Longtime Tigard teacher dies when car hits bike
Sunday, June 19, 2005
PETER FARRELL
The Oregonian
http://www.oregonlive.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news/1119175125264050.xml?oregonian?lcps&coll=7
Eric Kautzky, a science teacher and athletic trainer at Tigard High School for 24 years, was killed Saturday morning when a car that police said traveled into a bicycle lane hit his bicycle.
Kautzky, 56, a Durham resident and bicycle racer, was in the first year of his retirement.
"We're just sick about this," said Pam Henslee, the Tigard principal. "This is a huge loss to Tigard High School. He was just revered by people in the community."
The crash occurred about 6:30 a.m. as Kautzky's bicycle and the car traveled west on Southwest Tualatin-Sherwood Road at Wildrose Place in Sherwood.
Detective Sgt. Dwight Onchi of the Sherwood Police Department said witnesses told investigators that Kautzky was in a well-marked bicycle lane when he was struck from behind and thrown into the windshield of the car.
Kautzky was wearing a helmet, Onchi said, but appeared to have severe head injuries.
Onchi identified the car's driver as Joel Flores, 18, of Vancouver. No citation was issued immediately.
Sherwood officers were familiar with Kautzky because they frequently saw him riding in the area, Onchi said.
Kautzky rode in bicycle races with Team Rose City.
The BikeForums Team
-adv-
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content here.
....witnesses told investigators that Kautzky was in a well-marked bicycle lane when he was struck from behind
Onchi identified the car's driver as Joel Flores, 18, of Vancouver. No citation was issued immediately.
Well what the hell are they waiting for?
Cross the lane and hit a car and you'll get cited, I guess the guy on the bike shouldn't have been there.
kb0tnv
WTF (What the Fudge!) Crazy world we live in where a guy got hit from behind in a bike lane and still the driver isn't cited!
Keep Cycling!
Bike nut
I wonder if the police asked him why he was in the bike lane. If the driver was on the sidewalk and hit a pedestrian I wonder if they would have cited him. Once again, the best place way to punish him is with a nice big lawsuit instead of a small fine and a ticket.
randya
ORS 811.050 Failure to yield to rider on bicycle lane; penalty.
(1) A person commits the offense of failure of a motor vehicle operator to yield to a rider on a bicycle lane if the person is operating a motor vehicle and the person does not yield the right of way to a person operating a bicycle, electric assisted bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility device, moped, motor assisted scooter or motorized wheelchair upon a bicycle lane.
(2) This section does not require a person operating a moped to yield the right of way to a bicycle or a motor assisted scooter if the moped is operated on a bicycle lane in the manner permitted under ORS 811.440.
(3) The offense described in this section, failure of a motor vehicle operator to yield to a rider on a bicycle lane, is a Class B traffic violation.
ORS 811.435 Operation of motor vehicle on bicycle trail; exemptions; penalty.
(1) A person commits the offense of operation of a motor vehicle on a bicycle trail if the person operates a motor vehicle upon a bicycle lane or a bicycle path.
(2) Exemptions to this section are provided under ORS 811.440.
(3) This section is not applicable to mopeds. ORS 811.440 and 814.210 control the operation and use of mopeds on bicycle lanes and paths.
(4) The offense described in this section, operation of a motor vehicle on a bicycle trail, is a Class B traffic violation.
ORS 811.440 When motor vehicles may operate on bicycle lane.
This section provides exemptions from the prohibitions under ORS 811.435 and 814.210 against operating motor vehicles on bicycle lanes and paths. The following vehicles are not subject to ORS 811.435 and 814.210 under the circumstances described:
(1) A person may operate a moped on a bicycle lane that is immediately adjacent to the roadway only while the moped is being exclusively powered by human power.
(2) A person may operate a motor vehicle upon a bicycle lane when:
(a) Making a turn;
(b) Entering or leaving an alley, private road or driveway; or
(c) Required in the course of official duty.
