Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

7/31/11 fatality--"bicyclist lost control" or rundown? Bedford, PA (Buffalo Mills)

Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

7/31/11 fatality--"bicyclist lost control" or rundown? Bedford, PA (Buffalo Mills)

Old 08-02-11, 03:43 PM
  #26  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 4,556
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by rydabent
How convenient. Two 21 years olds tell their story, with no other witnesses. I would bet the driver and his friend said "lets buzz that fool on his bike and teach him a lesson not to ride on OUR road".

That driver will forever know that he is a killer!!!!!
Why does their age matter? People don't get worse at lying as they get older.
crhilton is offline  
Old 08-02-11, 03:46 PM
  #27  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 4,556
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by CB HI
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Route+...=12,50.79,,0,0

The cyclist is on a CAAD9, riding on a 1 foot berm and the 21 year olds claim they were safely passing the cyclist while they were in the narrow lane and it was the cyclist that SUDDENLY lost control and swerved in front of them at exactly the wrong second in time.

BS
Interesting. I hate when things say "shoulder" when referring to extra road to the right of the fog line. If it's not several feet wide it's not a shoulder. You couldn't pull a motorcycle over onto that...
crhilton is offline  
Old 08-02-11, 03:47 PM
  #28  
Lotus Monomaniac
 
Snydermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,046
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
The friends/family/co-workers of the two men in the car will probably be able to judge their character and if they are the type of people that would harass a cyclist or not. Not conclusive proof, but will probably sway opinion one way or the other.

For example, if the unfortunate should happen and I hit a cyclist, everyone I know would be positive that it was just an accident. I couldn't say the same about other people I know.
Snydermann is offline  
Old 08-02-11, 03:48 PM
  #29  
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,644
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1316 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times in 59 Posts
Originally Posted by myrridin
12 foot lane (narrow lane) - 6 foot wide car (avg width of car https://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_th...width_of_a_car) = 6 feet of room... If the cyclist was on the shoulder (as you say) it is entirely possible for the motorist to pass safely using your 3 foot rule.
Lane is not 12 feet wide (10 feet from white line to center line) and few cyclist on a CAAD9 are going to try and stay in a 1 foot glass and gravel berm, and the story indicates the driver did not claim to move over until after the claimed sudden cyclist swerve.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 08-02-11, 03:53 PM
  #30  
Don from Austin Texas
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 1,211

Bikes: Schwinn S25 "department store crap" FS MTB, home-made CF 26" hybrid, CF road bike with straight bar, various wierd frankenbikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by CB HI
When the 21 year olds take a lie detector test, then I will give them the benifit of doubt in this case.

With a narrow lane (fact) and 1 foot berm (fact), explain to me how the driver was passing safely (greater than 3 feet) without already being in the oncoming lane?
Lie detector tests are really BAD science. I would not take one because I would be so nervous about a false positive for lying that I would probably fail the test while telling the truth.

Don in Austin
Don in Austin is offline  
Old 08-02-11, 03:55 PM
  #31  
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,325
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by CB HI
Lane is not 12 feet wide (10 feet from white line to center line) and few cyclist on a CAAD9 are going to try and stay in a 1 foot glass and gravel berm, and the story indicates the driver did not claim to move over until after the claimed sudden cyclist swerve.
Ten feet still means a margin of 4 feet. Obviously the cyclist didn't remain on the shoulder, but if he was there in the first place he was not in the lane, so the car passed in the lane providing sufficient safety margin...

The driver claimed that he tried to swerve when the cyclist moved, which doesn't preclude him already providing sufficient (3') of passing distance for the original described circumstances. You stated that it wasn't possible to "safely" pass under the conditions described. The "facts" are it is possible. Only the individuals involved know if it actually happened.

The bottom line is that there is no evidence offered to support or dispute the drivers claim. All claims by you and others (supporting either side) are based upon prejudice driven speculation. As such they are completely worthless.
myrridin is offline  
Old 08-02-11, 04:03 PM
  #32  
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,644
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1316 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times in 59 Posts
Originally Posted by myrridin
Ten feet still means a margin of 4 feet. Obviously the cyclist didn't remain on the shoulder, but if he was there in the first place he was not in the lane, so the car passed in the lane providing sufficient safety margin...

