'Wheels of Misfortune': an account of a bicyclist killing a pedestrian
 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/11/o...bike-laws.html

"In their rush to shave a few seconds off their daily commutes, they probably don’t consider the risks. I’m sure they don’t plan to hurt anyone. Neither did the guy who killed my mother."

Neither is a driver speeding over the speed limit.

You hear people on these forums justify how they ride by saying that when they are on their bike they are only risking their own life. This is a good reminder that those statements are not true.

IMO the excuse that motorists kill or injure more people than bicyclists carries no weight. It excuses nothing to point claim that someone is worse.

OTOH there's an over emphasis on obeying the law. Traffic law and traffic control devices developed around motor vehicles, and were applied to bikes as an after thought. I don't offer that as an excuse to break the law, which is a good framework, but to point out that safety and the law aren't the same thing. Safety comes from common sense, courtesy and respect, and it's possible to ride safely with loose adherence to the law, and dangerously with strict adherence.

That story was all about a Strava jerk.

Sad situation all around.

May the deceased rest in peace.

For all cyclists who demand that they are vehicles on the road and have the right to a place on the road along with motor vehicles, then you are subject to the same laws and penalties and responsibilities as drivers of motor vehicles. You cannot make the rules of the road your buffet in picking and choosing which laws you want to obey. You cannot claim to be a vehicle on the road when it suits you but then claim you are just a bike when it does not. You cannot condemn motor vehicles for endangering you and then by your actions as a cyclist endanger pedestrians because you are bigger and more intimidating and have more physical power than they do. You can't have things both ways.

What are the odds of being killed by a car while walking?
What are the odds of being killed by a cyclist while walking?
What are the odds of being killed while riding a bike?

I suspect that the odds of being killed as a cyclist are the worst, while the odds of being killed by a cyclist are practically nil.

Unless you are the one killed, then it's 100% but then the odds are no small comfort because you are dead.
But I wonder how many people who have been hit by a bicyclist and only injured say to themselves, "Wow, I was hit by a bike! What are the odds?"

But do you want to be one of the few cyclists that kills a pedestrian? What do you think it feels like to plow over a toddler?

I think the odds of being struck by lightening are higher.

Of course it is a bad thing for a cyclist to hit a ped... and worse for a cyclist to kill a pedestrian... but we are talking about something that is so rare (death by cyclist) that I cannot even find odds for it.

You might have better odds for winning the lottery.

It just doesn't happen. Even in the story presented by the OP, the last such death mentioned took place in 2015.

Be careful out there, don't hit anyone, but jeeze to make this issue any sort of priority is just ludicrous.

I got hit by a cyclist one (as a lawful pedestrian), and it smacked my head into the ground pretty hard. I have never been hit by a car. I am still far more worried about getting hit by a car...

I'm an engineer and live by numbers and percentages, but safety is one of those areas where it is inappropriate (and heartless) to analyze strictly by the numbers, especially when deaths and the corresponding larger number of injuries are so easily preventable. Preventing these incidents is totally up to the cyclist and to disregard potential consequences as numerically insignificant goes out the window the first time you injure someone due to your own careless behavior.

Congratulations for having an intelligent comment on the subject. Neither lightning or the lottery are intelligent beings that can make any choices at all. As cyclists we constantly complain about how vehicles on the road don't treat us with respect and risk our lives and safety by their actions so how can we then behave the same way towards pedestrians on the MUPs? Obey the rules and slow down when passing pedestrians--it's simple stuff.
If a cyclist is negligent and hits a pedestrian anywhere who is right where they should be and doing what they they do, why should we have concern for the cyclist when if a car was negligent and hit a person riding a bike we would want to crucify them?

From what I can gather of the Dutch situation I've to agree with @genec. Pedestrians being killed by a cyclist are a statistical oddity. Around here it seems to happen every few years.

Yes, of course. But we don't have to live with people's intentions; we have to live with their results.

I've often thought that these careless and "unintentional" perpetrators should be required to attend the funeral services of those they killed.

I have to agree with Tape2012 who wrote: "I'm an engineer and live by numbers and percentages, but safety is one of those areas where it is inappropriate (and heartless) to analyze strictly by the numbers, especially when deaths and the corresponding larger number of injuries are so easily preventable. Preventing these incidents is totally up to the cyclist and to disregard potential consequences as numerically insignificant goes out the window the first time you injure someone due to your own careless behavior."

A pedestrian being killed by a cyclist is not a statistical oddity if it were to happen to you or a family member of friend. Respect and obeying the rules by cyclists for pedestrians is exactly what we expect from drivers as bike riders for ourselves.

Please note, I did say this... "Be careful out there, don't hit anyone... "

But again, this issue is one of control by cyclists... so cyclists are responsible for NOT hitting others... Just as motorists are responsible for not hitting cyclists.

But in perspective... motorists hitting and killing pedestrians and/or cyclists is an almost daily occurrence. Cyclists killing anyone... motorist, cyclist, or pedestrian is a not even annual statistical outlier.

Yes, let's be careful out there. Do not hit, do not injure, do not kill others... it is bad for them, it is bad for cyclists.... and probably doesn't help the bike either.