(3) An implement of husbandry may momentarily cross into a bicycle lane to permit other vehicles to overtake and pass the implement of husbandry.
(4) A person may operate a motorized wheelchair on a bicycle lane or path.
(5) A person may operate a motor assisted scooter on a bicycle lane or path.
(6) A person may operate an electric personal assistive mobility device on a bicycle lane or path
"...struck from behind and thrown into the windshield of the car.
Kautzky was wearing a helmet, Onchi said, but appeared to have severe head injuries."
At least the article was honest about this part; that's a big change from the typical press report on these types of incidents.
Diesel
I'm glad to hear that his helmet protected him.
What an offensive statement to post. A cyclist doing everything correctly to be safe gets killed by getting run up on from behind where there not a whole lot any cyclist can do in this type situation. I would hope not even you would encounter this type of accident even though you posted such jerk post.
Have a nice day creep.
oboeguy
What an offensive statement to post. A cyclist doing everything correctly to be safe gets killed by getting run up on from behind where there not a whole lot any cyclist can do in this type situation. I would hope not even you would encounter this type of accident even though you posted such jerk post.
Have a nice day creep.
Yes, that was a truly dumb statement. You don't hear about the ones who survive because, DUH, they survived. Go away, troll!
randya
Yes, that was a truly dumb statement. You don't hear about the ones who survive because, DUH, they survived. Go away, troll!
Yeah, but which one's the troll? Based on the personal attack, I'd say it's Diesel...and IMO his ire should more properly be directed towards the motorist...
Go read closetbiker's posts in the sticky helmet thread if you really want to know what BostonFixed meant, otherwise, my advice is keep it to yourself, you're not adding anything to the discussion...
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=96298
Miracle Whip
Law enforcement will often hold off on citing drivers and issuing tickets until the investigation has been completed.
slvoid
How can you be driving in a lane you're not supposed to be in, hit someone, kill them, and not get cited?
I hope someone can honestly answer that for me.
kuan
With something as serious as this, you don't want to botch anything. What kind of ticket would you give the driver? Is there one for reckless endangerment leading to manslaughter? It's like Sharon Stone said in Basic Instinct. What are you gonna do, arrest me for smoking?
anders
I'm glad to hear that his helmet protected him.
This is such a disgusting response to a tragic event. You should be ashamed of yourself. Have some respect.
anders
If you get more information on this after charges are brought, please post it. I am interested to see what happens to the driver.
timmhaan
With something as serious as this, you don't want to botch anything. What kind of ticket would you give the driver?
there are automatic tickets that would apply. failure to control vehicle would be a no-brainer ticket at the very least.
TeamKautzky
I just got back from the memorial service for Mr. Kautzky. He was a good friend and amazing inspiration to me and to many others. To read such a shallow and narrow- minded comment like "good to hear his helmet protected him" makes me sick. Furthermore, the reason a citiation wasn't issued at the site is because they have to investigate the sceen perfectly, so they don't botch anything, and then charge him with vehicular homicide....FYI. I do hope this tragedy opens the eyes of bike riders and drivers everywhere; I don't want anyone to feel what I, the family, and the community feel at this very moment.
trekets
I'm glad to hear that his helmet protected him.
How could someone post this? I don't understand. A man loses his life and we have to then read this rude comment. Unbelievable.
trekets
I just got back from the memorial service for Mr. Kautzky. He was a good friend and amazing inspiration to me and to many others. To read such a shallow and narrow- minded comment like "good to hear his helmet protected him" makes me sick. Furthermore, the reason a citiation wasn't issued at the site is because they have to investigate the sceen perfectly, so they don't botch anything, and then charge him with vehicular homicide....FYI. I do hope this tragedy opens the eyes of bike riders and drivers everywhere; I don't want anyone to feel what I, the family, and the community feel at this very moment.
I do hope this 18 year old is charged with vehicular homicide. He should never be allowed to get behind the wheel of a car again.
