genec

+1000 Basic violation of the most basic of driving rules.

I wonder if the bus had a cam?

I-Like-To-Bike

Perhaps the "I Always Take the Lane" advocates should use this tragedy to reconsider their notion that positioning themselves dead center in front of drivers' assumed line of vision is a guarantee of improved cyclist safety.

GiantOctopodes

Personally this is the kind of thing where I would much rather people get imprisoned for a substantial length of time, as opposed to nonviolent offenders such as those with drug related charges, prostitution, or other crimes. The bus driver *killed* someone. Sure, they did not intend to, and one would hope it will haunt them for all of their days. But all of the rules of society are there to regulate social interactions so that we can achieve more than animal like "might makes right" or otherwise have to worry that someone will kill us for impinging on their territory or some other perceived slight. Of all the actions you can take to betray the trust of society, killing someone else is the very worst.

As such, cases like this where people through negligence cause the death of those around them should be much, much more harshly punished than they usually are in my humble opinion. Set free those who prefer getting intoxicated from a substance other than alcohol, unless in pursuit of that goal they violated some other crime, and lock up those who aren't paying attention and performing every action within their power to act safely.

It is of course a different story if the individual did everything in their power to act safely and the incident occurred anyway, but it does not sound like that is the case here, and I am speaking more of a general principle than recommending a particular punishment for this incident, that is the role of the courts.

As a general safety principle, I think buses should honk before beginning to move again, both for the sake of the recently departed passengers and for the sake of the traffic they're merging back into. I know it would be annoying, but I would rather everyone be annoyed and alive than have any risk, no matter how small, of someone being unaware of a bus's potential movements and die as a result.


Absolutely not. First, no action is a guarantee of absolute safety. But second, the person in question was hit through the criminal negligence of a driver, which can occur despite taking every safety precaution as a cyclist, which in this case we don't even know if he did, we can only speculate. And third, this has nothing to do with taking the lane or riding your bike, he was killed while effectively acting as a pedestrian, which if anything reinforces how dangerous it is to act as a pedestrian on a bicycle, if we're going to draw loose and inappropriate connections.

Finally, and this is the most important point, positioning yourself dead center in a driver's intended line of vision is *absolutely* an increase in safety for a cyclist. It's not a guarantee, nothing is, but that doesn't change the fact that it's the safest way to ride. I know you're a fan of fearmongering that you're going to get run over from behind if you "take a lane", but beyond the fact that this is not what occurred here, it's just not very common. Even if you combine bicyclists hit from overtaking traffic *and* all bicyclists hit intentionally, it only accounts for 5.8% of all bicycle accidents (source: A Tale of Three Cities), and regarding your constant talk of the lethality of the roads, of the 3 cyclists killed by being hit from behind in Austin between '94 and '97, all 3 of them were riding at night, and at least 2 of them did not have lights on their bikes. (Source: https://bicycleaustin.info/justice/table.html) As tragic as those deaths are, they also serve to reinforce how important it is to do everything in your power to increase your visibility to drivers. Intersections, midblocks, and being "doored" are all *far* more common and potentially just as lethal, and the advice for every one of those things is, go figure, to not ride in the sidewalk, and to stay away from the extreme edge of the road and do everything in your power to increase your visibility (source: https://bicyclesafe.com/)

Wanderer

Good idea! I think honking would also make the driver look forward.

I-Like-To-Bike

Why not have every motorized vehicle honk their horn before moving ( or better yet while moving like a cow bell) to alert the unaware? Makes sense if reducing any risk, no matter how small, and no annoyance/imposition is too great, is considered worthwhile.

GiantOctopodes

Because not every motorized vehicle makes frequent stops during which they have a bunch of pedestrians with unknown destinations disembark? Oh wait, you were being sarcastic and trying to pull a slippery slope fallacy in an attempt to disparage an entirely legitimate idea. Because, you know, a bus honking once per stop is *such* a great annoyance/imposition.

FBinNY 

The problem with the honk before moving approach is that it shifts expectations. It's the driver's responsibility (as for all drivers, and bicyclists also) to scan in front of the bus and move only when it's clear.