The driver claimed that he tried to swerve when the cyclist moved, which doesn't preclude him already providing sufficient (3') of passing distance for the original described circumstances. You stated that it wasn't possible to "safely" pass under the conditions described. The "facts" are it is possible. Only the individuals involved know if it actually happened.

The bottom line is that there is no evidence offered to support or dispute the drivers claim. All claims by you and others (supporting either side) are based upon prejudice driven speculation. As such they are completely worthless.
Cyclist on CAAD9 was not on berm, more likely at least 1 foot left of fog line. 6 foot car with 1 foot for mirrors. 24 inch wide handlebars. 3 feet passing clearance

1 + 7 + 2 + 3 = 13

So, the lane is 3 feet too narrow for the driver to be likely of providing an actual 3 feet clearance.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 08-02-11, 04:05 PM
  #33  
Lotus Monomaniac
 
Snydermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,046
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Looks like the driver was booked for something on 7-7-11

https://pajails.info/?RID=111262857
Snydermann is offline  
Old 08-02-11, 04:07 PM
  #34  
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,644
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1316 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times in 59 Posts
Originally Posted by Snydermann
Looks like the driver was booked for something on 7-7-11

https://pajails.info/?RID=111262857
Must be a mistake, he is such an upstanding guy, how could anyone doubt any of his stories?

SARCASM (for those lacking an understanding of such)
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 08-02-11, 04:09 PM
  #35  
Βanned.
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland Oregon
Posts: 620

Bikes: 1976 Dawes Galaxy, 1993 Trek 950 Single Track and Made-to-Measure Reynolds 753 road bike with Campag throughout.

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by CB HI
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Route+...=12,50.79,,0,0

The cyclist is on a CAAD9, riding on a 1 foot berm and the 21 year olds claim they were safely passing the cyclist while they were in the narrow lane and it was the cyclist that SUDDENLY lost control and swerved in front of them at exactly the wrong second in time.

BS
Thanks for the link. I completely agree with you. I will only believe the driver is innocent if he passes a lie detector test - since none will be given, I will assume driver guilt. In the Netherlands, drivers are assumed to be guilty in car / bike collisions and have to prove their innocence. It will be a cold day in hell before we see that in car-centric USA.

His obituary provides his home address and place of work - Google maps shows this to be a 60 mile commute, so his Sunday afternoon ride was likely a training ride, though I can find no report that provides any details.

He was approximately 6 miles from home and heading north on 96 towards Manns Choice and his home.

His obituary does not state anything about his hobbies or if he was a keen cyclist. No mention of touring or club riding, etc. Though the Cannondale Caad9 looks like a reasonably nice road bike.

The weather on the afternoon of his ride, according to Weather.com was excellent with a high of 89°F.

"The accident was at the end of a gradual curve," [Trooper] Bonin said - Google maps shows an almost straight road for more than a half mile either side of the post office at Buffalo Mills.

I do not see many links to online reports above, so here is one.

Those one-foot shoulders are a travesty - I see so many cyclists riding in them as though they are adequate, this is a disservice to all other cyclists. We will probably never know the truth of where and how Gary was riding. I would have been in the lane and moved to the shoulder as a courtesy to other vehicles - but only after I am sure they have slowed down.

It would also be nice to know if Gary was using a mirror, hi-vis clothing, etc.

One wonders where the evangelical Far-Right-As-Practicable people (Bekologist) would ride on that particular piece of road.
__________________
LOL The End is Nigh (for 80% of middle class North Americans) - I sneer in their general direction.
HoustonB is offline  
Old 08-02-11, 04:15 PM
  #36  
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,644
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1316 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times in 59 Posts
Originally Posted by myrridin
The bottom line is that there is no evidence offered to support or dispute the drivers claim. All claims by you and others (supporting either side) are based upon prejudice driven speculation. As such they are completely worthless.
Based on photos of the road, based on the width of the road, based on real probabilities and statistics. Based on the fact that cyclist handlebars/elbows are 22 to 24 inches wide which you seem to ignore. Based on unreasonable claims by the motorist of sudden wide 4.5 feet swerves by the cyclist at the last second. Even if the cyclist was in the middle of the berm, the motorist would be 0.5 feet into the oncoming lane to provide 3 feet passing clearance.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 08-02-11, 04:35 PM
  #37  
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,531 Times in 3,157 Posts
Originally Posted by mulveyr
As opposed to people who have convinced themselves that they should always automatically blame the driver, regardless of the facts?