And I hope this tragedy opens the eyes of law enforcement so that they spend more of their time ticketing drivers for speeding, aggressive driving, DUI, failure to signal lane changes, going through stop signs & red lights, etc. The only thing that seems to get drivers to pay attention and obey the law is the threat of tickets, increased insurance rates and loss of license.
Totoro
I'm glad to hear that his helmet protected him.
Helmets are not foolproof, and neither is this board - if you get my drift.
John E
I just got back from the memorial service for Mr. Kautzky. He was a good friend and amazing inspiration to me and to many others. Thank you very much for writing what must have been a difficult post for you. What a fine memorial! I feel as though I have lost yet another valued "friend I never met." You have my sincere condolences.
To read such a shallow and narrow- minded comment like "good to hear his helmet protected him" makes me sick.
[QUOTE=TeamKautzky] Furthermore, the reason a citiation wasn't issued at the site is because they have to investigate the sceen perfectly, so they don't botch anything, and then charge him with vehicular homicide....FYI. I do hope this tragedy opens the eyes of bike riders and drivers everywhere; I don't want anyone to feel what I, the family, and the community feel at this very moment. The perpetrator needs at least a 10-year driver's license suspension and community service of speaking to driver's education classes, traffic schools, and community groups about the dangers of inattentive driving. I certainly hope the charges will stick and not be dismissed or diluted in a motorist-sympathetic courtroom.
John E
Helmets are not foolproof, and neither is this board - if you get my drift. I think many of us get your drift, Totoro. Well put.
TeamKautzky
I just wanted to let those out there know the outcome of the kid who hit and killed Eric Kautzky, an Oregon teacher. This morning Joel Flores, 18 was indicted for 2nd degree manslaughter which carries an automatic minimum punishment of 75 months in prison, or a little over 6 years.
Mr. K, as I called him was probably the most inspirational person I have ever known. I miss him dearly and feel incredibly sad for all those students out there that won't recieve the life-long benefit of knowing him for even a day. I have very split emotions when it comes to this case. A large part of me wants this kid punished to the fullest extent of the law. The other part of me knows for-sure, that Mr. K would NOT want such a young life to be ruined....he was such a forgiving soul.
I guess the very best that can come from this is that people out there, bikers and drivers, will remember this story and every time they pass a biker on the road they give them all the space they need to make their safe journey home.
genec
I guess the very best that can come from this is that people out there, bikers and drivers, will remember this story and every time they pass a biker on the road they give them all the space they need to make their safe journey home.
Well indeed the cyclists will remember it...
Sorry for your loss.
Sawtooth
I wonder if the police asked him why he was in the bike lane. If the driver was on the sidewalk and hit a pedestrian I wonder if they would have cited him. Once again, the best place way to punish him is with a nice big lawsuit instead of a small fine and a ticket.
You can't squeeze blood from a stone. He is 18. What could he possibly possess that would even begin to compensate for the loss to the victims family?
slvoid
You can't squeeze blood from a stone. He is 18. What could he possibly possess that would even begin to compensate for the loss to the victims family?
His hands. In some countries, they cut off your hands, or feet, if you're lucky.
That's what's wrong with this country, mixed up priorities.
Download 5 britney spears songs? $100,000 fine and possible jail time.
Take away a human life? Slap on the wrist.
scarry
So much for bike lanes and helmets. :rolleyes:
Could it be that, CARS SUCK?
Helmet Head
Not to blame the cyclist, but does anyone else think that cyclo-segregationism, and particularly the method of riding too far to the right, as is accepted as right and proper in our culture, was a significant contributory factor in the death of this man? Anyone else fault the BIKE LANE, as a tool of cyclo-segregationism, and those who support bike lanes, for misguiding cyclists into riding too far to the right in situations like this?
