Bike Forums

Bike Forums (http://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Advocacy & Safety (http://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-safety/)
-   -   Couple berate cyclist for reporting illegaly-parked van (http://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-safety/923316-couple-berate-cyclist-reporting-illegaly-parked-van.html)

I-Like-To-Bike 11-26-13 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phoebeisis (Post 16280082)
When you are making a turn-you are concentrating on a moving cars-or pedestrians jay walking or legally crossing and intersection-you might not expect the van to be plopped there.Yeah-humans are predators-so motion is what we most quickly appreciate.
Obvious he couldn't have LITERALLY almost hit it-but it probably did surprise him

Any adult cyclist who is "surprised" to encounter an illegally parked car/truck when cycling anywhere in a major U.S city must be a blissfully unaware cyclist, or "distracted" by something else other than cycling.

mconlonx 11-26-13 03:28 PM

This would have worked out much better in the cyclist's favor if he'd hit the van first, then called the cops. Subpoena the couple as witnesses...

FBinNY 11-26-13 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mconlonx (Post 16280639)
This would have worked out much better in the cyclist's favor if he'd hit the van first, then called the cops. Subpoena the couple as witnesses...

Under the traffic laws of most states the cyclist would have been responsible, and could be made to pay for damage to the back of the van.

Just about everywhere, the driver of a vehicle is responsible for his front end, and must drive/ride in control.

Let's flip this on it's end and reverse the roles. A cyclist (stupid, but bear with me) is fixing a flat curbside but in the street near a corner. A car swings around and hits him. Does anyone here believe the driver wouldn't be at fault?

noisebeam 11-26-13 04:12 PM

If I understand correctly this left turn is more like a typical right turn.
There is plenty of line of sight to see and react to parked van as seen in the video at ~0:15s mark.

I also find it curious the cyclist did not post the video footage of approaching the van from the turn, but instead started showing it after adjacent to van, probably it would show clearly there was no safety issue.

FBinNY 11-26-13 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by noisebeam (Post 16280740)
If I understand correctly this left turn is more like a typical right turn.
There is plenty of line of sight to see and react to parked van ....

And if there isn't the cyclist (or anybody) coming around the corner should be adjusting speed accordingly.

dynaryder 11-26-13 05:32 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by FBinNY (Post 16278070)
I read the links, but for me it comes down to philosophical priorities. IMO the concept of "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" trumps the specific case here. I don't live such an exemplary life that I'm willing to report the
minor (IMO) infractions of others. Of course, it's possible that the cyclist in the OP is a saint....

You are just not getting this. This is Washington DC,not New York City. They are different places. We do not have effective traffic enforcement,we haven't for over a decade. If it weren't for cyclists and WABA raising a stink about the cycle tracks(this one and the Penn Ave one),*NOTHING* would be done about it. That's how things are around here. Grease is only supplied to squeaks.

And what's with this first stone crap? Who cares what kind of person the cyclist is? He was reporting something illegal/unsafe. First stone nonsense is exactly how many drivers talk;they may be talking on their cellphone(illegal here),but all cyclists run stop signs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FBinNY (Post 16278070)
If this is important to you, work through the same community structures that got the patch built, to let the police command know that enforcement is a priority.

We are. It's called WABA.

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=352678

Quote:

Originally Posted by FBinNY (Post 16278070)
BTW- this is a forum, and I think I'm made my opinion abundantly clear, and don't think there's anything I could add, so I'll move on.

3 more posts. :rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by boattail71 (Post 16278243)
Both parties are unreasonable and dare I say that the cyclist started it.

Started what? All he did was swing around and start making a phone call. The woman approached him,then the man piled on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by boattail71 (Post 16278243)
I don't know this area; did not the Monopoly Man have a point about the bike lane not blocked?

No,he was totally wrong. He said the buffer,with the bollards,was the cycletrack.

Quote:

Originally Posted by boattail71 (Post 16278243)
I'd suggest the camera-cyclist to pick your battles. Save your energy on infractions that really matter. Wouldn't that get more respect from the authorities?

See the previous links. We've been having significant issues with the L St and Penn Ave cycletracks.

FBinNY 11-26-13 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dynaryder (Post 16280963)
You are just not getting this..... .

Absolutely, I don't get it, and probably never will.

I don't get how a cyclist almost hitting a stationary object can blame the object (under ANY circumstance). IMO, that difuses the safety argument.

As for whether reporting violations, that's simply a philosophical differences, you feel it's necessary (which is your opinion, and I don't have a problem with it) I don't feel it's the best approach, and may be counter-productive. That's on top of my deep felt bias against reporting infractions based on personal pique.