It's amazing to me that so many people in A&S are absolutely convinced that the cyclist is never, ever in the wrong. They never veer. They never get in front of a car without looking. They're never ninja salmon at night. ( But if they are, they're still not at fault. )

There's no question that drivers are frequently at fault in car/cyclist accidents. But there's also no question that many cyclists are just as oblivious to basic rules of common sense when it comes to sharing roads.
It may be because some of us use mirrors, can hold a straight line so well that we can ride the bike lane stripe for as long as we want, and we have good lighting and believe in making ourselves both visible and predictable... and yet, in spite of all that, we find we do get close passes by motorists that could have easily made other choices... or worse, choose to harass cyclists.

And yes, we do see the ninjas, and the other cycling idiots that just make us slap our heads and shudder... while thinking "well, no wonder... "

As a side note, I do know a cat that plays the piano... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZ860P4iTaM
genec is offline  
Old 08-02-11, 04:41 PM
  #38  
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,325
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by CB HI
Based on photos of the road, based on the width of the road, based on real probabilities and statistics. Based on the fact that cyclist handlebars/elbows are 22 to 24 inches wide which you seem to ignore. Based on unreasonable claims by the motorist of sudden wide 4.5 feet swerves by the cyclist at the last second. Even if the cyclist was in the middle of the berm, the motorist would be 0.5 feet into the oncoming lane to provide 3 feet passing clearance.
From OP, "Police said Latterner was riding a Cannondale Caad9 bicycle on the east berm while traveling northbound on Route 96. He lost control of the bicycle and then traveled into the northbound lane..."

If the cyclist was traveling on the berm.shoulder when the motorist went to pass, then the motorist would clearly have been able to pass safely in the narrow lane despite you claim to the contrary. And you, nor anyone else on this thread have no evidence that the cyclists was not riding in the shoulder/berm.

You mention real probabilities and statistics... something that clearly indicates you know nothing of the subject since the facts are that a safe pass under the described conditions is possible. It is possible for a cyclist to swerve several feet (particularly when riding in a shoulder as anyone here should know) thereby causing an unavoidable collision. It is also possible that the motorist caused the accident. There is simply no empirical evidence to assign probabilities to either situation. Your claims are based solely upon your own prejudices...
myrridin is offline  
Old 08-02-11, 08:04 PM
  #39  
Banned
 
dynodonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: U.S. of A.
Posts: 7,466
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1268 Post(s)
Liked 78 Times in 67 Posts
Too bad that the cyclist didn't have some sort of rearward facing video cam on his bike, it might have helped shed some light in this incident.
__________________
Prisoner No. 979




dynodonn is offline  
Old 08-02-11, 08:09 PM
  #40  
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,644
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1316 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times in 59 Posts
Originally Posted by myrridin
From OP, "Police said Latterner was riding a Cannondale Caad9 bicycle on the east berm while traveling northbound on Route 96. He lost control of the bicycle and then traveled into the northbound lane..."

If the cyclist was traveling on the berm.shoulder when the motorist went to pass, then the motorist would clearly have been able to pass safely in the narrow lane despite you claim to the contrary. And you, nor anyone else on this thread have no evidence that the cyclists was not riding in the shoulder/berm.

You mention real probabilities and statistics... something that clearly indicates you know nothing of the subject since the facts are that a safe pass under the described conditions is possible. It is possible for a cyclist to swerve several feet (particularly when riding in a shoulder as anyone here should know) thereby causing an unavoidable collision. It is also possible that the motorist caused the accident. There is simply no empirical evidence to assign probabilities to either situation. Your claims are based solely upon your own prejudices...
You seem to have no ability for simple addition.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 08-02-11, 09:05 PM
  #41  
Senior Member
 
mulveyr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: In the wilds of NY
Posts: 1,572

Bikes: Specialized Diverge, Box Dog Pelican, 1991 Cannondale tandem

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked 11 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by genec
It may be because some of us use mirrors, can hold a straight line so well that we can ride the bike lane stripe for as long as we want, and we have good lighting and believe in making ourselves both visible and predictable... and yet, in spite of all that, we find we do get close passes by motorists that could have easily made other choices... or worse, choose to harass cyclists.