I have described my hypothesis on this forum many times... The subconscious of a driver tends not to bother to alert his conscious mind about what it deems to be insignificant... like a cyclist who is up ahead riding near the right side, in a bike lane. Anyone want to bet that the driver "never saw him"? Of course he never "saw" him... what he means is he was never aware of him, and what that means is that even though he probably physically saw the cyclist, the subconscious mind didn't think it was important enough to make the conscious mind aware of his presence. So there he is motoring along the road, unaware of the cyclist up ahead and "out of the way" in the bike lane, and, for some reason, drifts into the bike lane. The idea that bike lanes make motorists MORE aware of cyclists is a crock. How many cyclists have to die until cyclists, much less the general public, realizes this? How many? How many?
Now, I'm NOT defending the motorist here, don't get me wrong. That's completely negligent driving and I hope he goes away for a long time, BUT, that will not bring back Eric Krautzky. We need to look at ALL the contributory causes here, not just the negligent driving. And, in particular, as cyclists, I think we need to look at what cyclists can do in this type of situation to make getting run over less likely. I better not get any flack here for defending the motorist or blaming the cyclist. I'm not doing that.
However, I will say this: If you're riding on a quiet street at 6:30 am in a bike lane... be afraid. GET OUT OF THE BIKE LANE. Please.
Yes, I'm saying ride in the center of the vehicular lane even though there is a "perfectly good" bike lane to ride in. Why? Because your "perfectly good" bike lane is DEADLY. You need to position yourself so that motorists coming from behind (not to mention those whose path of travel intersects yours) NOTICE you, and are aware of you. Then you can move temporarily aside, when it is safe, reasonable and appropriate, to let them pass. Want to learn about this? Read about the concept of the default position in Robert Hurst's Urban Cycling, or, even better, study the concept of the primary riding position, and its purpose, in John Franklin's book, Cyclecraft.
And next time you're clamoring for more bike lanes in your town or city, please consider what I'm saying here, and pause for at least a moment, in memory of Eric "yet another BL victim" Krautzky.
How many cyclists have to be killed unnecessarily before we realize the culpability of cyclo-segregationism in so many cyclist deaths? How many wasted lives? It makes me sick.
SteveAZ
First and foremost, my condolences to Krautzky family and friends! It's always hard to hear stuff like this.
As for the bikelane debate, I don't know, I have a hard time believing that riding to the left of a bike lane that is 4' wide wouldn't make you the target of A LOT of road rage! Not to mention the fact that it would be illegal in most states thus putting you at fault if you were in an accident.
While riding in the bike lane you are going to have those that fail to accurately judge your speed and turn in front of you (daily occurance for me) and those that simply aren't AWARE that you're there. In my opinion the better solution (and one I'm much more comfortable with) would be to ride in the bike lane with caution and use a mirror.
It's unfortunate that there are these kinds of incidents but there are traffic accidents everyday, this is something bicyclists have to predict and regularly avoid. Riding in the middle of the street is not going to "educate" anyone, put the cyclist at a greater risk, and add to the on going tension between motorist and cyclist . Educate cyclists on awareness, defensive riding, and other safe practices will have a far greater impact that trying to make drivers more aware. They don't feel they have to be, nor are they concerned for their safety.
Keith99
While riding in the bike lane you are going to have those that fail to accurately judge your speed and turn in front of you (daily occurance for me) and those that simply aren't AWARE that you're there. In my opinion the better solution (and one I'm much more comfortable with) would be to ride in the bike lane with caution and use a mirror.
How would a mirror be of any use in this situation? What could the cyclist have done? While I disagree with Serge on the general advantages in this case a mirror would only be of use if one were riding well left, then the rider MIGHT have been able to duck to the right. Though in this case I doubt even that. It seems the car came fast from behind. Reactions of even the best cyclist are finite.
Helmet Head
I must have not been clear.
I am not suggesting that the cyclist still be in the center of the lane at the time the car from the rear reaches him.