So you're right, we will never see eye to eye on this, but that's OK because reasonable people can look at the identical situation and draw completely opposite conclusions.

And, you are right that I basically signed off on the thread, but I don't consider that binding, nor does anyone else.

So please stop saying I don't get it, or that Wash, DC isn't NYC, because both are givens. Instead, let's just agree to disagree on the fundamental points here.

phoebeisis 11-26-13 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike (Post 16280633)
Any adult cyclist who is "surprised" to encounter an illegally parked car/truck when cycling anywhere in a major U.S city must be a blissfully unaware cyclist, or "distracted" by something else other than cycling.

Maybe startled a bit is more correct.
Riding along-looking for pads and moving cars-makes a turn-BLAM there it is. Yeah he was probably concentrating on the moving targets-cars and peds.

I-Like-To-Bike 11-27-13 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phoebeisis (Post 16281178)
Maybe startled a bit is more correct.
Riding along-looking for pads and moving cars-makes a turn-BLAM there it is. Yeah he was probably concentrating on the moving targets-cars and peds.

Maybe. I suspect more likely he had no problem maneuvering around the parked vehicle but decided to make an issue of it anyway. Just as a minute later the older couple made an issue out of his activities.

katsrevenge 11-27-13 02:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike (Post 16281915)
Maybe. I suspect more likely he had no problem maneuvering around the parked vehicle but decided to make an issue of it anyway. Just as a minute later the older couple made an issue out of his activities.

There is a lovely little old lady who crosswalk guards for a school near here. She rides a bike that she's very fond of, an old fashioned Schwinn -looking cruiser with all the bells and bobbles that you could ask for. Her son bought it for her after her first bike died. She was so afraid she's be house bound without her old bike..bought that one in the 60s if I remember her story right. She's 70-something. No car.

So, her kid fixed bike.2 all up with a bell and fenders and a squishy seat and spray painted it blue just like her first one. She rides that bike everyday. Slowly, but she's on it and riding very carefully along the sidewalks and side roads doing whatever it is 70+ women do.

I complimented her bike and got the whole story. She still waves when she sees me. It really is a cute bike. Teal and bright blue. She says a blue bike is her 'signature' thing.

Point of all of this is that bicyclists come in all sorts of skill and ability levels. A slower rider like her would probably feel safe riding in a bike lane with some dividers. She would have every right to expect that bike lane to not have a car parked in it. A slower bike rider may even be put into danger if they would have to nip into traffic to go around it. You want more people cycling, better cycling laws and infrastructure, the works... than these are the sorts of people you need to make welcome. That means busting the hell out of buttheads that park in cycling lanes.

Chris516 11-27-13 02:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike (Post 16280633)
Any adult cyclist who is "surprised" to encounter an illegally parked car/truck when cycling anywhere in a major U.S city must be a blissfully unaware cyclist, or "distracted" by something else other than cycling.

+10

Chris516 11-27-13 03:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dynaryder (Post 16280963)
You are just not getting this. This is Washington DC, not New York City. They are different places. We do not have effective traffic enforcement, we haven't for over a decade. If it weren't for cyclists and WABA raising a stink about the cycle tracks(this one and the Penn Ave one),*NOTHING* would be done about it. That's how things are around here. Grease is only supplied to squeaks.

And what's with this first stone crap? Who cares what kind of person the cyclist is? He was reporting something illegal/unsafe. First stone nonsense is exactly how many drivers talk;they may be talking on their cellphone(illegal here),but all cyclists run stop signs.

I am inclined to agree with this. Even though I lived in (Duluth)Minnesota Nov.'02-Jan.'07, I had lived in NW DC and Montgomery County(Maryland) since 1984. I had also lived in DC back in 1981. Prior to that only a few summers. In 1981. I was hit by an inattentive octogenarian as I was making a right turn from Foxhall Road on to Q St.. I was 'stupidly' hugging the curb, but as a 14yr.-old kid I didn't know any better. When I started to make the turn, I had to avoid a parked car on Q St., the 80yr.-old female driver crowded me on the left side. This resulted in my crashing and ending up halfway under her car. She was totally oblivious except for screaming in pain as the left pedal(it had the standard 'tooth' design, instead of the flat surface of touring pedals) dug into my foot.

Since I moved back to the region from Minnesota in 2007, I have had one bike accident on Wisc. Ave. right across from the HQ of the U.S. Secret Service where, I stupidly didn't see the 'classic' DC pothole, that sent me flying over the handlebars. But I have also been hit three times when I have 'hugged the curb'. I was hit once last year at an intersection because of getting frustrated with the bottleneck at a green light during PM-Rush. So that was entirely and totally my fault.