But this occurs less often than lightening striking and killing people. So let's not make a big thing out of it. Just don't do it.

That's just plain silly. Lightening cannot make a choice as to where it strikes or does not. Cyclists on the other hand CAN make choices about how they ride and if they don't ride with respect for pedestrians who have the right of way. We claim to be vehicles just like cars and trucks and so just like cars and trucks we have a legal obligation to yield to pedestrians.
If it were the other way around and not many cyclists were killed by motor vehicles would you still claim not to make a big thing out of it? Numbers don't matter because any number of pedestrians being killed by the actions and choices of cyclists is too many just as cyclists killed by motor vehicles.
By why lower the bar to just fatalities? Is it ok for pedestrians to be injured or crippled by cyclists because of bike riders disregard for their safety?
Motorists having respect and obeying the rules regarding cyclists is just the same as cyclists having respect and obeying the rules for pedestrians. To believe otherwise is hypocritical.

Wow, bit of a reading comprehension problem? OK make a big deal of it... The big deal comes down to one thing and one thing only... Don't do it! Just like I said in every post I made...

Now have a nice day... and don't hit anyone.

BTW I'm done... any more posts and this goes to more than one page. The only problem I have with even the OP post is that the NY times is covering this... how often do they discuss the hundreds of pedestrians and cyclists killed by automobiles... a problem several orders of magnitude greater.

I run the dog on sidewalks daily, its actually a trott for the dog. I yield to all pedestrians having no issues with stopping pulling off and sitting the dog down for a stroller, small children, 2 folks walking side by side. I rarely ride over 10 or 12 mph on the street or dedicated bike paths which have a 10 mph ticketable speed limit. Slower on the sidewalks. I disobey most traffic devices when safe to do so and have no guilt about this. It's illegal to ride a bicycle on the sidewalks in this city but police know some of us are not suicidal, some street traffic is just a plane stupid mix with bicycles. Its tragic to hear of a pedestrian death due to a bicyclist unable to control his/her momentum. Control is a skill. What's the big rush. Look ahead.-I have a bell.

This is a sad story. And a few threads down is one on how to run red lights (SMH).

Cyclists are our own worse enemy at times. I see people run red lights all the time and cycle like complete idiots in heavy traffic. While I am not surprised by the incident described in the OP, it's nonetheless preventable.

Be safe out there, be courteous and follow the laws and rules of the road.

In full agreement

In general agreement, but traffic law consists of various sets/subsets. The general set applies to all, e.g. drive on the right/left, depending on which country you're in; obey traffic signals and other signs within the law (Idaho right for cyclists to ignore signals, where safe, is a cyclist subset within Idaho) and all users can then be reasonably certain of how others will behave (inc. Idaho) assuming reasonable law-abiding behaviour on everyone's part.

I'm one of those anal-retentive types who tightly adhered to the law and didn't find it particularly restrictive, except on rare occasions. For example, I would ignore signals at red if they showed no sign of responding to my presence; there were also times when I'd ride on the pavement (sidewalk to you benighted ex-colonials) because of roadworks or traffic holdups and there weren't any pedestrians around.

OTOH, I was on very rare occasions, pretty damn stupid and, fortunately, suffered no collisions, let alone injuries.

But, in general, I did behave with "common sense, courtesy and respect" and kept a sharp look out for idiots using any form of transport - the majority of whom were drivers. The latter tended to be of two kinds: careless/dangerous drivers or those who had a mistaken understanding of what the law says with regard to cyclists.

I found that these principles applied on both sides of the pond when I took my bike to Canada (Toronto) and found no difficulty in riding safely there. I did, however, make some minor alterations: in the UK, it's understood that riders can filter on the inside of a line of traffic at the lights (with care), whereas, thanks to various comments and links on this forum, I understood that this might lead to considerable irritation (at the very least) on your side of the Atlantic, so I didn't. Otherwise, I didn't change my general approach, tho' riding on the right presented some minor problems regarding automatically looking over the left, rather than the right shoulder.

It may be that, if I'd grown up riding in God's own country, I'd hold somewhat different opinions.

(By the way, the phrase "God's own" more properly applies to Yorkshire, as in "God's own county" - just thought you'd like to know)

I basically agree, but live by the "no harm, no foul" rule.

For example, if I come to a red light and there's no traffic on the road, the only purpose served by waiting is adhering to the law and avoiding a possible fine. OTOH - if I proceed through, there's no harm to any other party and I'm like the tree falling in a forest with nobody to hear.

So, while man's laws provide a framework, I don't feel compelled to follow them when there's no other factor at play.

Every once I enjoy a comical moment when I'll pull up alongside a police car waiting at a red light. The officer will roll down the window and ask me why I'm waiting. (they've all seen me not waiting on a fairly regular basis).

So, thinking of NYC where the police periodically go on a bicycle enforcement binge, I have no objection at all if they cite bicyclists who speed through lights and/or crossing pedestrians. But I don't think any purpose is served when they cite bicyclists who slowly and safely proceed against the light through an empty intersection. Likewise I don't agree with citing bicyclists who slow but don't come to a full "toe down" stop at stop signs.

As I said, No harm, (should be) no foul.