What I'm suggesting is that at 6:30 A.M., and since there were no witnesses, he was probably riding along on a road devoid of traffic. At that time I would have been in the center of the lane. Now, as the motorist approached from the rear, which I would be aware of due to a judicious use of my mirror (momentary glance every 3-4 seconds), I would look for a sign that the driver knows I'm there. Usually, you will see him slow down a bit, or make an adjustment to his left in prepartion to pass you. Sometimes they honk. Whatever... as long as I know they are aware of me. Every time I do this, I get the "he is aware of me" feedback that I'm looking for long before he reaches me. When he is just a few seconds behind me, I take the fraction of a second that I need to move the 6 feet or so off to the side, including into the bike lane if one is there. Moving aside too early could be a mistake - you want to still be on their awareness radar as they pass you.
By the time he reaches me I'm in the exact same position Krautzky was in... in the bike lane. The only difference is that I would make sure he was aware of me before he reached me.
The backup plan - which only needs to be executed should the motorist continue driving without providing any feedback that he is aware of me - is to bail onto the sidewalk or off the roadway. I've never had to do that.
SteveAZ
First let me say I am not second guessing the actions of the deceased cyclist, that is not what I was refering to. I was replying to Helmethead's comments about BL riding.
Keith, to answer your question (Helmet Head kind of already did) diligent use of a mirror would make you aware of a vehicle (especially that early in the morning with little traffic) long before they were close enough to hit you. At which time you can make some observations about their driving and decide whether or not evassive action is necessary.
Sometimes I almost wonder if a tail light doesn't actually contribute to some of these types of accidents as a drunk or impaired driver might be inclined to actually follow that tail light failing to note that it's speed is significantly slower until it's too late. :(
Helmet head, after reading your post and rereading you're original post I understand what you're saying. I don't have a response for you as I'm still not sure that I totally agree with you nor do I fault it, so with that I'll leave it alone as I don't feel this is the place to debate it.
Steve
kwhord
Helmet: Is it really necessary to post a VC dissertation in response to every "cyclist killed" thread. I think everyone is aware of your possition on VC. I agree with you for the most part, but it isn't going to bring back this man, or help his family and friends cope with the loss. Perhaps you should write a book sir.
Yoshi
While I agree that bike lanes are a form of segregation and should be used with caution (if at all), I don't think this contributed to the accident. The cyclist was struck from behind as the driver was driving in the bike lane. Had the cyclist been in the center of the lane (and had the car not been driving in the bike lane) there is little to suggest that this would not have happened.
KeithA
TeamKautzky,
Your words regarding the man are truly a tribute and make me feel the loss as if I knew him myself.
Sounds like one of those special guys who has touched many lives.
Helmet Head
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think there is a certain efficacy in presenting these points in the context of a someone dying that is absent in a thread discussing seemingly abstract ideas. You're right, there is nothing we can do to bring back Eric Kautzky. But my interest is in trying to prevent losing others unnecessarily.
I do plan on writing a book. Part of my efforts here are to see what kinds of explanations and approaches work, and which ones don't. Here's a good example:
While I agree that bike lanes are a form of segregation and should be used with caution (if at all), I don't think this contributed to the accident. The cyclist was struck from behind as the driver was driving in the bike lane. Had the cyclist been in the center of the lane (and had the car not been driving in the bike lane) there is little to suggest that this would not have happened.
Yoshi, after apparently reading my posts, is not showing any sign of having recognized - whether he agreed with it or not - my point about making motorists AWARE of us when we are on the road. So did I not explain this carefully enough? Or was Yoshi not reading carefully? Or did he notice, choose to disagree with it, but not mention that in his post for some reason? Maybe I'm wrong, but not addressing it seems to me to indicate his missing the significance of it in my point.
I'll try one more time. The way we prevent getting hit by motorists is by getting them to be aware of our presence. If they're aware of us, unless they are homocidal maniacs, they are almost for sure not going to hit us. Even a drunk driver is unlikely to hit someone if he is aware of their presence. Many more drunk drivers make it home than not... So our strategy should be to make motorists aware of our presence.
I contend that riding in bike lanes is contrary to a strategy of making motorists aware of our presence.
