automobile dependent society's mass shrug that's the true crime.
> > --
> > zk
>
> We must agree to disagree here because I don't see that "mass shrug"
> being given any more or less often in cases involving death by motor
> vehicle than I see it happening in any other type of homicide. I think
> it's more a matter of human nature- "It didn't happen to me or my
> loved one"- than any dependence on automobiles.
I think the "mass shrug" may occur before the fact. That is, I think
it's common for people to drive in a way that puts others at serious
risk, and not give much of a damn about it. I've certainly been put
in significant danger, purposely, by many drivers, while riding my
bike, riding my motorcycle and driving my car.
And I think those people are likely to run if they do hit someone.
But my question is, what, if anything, can be done about hit & run
drivers?
Riley Geary (an expert on bike safety data) has pointed out that a
very large percentage of bike fatalities involve hit & run motorists.
I know our last area bike fatality was a hit & run. This long-time
bike commuter was killed on a road with very wide lanes. He was
leaving work late at night as usual, well lit, riding properly. (And
his certified hat did not save his life.)
Our bike club offered a reward through the local police, but that's
made no difference.
What _can_ be done, either before or after the fact? Or must we
accept that the best way to murder someone is by motor vehicle?
- Frank Krygowski