The honk before moving carries the implication that not honking means not moving.

It's far simpler an logical for passengers who've just disembarked to assume (correctly) that the bus will be moving momentarily, unless other vehicles were passing (also a good reason not to cross in front), and not cross in front after disembarking, unless with a green light at an intersection.

The bike rack adds a wrinkle because you have to go in front of the bus to get your bike. I don't think this creates a great hazard, but does call for an extra bit of vigilance from all players.

kickstart

Every bus in the Puget sound region has front mounted bike racks that see a lot of use, it seems over the top to condemn something so widely uses and in demand because of a few isolated incidents.

intransit1217

Truly sad for both parties.

CliffordK

This was a tragic accident. It certainly wasn't something where the driver intended to cause harm to his passengers. At this point we don't know anything about his safety record, years of experience, or mental status. However, it should not be treated in the same manner as people who intend to cause harm to others.

Now, one might argue that he should be given a bicycle and have his driver's license permanently revoked, including no bus driving.

I do agree that some of the drug and prostitution laws are pretty silly, as well as the effort police have to just go out and ticket individuals for minor offences to fill the court rooms. However, the longer sentences are reserved for things like production and distribution of drugs which harms more than just the individuals themselves.

Yes, not necessarily honk, but add a chirp when the doors are closed and the bus is ready to move, and train those getting a bike to move out of the way when they hear the chirp. As I mentioned earlier abandon the bike and save oneself. Scream, bang on the SIDE OF THE BUS, whatever, but get out of the way.

Of course, one should evaluate the actual statistics, deaths, accidents, and near misses before making any sweeping changes based on a single anecdote. Too many laws have been made in our society based on rare anecdotes.
I've thought about positioning oneself a bit. With the split window on the bus, one could design the rack on the bus so that the bike must be removed from the left side of the rack (in front of the driver), or the right side of the rack (near the curb). Personally I'd much rather be 1 step from the curb, rather than being 3 steps from the curb, so in case the bus moves unexpectedly, one has a chance of getting out of the way. And jumping into the traffic lane to get out of the way of the bus is unwise.

As people have mentioned, it is likely that the driver's focus was on traffic around him, and being dead center in front of the driver might not have helped.

asmac

Now you're talking. Even better, maybe every motorized vehicle should be preceded by a servant carrying a red lantern. Just in case.

Re the honk, instead of just squish it would now be honk-squish. Much better.

GiantOctopodes

or honk jump and squish averted, which is indeed much better. The trouble with bus disembarking is that it's like a yellow light, it's impossible to foresee exactly how long it's going to stay that way.

I'm not saying buses killing disembarking passengers is a huge issue, buses only account for around 2% of traffic fatalities *total*, much less the subset of disembarking passengers, the total incidents per year are low enough to not be readily available. So definitely I agree sweeping reform should not be made to target an incredibly narrow issue, but honking your existing horn is something that can be done for free- there is absolutely no cost to it except an increase in noise, and barring specific circumstances (a line of buses at a convention or something) it's not likely to present a significant disturbance. So sure, it's a minor problem, thus a minor solution. If the honk doesn't happen, no harm, no foul, we're no worse off than we are now with no information about when the bus will start moving. I get the concept of the idea of a safety precaution being in place could lead to people being lulled into a false sense of security, exacerbating the issue, but those who would be affected by such a false sense of security are the same people who would not be paying attention now, so I still feel that overall it would be a net positive.

Note that I'm not running to the legislature trying to get a law changed or anything, merely was saying that I think it would be a wise idea, and if I were running a bus company that would be a thing we would do.

CliffordK

Now, why don't they just design the buses like this?



I'm not finding any reports of bus rack injuries (other than several metros claiming no liability for injuries). I have to assume they occur rarely.

How easy is it to load and remove one's bike from the back or middle slot with another bike in front?

I can think of designing a rack that would swing or slide to the side allowing access to the bike without getting on the road, perhaps with a drive lockout system preventing the bus from moving until the rack is locked in place. But, if a billion trips are made with 2 reported fatalities, that would hardly be sufficient to make sweeping changes.