How much of a role does a cyclist's lane position play in motorist's awareness of that cyclist? I believe a huge percentage of motorists are not aware of cyclists riding off to the side, including in shoulders and bike lanes. I also know that every motorist that has ever encountered me riding in the center of the lane in front of them, in his or her path, was aware of me. I know because they did something to indicate they were aware of me (e.g, slow down, adjust to the left, honk, wave, etc.).
To get on a motorist's "awareness radar", we must get out of the gutter and out of the bike lane, and, yes, into his path. Sure, we shouldn't be rude, and so we should get out of his way before we impede his travel (if it's safe and reasonable to do so), but why do it before we got some kind of feedback from him indicating that he is aware of our presence? Why not wait for that feedback, and then move aside? I do it. It seems like extra work at first, but now it's second nature. Consider that if you develop this habit too, what's the likelihood that someone will inadverdently drift into you to end in the same fate as Eric Kautzky? Nil.
Yoshi
Maybe I'm wrong, but I think there is a certain efficacy in presenting these points in the context of a someone dying that is absent in a thread discussing seemingly abstract ideas. You're right, there is nothing we can do to bring back Eric Kautzky. But my interest is in trying to prevent losing others unnecessarily.
I do plan on writing a book. Part of my efforts here are to see what kinds of explanations and approaches work, and which ones don't. Here's a good example:
Yoshi, after apparently reading my posts, is not showing any sign of having recognized - whether he agreed with it or not - my point about making motorists AWARE of us when we are on the road. So did I not explain this carefully enough? Or was Yoshi not reading carefully? Or did he notice, choose to disagree with it, but not mention that in his post for some reason? Maybe I'm wrong, but not addressing it seems to me to indicate his missing the significance of it in my point.
I'll try one more time. The way we prevent getting hit by motorists is by getting them to be aware of our presence. If they're aware of us, unless they are homocidal maniacs, they are almost for sure not going to hit us. Even a drunk driver is unlikely to hit someone if he is aware of their presence. Many more drunk drivers make it home than not... So our strategy should be to make motorists aware of our presence.
I contend that riding in bike lanes is contrary to a strategy of making motorists aware of our presence.
How much of a role does a cyclist's lane position play in motorist's awareness of that cyclist? I believe a huge percentage of motorists are not aware of cyclists riding off to the side, including in shoulders and bike lanes. I also know that every motorist that has ever encountered me riding in the center of the lane in front of them, in his or her path, was aware of me. I know because they did something to indicate they were aware of me (e.g, slow down, adjust to the left, honk, wave, etc.).
To get on a motorist's "awareness radar", we must get out of the gutter and out of the bike lane, and, yes, into his path. Sure, we shouldn't be rude, and so we should get out of his way before we impede his travel (if it's safe and reasonable to do so), but why do it before we got some kind of feedback from him indicating that he is aware of our presence? Why not wait for that feedback, and then move aside? I do it. It seems like extra work at first, but now it's second nature. Consider that if you develop this habit too, what's the likelihood that someone will inadverdently drift into you to end in the same fate as Eric Kautzky? Nil.
I agree with you completely. But I also believe that in this situation the motorist would not have been aware of the cyclist regardless of lane position. Being hit from behind is the least likely car-bike collision situation as most of us know. This is because, as you said, the motorist is aware of the cyclist since s/he is in the motorist's path. If bike lanes do anything, they prevent being rear-ended (while increasing the likelihood of other incidents such as right/left hooks). Given these two factors I do not believe that Eric Kautzky death was caused by lane positioning. I could be wrong, but since the motorist was driving in the bike lane, and Eric Kautzky was in his path (as you said he should have been) I fail to see how this led to his being hit. Everything you said suggests that the driver should have been aware of Eric (again, Eric was riding in his path, which happened to be the bike lane he was illegally driving in). Perhaps the driver drifted into the bike lane and so didn't see him until it was too late - a possibility for sure but we don't really know since we weren't there.
