This is exact the crap I don't want my wife to see... she freaks out every time I hit the road. She just knows "I am next..."
So there was no word about the skills or experience of the rider...
But still, hit and run, jeeze.
[QUOTE=genec]This is exact the crap I don't want my wife to see... she freaks out every time I hit the road. She just knows "I am next..."
I bet she dosn't think twice about getting in her car, in spite of the 45,000 motor-car deaths every year.
[QUOTE=scarry]You're right, she doesn't, but you are quoting statistics... so that is 45,000 deaths out of how many users, and of those users, how many crashes without death or serious injury, and compare that to how many full time commuting cyclists, and of those how many have auto/bike crashes, and how many survive?Originally Posted by genec
The sad thing is, I am on your side.
But frankly I think I have a higher chance of survival in a auto/auto accident... especially at rush hour speeds, than I do of a bike/auto accident, even at rush hour speeds.
I certainly know I am absolutly invisible. (actually have fun with that sometimes... Quick thought... what if we rode naked... think the cars would see us then?)
It doesnt say much about the circumstances so it is difficult to draw conclusions. It was dark, so let this be a lesson - do you always have lights when riding at night? Do you stop at Red lights and stop signs?
The chances of being killed in a car are about the same as for a bicycle when measured on a per mile travelled basis. This is largely because many car accidents happen at high speeds.
Seems like we've had a cyclist killed by some hit and run driver every weekend for the past few weeks. One in the Bronx earlier this month, and I think there was another one in Queens.
Maybe it's insensitive on my part but I wish the news would report whether or not the bike had lights.. was he moving with traffic, wearing a helmet, etc. We have a lot of cyclists riding around the city in the dark, without lights, reflectors, who are practically invisible. Maybe the news could do a bit more to educate cyclists rather than just report the horror stories.
You can go to google and put up dozens of stories about bicyclist getting killed. You can also do it for auto accidents, shootings etc. While I think bicycling is safe and the odds of dying on the road are minimal, I don't see the point of these "bicyclist killed" threads. We know it happens. I think those who killed bicyclist that "hit and run" or are drunk should be punished very harshly. And those stories should be published here, so we can follow the PUNISHMENT they get (or not get). However, as much as we may get mad, when it is simply an accident, there isn't a purpose in getting all upset about them. It is part of the risk we take when riding a bike. It is a small risk and small enough that it certainly doesn't deter me from riding on the road.
If the accident did occur at night, I'm 99% positive he did not have any lights. I happen to like riding in Queens but some of the roads (under the elevated trains) can be real tight. As you head further out to Long Island, the roads become faster as you can no longer ride through the subdivisions and are forced to ride on the highways!Originally Posted by Stacy
And there are plenty of places in the City that are dangerous even during the day... like the Boulevard of Death.Originally Posted by Dahon.Steve
Offjhand I'd guess at least half the cyclists in Manhattan ride at night without lights, and often in dark clothing.
Have not heard the term "Boulevard of Death" since I left NYC. Queens Blvd is one of the worst streets in all of Queens, especially the part through Woodside coming into Rego Park as it goes under the LIRR. Even the pedisatran barriers do not mean a thing. The little piece of street info they gave in the article the accident says it occured in Corona. I can think of a number of very danergous corners in Cororna, let alone streets (108th St & Corona Ave, any street which goes underneath the El for the 7 Train, Corona Ave by Newtown High School, just to name a few).
I do not know the circumstances or who was responsible, the only thing I do know is a person is dead (whether it was his fault or not is for others to say).
"Angel, Bop Bop loves you!!!"
While overall accidents are an important statistic, most safety professionals modify the statistic by using a rate, which is accidents per unit of exposure. The unit of exposure is where the numbers can be played with. The most common unit of exposure is distance, especially when further modified by what is being carried, such as ton-mile or passenger-mile. Occupational safety is sometimes measured as safety per work-hour. Last week I had a guy from a large passenger railroad arguing that the correct measure of exposure when comparing railroads to trains was passenger-hours. If we were to exclude the time passengers sit waiting for their planes to take off, this would really make the airlines look much worse.
So what does this mean for bikes? If we are using bikes for recreation, then the hours of exposure is probably more relevanat and bikes are relatively safer, while if we use bikes for transportation, then bikes, being slower than other vehicles, are relatively less safe. Further, there are other measures which could be used, such as accidents per vehicle encountered, in which case bikes might be very safe, because they are passed by so many cars.
Getting back to the train exposure, it appears obvious to me that we are using trains for transport, not recreation, although poor schedule-keeping may give you a lot more leisure time on a train than you had planned. It would therefore follow that pasenger-miles are good measure of exposure. What happens is that individuals who have a particualr point of view can easily skew statistics by picking the measure of exposure. Always bear in mind the first rule of objective analysis: Never ask the barber whteher you need a haircut.
Anti-Rail organizations like the American Dream Coalition use stats to prove that rail is actually more dangerous than motor transport. Read their report, "Great Train Disasters" in which their hypothetical (sp) numbers make rail/lightrail transport far more dangerous IF they moved as many people as cars.Originally Posted by FOG
We don't know what the numbers would actually be under actual conditions but the total number of deaths would be far less than 40K per year if everyone moved by rail.