And yes, we do see the ninjas, and the other cycling idiots that just make us slap our heads and shudder... while thinking "well, no wonder... "

As a side note, I do know a cat that plays the piano... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZ860P4iTaM
I *knew* someone would find a cat video... ;-)

I was discussing this subject with my 10-yr-old on our ride tonight. We started out at 6:30PM, and it was a bit cloudy. Decked out in all of our Fredly glory with front and rear blinking lights and his spoke lights ( you can't start the Fred-ness too young ) and highly visible clothes, we kept track of the riders we saw. We rode on suburban streets, mostly with designated bike routes. ( Mostly Penfield Road and then Clover Street in Brighton, for anyone who cares )

Unlit Ninjas: ( Based on them wearing black after 8:00PM - it was at least 30 minutes since most cars turned on lights ) : 5
Salmon: 1 ( Which must be a new record! )
Fred/Wilmas: ( Yay! ) 3
Sundry scofflaws: ( Running red lights ) 2
Wobbler and Weavers: ( Highly subjective ) 3

Of the motorists:
Potential right-hookers : 0
Potential Left hooker: 1
Close passers: We stopped counting at 20
Safe passers: Way too many to count

What does all that prove? Not much. Except that the number of cyclists doing things that would have me say to my kid "If I see you doing that your bike is going in the garage for two weeks" significantly outnumbered the ones that I could point out and say "Now THAT'S how you ride safely."
__________________
Knows the weight of my bike to the nearest 10 pounds.
mulveyr is offline  
Old 08-03-11, 06:09 AM
  #42  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Houston TX area
Posts: 816

Bikes: Trek 1420 triple, Mercier Corvus, Globe 1 700, Surly Disc Trucker, GT Avalanche, GT Grade, GT Helion, Mercier Corvus, Motobacane Boris X7 Fat Bikes,

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
IMO the driver buzzed the guy and blew the horn. gut feeling
Jamesw2 is offline  
Old 08-03-11, 06:19 AM
  #43  
Senior Member
 
Zaneluke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Germantown MD
Posts: 279

Bikes: Trek Y-5

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by mulveyr
As opposed to people who have convinced themselves that they should always automatically blame the driver, regardless of the facts?

It's amazing to me that so many people in A&S are absolutely convinced that the cyclist is never, ever in the wrong. They never veer. They never get in front of a car without looking. They're never ninja salmon at night. ( But if they are, they're still not at fault. )

There's no question that drivers are frequently at fault in car/cyclist accidents. But there's also no question that many cyclists are just as oblivious to basic rules of common sense when it comes to sharing roads.
I drive,bike and run.
I run about 30 miles a week. I come across just as many clueless drivers as I do bicyclists. I almost get whacked crossing crosswalks and running on multi use pathways.
Zaneluke is offline  
Old 08-03-11, 08:03 AM
  #44  
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,325
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by CB HI
You seem to have no ability for simple addition.
Your "math" only works because of your prejudices and assumptions. You claimed it wasn't possible to safely pass while remaining in the same lane. The key is your assuming (which you stated above) that the cyclist was in the lane. If they were in fact on the shoulder (which you have no evidence to prove otherwise) than safe passing was possible.