VC, while an extremely effective way to ride safely, is not a pancea. Car-bike collisions will still occur so your assessment that the likelihood of death is Nil is inaccurate. Drunk drivers will still be on the road, people will still be going past the speed limit and past the point where they can effectively control their vehicles, people will still drive when they are too tired, etc etc.
Helmet Head
OK, now I see where I erred.
I have been assuming that the driver was not simply driving along in the bike lane. Why? Because
a) that's very rare (though I realize that alone doesn't mean it didn't happen in this case)
b) if he had, he would have most probably noticed the cyclist up ahead, because he would have been in his path.
Now, of course, that doesn't mean it didn't happen that way anyway, but what seems to me much more likely is, "Perhaps the driver drifted into the bike lane and so didn't see him until it was too late ".
I think this is much more likely because:
a) It's much more common... I see momentary drifts into bike lanes much more often than blatant driving in bike lanes, which, frankly, I've never seen.
b) To a driver who is unaware of a cyclist up ahead (because he is in the bike lane), when he momentarily drifts, in his mind, he's drifting into an unoccupied place on the roadway. Motorists momentarily drift into shoulders on rural roads all the time. When you're briefly distracted, it's much more natural to allow yourself to drift right, into (what you believe to be) unoccupied space, then left, into potential oncoming traffic.
For these reasons, I find the "driving in the bike lane" scenario to be far, far less likely to have occured than the "momentarily drifted into the bike lane" scenario.
Slow Train
This morning Joel Flores, 18 was indicted for 2nd degree manslaughter which carries an automatic minimum punishment of 75 months in prison, or a little over 6 years.
A large part of me wants this kid punished to the fullest extent of the law. The other part of me knows for-sure, that Mr. K would NOT want such a young life to be ruined....he was such a forgiving soul.
I am in sympathy with your hesitation about sending this young man to jail for many years as well. If he wasn't driving impaired (drug or alcohol) or in a reckless manner (either that day or history of such) then this was just a truly awful accident. Were is the justice in destroying his life as well? I hate these minimum sentencing laws.
In my view, what would be appropriate is a 10 year driving suspension and a 10 year probation. If he is caught driving then send him to jail. In the meantime community service and the lifetime regret over killing a fellow human being is enough punishment.
SteveAZ
I am in sympathy with your hesitation about sending this young man to jail for many years as well. If he wasn't driving impaired (drug or alcohol) or in a reckless manner (either that day or history of such) then this was just a truly awful accident. Were is the justice in destroying his life as well? I hate these minimum sentencing laws.
In my view, what would be appropriate is a 10 year driving suspension and a 10 year probation. If he is caught driving then send him to jail. In the meantime community service and the lifetime regret over killing a fellow human being is enough punishment.
I agree and have often felt the same way. The 10/10 sentence is a great idea, he will then become a cyclist due to necessity and will be much more AWARE from then on, assuming he isn't already given the circumstances.
Helmet Head
What if his awareness, and lack thereof, was typical, and while all motorists momentarily drift into bike lanes from time to time, without really knowing whether a cyclist is present or not, he just happened to do it when someone was in the bike lane...
Is there any justice for punishing him at all? What good would that do when all other motorists continue to do the same thing, because it's only human?
If all that's true, shouldn't we go after the root cause instead?
Yoshi
OK, now I see where I erred.
I have been assuming that the driver was not simply driving along in the bike lane. Why? Because
a) that's very rare (though I realize that alone doesn't mean it didn't happen in this case)
b) if he had, he would have most probably noticed the cyclist up ahead, because he would have been in his path.
Now, of course, that doesn't mean it didn't happen that way anyway, but what seems to me much more likely is, "Perhaps the driver drifted into the bike lane and so didn't see him until it was too late ".