I use rail for transport and recreation. During the weekends, you'll see me on the NJ Trainsit rail lines going to the burbs with my bicycle. Without the bicycle, I feel weak and helpless because I'm dependant on walking or the bus once I leave the train station. With my bicycle on boad, I have the same hyper-mobility the motorist has for a fraction of the cost. In the tri-state, just about every place (malls, beaches, amusement parks ect) that means anything is within reach using rail and bicycle.
When I referred to rding trains as transportation, not recreation, I meant that the train is a means of getting to a destination. This is usually the case, even where the destination is recreational. The exception would be a tourist railroad, like the Durango and Silverton, where the recreation comes from riding the train. So what I was saying is if you use the train to get somewhere then the exposure ought to be passenger miles. If you ride the train to enjoy the train ride the exposure ought to be passenger hours.
What makes that important to bicycling is that the overwhelming majority of bicycle use in this country is for recreation, so rider hours would be an appropriate measure of exposure. For those of us who are more likely to try to use the bicycle as transportation, rider miles would be relevant, but we would have to find a way to filter the statistics to get meaningful data. The 10 year old who gets hit riding his BMX bike the wrong way on an arterial street at night with no lights will show up as an accident, injury or fatality, depending on the result of the accident. The data related to his accident doesn't really help me understand how dangerous it is or is not to ride a road bike using vehicular cycling techniques.
BTW, I know several folks at NJT, and they are all consummate professionals, who do a great job of running a very complicated transportation system with trains and buses serving two major metropolitan areas.
I'm not surprised about anything that happens in NYC. I lived on the upper east side of Manhattan for 10 years and saw stuff I don't think I'd see too many places. Here's my favorite:
Delivery guy wants another delivery guy's bike that's locked up with a u-lock. Gets hammer and starts hammering away at the shackle in an effort to get the shackle to release from the u part by brute force. You know what, after about 30 whacks, the shackle breaks off and the delivery guy rides off with his new bike. This happened in broad daylight on 79th St between 1st and 2nd in Manhattan. Busy street, cars, people everywhere. Nobody, including me, does anything. What am I going to do? I looked around for a cop, but since I didn't see one, I ignored it.
I would constantly see cab drivers and other losers open their windows or doors and just toss out their fast food containers or coffee cups right into the street. Anywhere, anytime. Didn't matter.
People drive like maniacs. Nobody looks at anybody on the sidewalks. This is all done in an effort to deal with the otherwise unbearable aspects of NY life. It's a rough place in very many ways. I had a mountain bike in the city, but I'd only ride on the side streets to get to Central Park during times when cars weren't allowed. Messengers and commuters seriously risk their lives every day. I would never do it.
As the ultimate melting pot of the world, many people that live there came from somewhere else where life was no doubt much more unbearable. Those things we consider reprehensible were a way of life where they came from.. Somalia. Iraq. Morocco. Think about that. It was probably OK in their old country to do what they do in NY. Not that it's OK. That's just the way it is.
That being said, I think everyone should live in Manhattan for at least 5 years. Many things to be learned there. Best food anywere. One can never say there is nothing to do in NY. Just walking through the streets is interesting.
Jeez, what a ramble.
I resent that statement. I drove cabs in NYC as a 20 year old college graduate because jobs were very hard to find in the mid 70's. I was not then and have never been a loser. I was willing to do the work that was available, and had no misplaced sense of pride that said I was too good for any type of work.Originally Posted by bsyptak
I think you are confusing poverty with values. Poor people do things the rest of us don't have to, because their choices are limited. If theyapply themselves in this country they can get ahead, which is what I see most of them doing. They save money for the children's education, and make sure their kids bust their butts to get a good education and good job. If suburban-raised, american born kids, including mine, had half their drive, then this country would pull even further ahead of the rest of the world. Celebrate the immigrants' hard work and willingness to do the unpleasant, don't denigrate it.As the ultimate melting pot of the world, many people that live there came from somewhere else where life was no doubt much more unbearable. Those things we consider reprehensible were a way of life where they came from.. Somalia. Iraq. Morocco. Think about that. It was probably OK in their old country to do what they do in NY. Not that it's OK. That's just the way it is.
I grew up in NYC and think it is a great place to be from, far from. I had plenty of negative experiences, but as far as I could tell the vast majority of those imposing the negative experiences were born in the US.That being said, I think everyone should live in Manhattan for at least 5 years. Many things to be learned there. Best food anywere. One can never say there is nothing to do in NY. Just walking through the streets is interesting.
This reminds me of a friend and sometime riding partner of mine. He has lived in the Northwest since 1975.
He was born and raised in Manhattan. It took him about TEN YEARS living out here to realize that red lights really do mean something, and to not run lights on his bike even when his three or four riding partners were sitting at the light waiting for it to turn green! His saying was something like "in New York, red lights are just kind of a suggestion."
My sentence implied that cab drivers=losers. It is not what I meant. What I meant was anybody that tosses trash out their window is in my mind a loser POS.Originally Posted by FOG
Lighten up, and ask for a clarification before attacking people.
By the way, I fixed vacuum cleaners and delivered pizzas to pay my way through college.