JoeyBike

1. NOT riding a bicycle in the first place would pretty much eliminate cycling dangers from motor vehicles.

2. Limiting your exposure to motor vehicles would drastically reduce the danger of getting run over on a bicycle. Take a less busy route, or ride in traffic gaps. Use a rear view mirror. Don't daydream or become too fixated on any one object - keep your eyes moving.

3. Never EVER stand near the front or rear bumper of any motor vehicle that is running, not even in the grocery store parking lot.

So there are things^^ you can do to vastly limit the danger of playing in traffic.
=============

All of that being said, the OP story really sucks. Just goes to show that you can never relax driving, cycling, or on foot. One silly little lapse and you could kill someone, or end up literally under the bus.

howsteepisit

Does anyone have a link to what actually happened over the initial post?

Chris516

Not me. Just a few days ago, I was on one of the two-lane blacktops outside of the town I live in. When a county bus tried to pass me before getting to a small hill with a curve, that creates a major blind spot. That same hill has a speed bump directly before the hill, on the same side of the road that we were travelling. The speed bump was installed after the town won a legal battle with the county. Because, While the speed limit is 30mph. Before the speed bump was put in, traffic would go 40-45mph on that road.

Dahon.Steve

I was thinking bus companies may need to install a safty feature similar to the back door. Years ago, passengers would get killed or seriously injured using the rear door because the driver would start to pull out while the passenger was still on the steps.

That was changed and a safty feature was added that made it impossible for the driver to move the bus as long as the back door was opened. Over the years, I've seen numerous bus drivers hit the throttle while someone was in the process of leaving through the rear door only to be stopped by the engine being killed due to the rear door safty device.

However, installing an electronic safty device making it impossible for the driver to move the bus while the bike is being removed will increase the cost of bike racks by a factor of 3 or 4.

Sad to say but accidents like this just might cause bus companies to remove their bike racks.

Wanderer

Yikes! The problem wasn't the bike rack, the problem was the bus drivers incompetence!

enigmaT120

I agree. They're common around Salem, too and I use them every day I bicycle commute. I flatter myself that my comments helped the CARTS (community connection buses) change from 2 to 3 bike racks, as it sucks to not be able to take your bike on the bus when you're going 30 miles or (in my case) more.

njkayaker

Suggesting that the person was killed because he was trying to save his bicycle is strange.

Clearly, you have never used a bus.

kickstart

Not having any actual information, and considering the rack is right in front of the driver, something "strange" could have happened. Speculating how the driver could have possibly lost track of, or forget about someone directly in front of them, perhaps the passenger was doing something unusual like trying to recover something they dropped under the rack where the driver couldn't see them is a possibility.


My thought too, 3 bikes would take up a significant amount of space that's already at a premium.

Wanderer

I'm sure that the bus driver never intended to run the person over! However, thru their mistake, it happened! There is no other fault to be assigned.

Dave Cutter

+100

There we go! And cyclists... we could attach bells to our wheels! That way we would sound like the old ice cream carts (that were bicycle powered)... those things could be heard for BLOCKS!!!! This idea if fully implemented with extremely punitive laws... could most certainly [possibly] save dozens of lives.

And having devices and tyrannically severe laws is so much better than having a clear sober head.... and just paying attention.

You know.... now I am thinking maybe all people should wear motion-sensing beepers (maybe with those feel-good flashing lights). So anytime any human was moving about... any human near-by would be alerted. Wait... the luddite's will never go for a beeper/flasher. Maybe we could just re-name the cow bell... to the "Person-bell".

There we go. We'll just petition the King to declare all subjects must wear a bell at all times (both sleeping and awake).

Dave Cutter

That is absolutely correct! Almost all (not all... but most) accidents are known to be caused by human error. So many human error failures have plagued mankind for so long as to make universally common the phrase "only human". Self-driving... or better said: Error-free machine driven vehicles would absolutely have prevented that death.

It is time people insist on removing all human driven vehicles from the roads and streets!

Wanderer

LOL, I like that - but how am I going to drive my big RAM Crew to Maine?

Nice one, though, Dave.......