Last year, and the pothole in DC notwithstanding, every time I have had a chance to talk with an officer in Montgomery County, DC, (or even in Fairfax County or Arlington County in Virginia), I have heard the classic excuse that they had to 'see' a 'close pass'. Granted an officer can't accurately see if a vehicle is abiding by the 'close pass' laws. But, Even if a cyclist has a helmetcam, the departments won't look at it. The police departments(state, county, and city, along with the U.S. Park Police) in the region only take notice of a cyclist, when they are involved in an accident. Regardless of whether a cyclist is killed or not, in this region predominantly, the it is almost always judged to be the cyclist's fault. That is what happened in the case of Natasha Pettigrew's death. The driver(Christy Littleford) was sentenced to less than a year in prison. The latest case of maligned justice is the recent death of Trish Cunningham. Where the DA in the case, chose not to press charges against Whitney DeCesaris, beyond the four driving-specific charges. Despite the fact of the comment Ms. DeCesaris following the accident saying specifically "Forget about what is gone". So, When Dr. Christopher Thompson was sentenced in California, to prison for road rage against two cyclists' who were not killed, that was a rarity. Yet motorists' in the D.C.-Metro region can practically treat cyclists' like shooting pigeons at a state/county fair. Because of the gift of 'immunity from prosecution' due to the hostility of law enforcement towards' cyclists'. Sure, There are 'passing' laws on the books in Maryland, Virginia, and DC. But both states and DC choose to ignore them. I was at a grocery store yesterday and happened to see a county police officer. I 'tried' to ask him about seeing what the police department's policy was on the 3-Foot law that was put into law several years ago. He became hostile with me, almost immediately. When I wasn't asking him to tell me the answer to what the policy was, but where I could find the actual noted policy in the police department's records so I could talk to a senior officer about it.

phoebeisis 11-27-13 05:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike (Post 16281915)
Maybe. I suspect more likely he had no problem maneuvering around the parked vehicle but decided to make an issue of it anyway. Just as a minute later the older couple made an issue out of his activities.

Well,yeah, he is obviously a crusader-beloved by some-not so beloved by others.

mconlonx 11-27-13 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FBinNY (Post 16280665)
Under the traffic laws of most states the cyclist would have been responsible, and could be made to pay for damage to the back of the van.

Just about everywhere, the driver of a vehicle is responsible for his front end, and must drive/ride in control.

Let's flip this on it's end and reverse the roles. A cyclist (stupid, but bear with me) is fixing a flat curbside but in the street near a corner. A car swings around and hits him. Does anyone here believe the driver wouldn't be at fault?

Cyclist could claim "I didn't see it," which is known to absolve vehicle drivers in court, and further, that the cyclist was certainly not expecting a parked car in the bike lane.

I-Like-To-Bike 11-27-13 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katsrevenge (Post 16282050)
Point of all of this is that bicyclists come in all sorts of skill and ability levels. A slower rider like her would probably feel safe riding in a bike lane with some dividers. She would have every right to expect that bike lane to not have a car parked in it. A slower bike rider may even be put into danger if they would have to nip into traffic to go around it.

Any cyclist who rides blissfully along a bike path as if her "right to expect that bike lane to not have a car parked in it" will make it so is someone who should not be riding on a city street. Nor should anyone ride who is not capable of looking to see what traffic is approaching before "nipping" into traffic and using brakes if necessary. I feel no need to welcome people who ride a bicycle in traffic as if brain dead.

dynodonn 11-27-13 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike (Post 16282699)
I feel no need to welcome people who ride a bicycle in traffic as if brain dead.

Maybe we should also not welcome motorists who drive in traffic or park their vehicles as if in the same manner.

I-Like-To-Bike 11-27-13 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dynodonn (Post 16282715)
Maybe we should also not welcome motorists who drive in traffic or park their vehicles as if in the same manner.

If you believe continual indiscriminate ranting and wailing about motorists in general (as found in A&S postings) is good advocacy for bicyclists or will make conditions safer for bicyclists, you are welcome to it

katsrevenge 11-27-13 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike (Post 16282699)
Any cyclist who rides blissfully along a bike path as if her "right to expect that bike lane to not have a car parked in it" will make it so is someone who should not be riding on a city street. Nor should anyone ride who is not capable of looking to see what traffic is approaching before "nipping" into traffic and using brakes if necessary. I feel no need to welcome people who ride a bicycle in traffic as if brain dead.

I think you are missing the forest for the trees. As more people bike for actual transportation needs and NOT as kitted up weekend road warriors who thrill at high speeds you will see many more people with lesser physical strength or abilities on the road. 'Nipping' in and out of traffic takes more sheer muscle power than does riding slowly in a straight line. Add a speeding car (and at least around here half of them are always speeding) and it could get deadly fast. All because someone broke a simple parking law.