Like so many here you are letting your prejudices make you assume the driver was at fault when the facts are it could have been either the driver or the cyclists or even both who contributed to the accident...
myrridin is offline  
Old 08-03-11, 08:44 AM
  #45  
Banned
 
dynodonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: U.S. of A.
Posts: 7,466
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1268 Post(s)
Liked 78 Times in 67 Posts
Originally Posted by Snydermann
Looks like the driver was booked for something on 7-7-11

https://pajails.info/?RID=111262857
If indeed that this is the same driver, curiosity is getting the best of me on what he was booked into jail for.
__________________
Prisoner No. 979




dynodonn is offline  
Old 08-03-11, 09:47 AM
  #46  
Senior Member
 
Kurt Erlenbach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Space Coast, Florida
Posts: 2,465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
It's always entertaining to have a few pieces of a 100-piece puzzle and try to figure out what the real picture is. I do it for a living (though with more than a few pieces of evidence, I hope) in court every day. Here's what I know. Without other evidence, you've got to go with the testimony of witnesses (here, the driver and passenger), even if you don't want to. There's plenty of room to speculate, and HoustonB above adds some interesting info. You've got to believe that someone on a long ride with a nice bike is not an inexperienced noob. But a Focus is a small, quiet car, and more than once I've done things (swerved to miss a stick, make an inadequate look when changing lanes, things like that) which in retrospect were not wise. The cyclist might not have heard the car. On balance, I think you've got to go with the witnesses, even though biased, unless other evidence contradicts them.
Kurt Erlenbach is offline  
Old 08-03-11, 10:04 AM
  #47  
Senior Member
 
EsoxLucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Western Wisconsin
Posts: 411

Bikes: 2009 Giant Cypress DX 2009 Jamis Coda Comp

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by HoustonB
Thanks for the link. I completely agree with you. I will only believe the driver is innocent if he passes a lie detector test - since none will be given, I will assume driver guilt. In the Netherlands, drivers are assumed to be guilty in car / bike collisions and have to prove their innocence. It will be a cold day in hell before we see that in car-centric USA.
Throw out the 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments to US Constitution and a whole *****pot of common law just to accommodate bicyclists?
EsoxLucius is offline  
Old 08-03-11, 11:27 AM
  #48  
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,531 Times in 3,157 Posts
Originally Posted by EsoxLucius
Throw out the 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments to US Constitution and a whole *****pot of common law just to accommodate bicyclists?
Some of that "common law" is in place to accommodate motorists... at least some of the written laws DO give priority to motorists... such as the 85% rule. And then there are a whole host of bike laws that restrict movement of cyclists, relative to that of motorists.

When the laws are all fair to all road users... Then perhaps we won't entertain notions such as "assuming driver guilt as in the Netherlands where drivers are assumed to be guilty in car / bike collision, unless they can prove otherwise."
genec is offline  
Old 08-03-11, 12:59 PM
  #49  
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,325
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by genec
When the laws are all fair to all road users...
An adult shouldn't need to hear this, but life is not fair. Some people are smarter than others, some people are richer than others, etc. Nothing in the law is indicative of fairness...

Originally Posted by genec
Then perhaps we won't entertain notions such as "assuming driver guilt as in the Netherlands where drivers are assumed to be guilty in car / bike collision, unless they can prove otherwise."
So your willing to change our entire system so that the government can accuse you (or anyone) of a crime and it is your responsibility to prove your innocence? Lets hope that the rest of the country retains their sanity and this never becomes an issue. Since you can't change the assumed innocent presumption for some crimes and not expect it to spread to other (and likely all) crimes, version of the flavor of the month... Whatever, faction gets the upper hand legislatively can than start applying that new rule to whatever crime they wish...

Our system was designed, and rightfully so, not to ensure the conviction of the guilty, but to minimize the chance that the innocent would be convicted... Despite hysterical, prejudice driven rhetoric to the contrary...
myrridin is offline  
Old 08-03-11, 02:34 PM
  #50  
Senior Member
 
EsoxLucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Western Wisconsin
Posts: 411

Bikes: 2009 Giant Cypress DX 2009 Jamis Coda Comp

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by genec
Some of that "common law" is in place to accommodate motorists... at least some of the written laws DO give priority to motorists... such as the 85% rule. And then there are a whole host of bike laws that restrict movement of cyclists, relative to that of motorists.

When the laws are all fair to all road users... Then perhaps we won't entertain notions such as "assuming driver guilt as in the Netherlands where drivers are assumed to be guilty in car / bike collision, unless they can prove otherwise."
I was referring only to the long standing precept in this country of a presumption of innocence.
EsoxLucius is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.