Besides, part of the point of a bike lane is to get bikes OUT of the traffic if they want out. Not all of us want to fight for part of a lane and do 20 mile an hour.

Quote:

Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike (Post 16282771)
If you believe continual indiscriminate ranting and wailing about motorists in general (as found in A&S postings) is good advocacy for bicyclists or will make conditions safer for bicyclists, you are welcome to it

...this isn't indiscriminate ranting. This is wondering why a bicyclist feels the need to defend the illegal actions of a particular driver.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dynodonn (Post 16282715)
Maybe we should also not welcome motorists who drive in traffic or park their vehicles as if in the same manner.

Agreed. Even more so when their actions are illegal.

dynaryder 11-27-13 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike (Post 16281915)
I suspect more likely he had no problem maneuvering around the parked vehicle but decided to make an issue of it anyway.

Quite possible. But as I've said,repeatedly,if cyclists didn't aggressively report bike lane parking,this track and other lanes would be useless. I've had people come into my clinic who wouldn't ride if it wasn't for the bike lanes.

FBinNY 11-27-13 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dynaryder (Post 16284516)
Quite possible. But as I've said,repeatedly,if cyclists didn't aggressively report bike lane parking,this track and other lanes would be useless. I've had people come into my clinic who wouldn't ride if it wasn't for the bike lanes.

While I don't agree that it's the best way, I have no issue with your opinion that reporting is necessary to get police action. We also have a philosophical difference about reporting traffic in infractions in general. Both are valid differences of opinion, and there's plenty of room for mutual respect.

OTOH- I take exception to the idea that this is big time safety issue. Any rider that turns a corner and nearly, or actually collides with a van is outriding his sight lines and not in control of his bicycle. To speak of this as a safety issue is to absolve cyclists of responsibility for riding intelligently.

daihard 11-28-13 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike (Post 16280633)
Any adult cyclist who is "surprised" to encounter an illegally parked car/truck when cycling anywhere in a major U.S city must be a blissfully unaware cyclist, or "distracted" by something else other than cycling.

This may be the first time I've fully agreed with you. :)

I-Like-To-Bike 11-28-13 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katsrevenge (Post 16284476)
As more people bike for actual transportation needs and NOT as kitted up weekend road warriors who thrill at high speeds you will see many more people with lesser physical strength or abilities on the road. 'Nipping' in and out of traffic takes more sheer muscle power than does riding slowly in a straight line. Add a speeding car (and at least around here half of them are always speeding) and it could get deadly fast. All because someone broke a simple parking law.

Besides, part of the point of a bike lane is to get bikes OUT of the traffic if they want out. Not all of us want to fight for part of a lane and do 20 mile an hour.

The issue is not a question of speed, equipment or clothing. Riding in bike lanes IS riding in traffic. Urban bike lane cyclists are not isolated from interactions with motor vehicles and cannot be protected by righteous indignation at the sight of a motor vehicle nearby or crossing bike lane paint.

A bike lane cyclist should not be surprised or shocked to encounter traffic at an intersection, let alone deal with a car door that might open in front of them or a motor vehicle make a turn into a driveway or exit same; or even a car backing up across a bike lane while parking. If cyclists expect to be isolated from motorized traffic they should seek bike trails through the woods to nowhere.

dynodonn 11-28-13 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katsrevenge (Post 16284476)
Besides, part of the point of a bike lane is to get bikes OUT of the traffic if they want out. Not all of us want to fight for part of a lane and do 20 mile an hour.

Agree, and reflects my earlier posts whereas if cycling infrastructure is left to be continually obstructed, a number of cyclists will eventually opt for other means of transportation, driving down ridership numbers.

daihard 11-28-13 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike (Post 16285869)
A bike lane cyclist should not be surprised or shocked to encounter traffic at an intersection, let alone deal with a car door that might open in front of them or a motor vehicle make a turn into a driveway or exit same; or even a car backing up across a bike lane while parking. If cyclists expect to be isolated from motorized traffic they should seek bike trails through the woods to nowhere.

Well-designed bike lanes address some of those issues, if not all. For instance, they can build bike lanes right by the curb, designate the parking spots outside them, and separate them from the bike lanes with a low concrete wall with enough space to prevent passenger dooring. We will still need to be aware of vehicles making a turn onto a crossing street or into a driveway, but the fewer issues to deal with, the better.

Dchiefransom 11-28-13 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dynodonn (Post 16273050)
...and one wonders why a number of motorists will continue blocking cycling infrastructure. I not sure why you sense entitlement from the cyclist's right in reporting a traffic hazard.

Would you call in every salmon cyclist you see?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:14 AM.