I think this is much more likely because:
a) It's much more common... I see momentary drifts into bike lanes much more often than blatant driving in bike lanes, which, frankly, I've never seen.
b) To a driver who is unaware of a cyclist up ahead (because he is in the bike lane), when he momentarily drifts, in his mind, he's drifting into an unoccupied place on the roadway. Motorists momentarily drift into shoulders on rural roads all the time. When you're briefly distracted, it's much more natural to allow yourself to drift right, into (what you believe to be) unoccupied space, then left, into potential oncoming traffic.
For these reasons, I find the "driving in the bike lane" scenario to be far, far less likely to have occured than the "momentarily drifted into the bike lane" scenario.
I'm the one that erred, I could have sworn the article said he was driving in the bike lane (which isn't as uncommon as you think - I see it all the time), but it just said he traveled into the bike lane. This probably means he drifted.
sggoodri
We don't know enough about the facts of this case to draw any firm conclusions about why the collision happened.
Drivers do drift into bike lanes or striped paved shoulders from time to time, either because they stop paying attention, or they get a little sloppy. If there is clearly no cyclist present, society might not need to penalize the merely sloppy driver too severely. However, if a cyclist is visible on the roadway, it is appropriate to hold drivers, and their insurance companies, accountable to a higher standard of control and caution. When insurance companies see a problem with costly claims against dangerous driving, they often seek to reduce the specific dangerous driving behavior. This is good for cyclists.
But what if the cyclist was not, for some reason, visible? This might be the case with an unlighted/unreflectored cyclist in darkness. We don't know what equipment the cyclist in this case was using, and whether he was seen at all, due to negligence by the driver or equipment deficiencies, or some combination of both. I've seen a lot of rear bike reflectors that were terribly dim and difficult to see from an overtaking automobile, and I've also seen a lot of sloppy driving. The intersection of these can be tragic, and perhaps the best way to address such societal problems is to not assume malice at the start. But, if there was malice, then it needs to be treated as such, and not a mere "accident".
sbhikes
Yesterday a jury convicted a local woman for felony hit and run and misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter. In one part of town there are no bike lanes, no sidewalks and no street lights. The woman ran over a man at night who was walking on the side of the street. She saw him beforehand because he was carrying a small light she said she saw. It didn't stop her from being unable to keep her car from running over someone walking in the street. She claims she had no idea she hit him, even though she threw him out of his shoes with her car and injured a second person at the same time. (You think you'd notice something like that.)
Anyway, I know the street in question. It is narrow and the only way to walk it would be to walk pretty much where a lot of people might ride a bicycle. Should he have walked down the center of the street? Taken the lane, so to speak? Was it his fault? Or hers?
kf5nd
Not to criticize Mr. Kautzky's riding skills, let me just say, in case he wasn't a mirror user, a rear-view mirror might've saved him. But, even with a mirror, someone can sneak up on you in-between rearward scans, which you do every 2 - 5 seconds.
ghettocruiser
Guys, drivers just RUN INTO THINGS all the time. Whether or not the object is in the lane is immaterial. Most of these drivers are paying so little attention they aren't aware of where the lane is.
I've said before, THREE TIMES in the last five years I have had vehicles run into the back of my CAR why I was either driving at a normal speed or stopped in traffic. In each case they were either half-asleep at the wheel or paying attention to something else.
In all cases my car was hit with enough force to seriously injure me had I been on my bike.
If we get hit riding in the centre of the lane, and we will eventually if we ride there, the only difference in outcome will be the police report will be more likely to blame us.
Brian Ratliff
Wearing a helmet and riding in the bike lane....
Longtime Tigard teacher dies when car hits bike
Sunday, June 19, 2005
PETER FARRELL
The Oregonian
http://www.oregonlive.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news/1119175125264050.xml?oregonian?lcps&coll=7
Eric Kautzky, a science teacher and athletic trainer at Tigard High School for 24 years, was killed Saturday morning when a car that police said traveled into a bicycle lane hit his bicycle.
Kautzky, 56, a Durham resident and bicycle racer, was in the first year of his retirement.
"We're just sick about this," said Pam Henslee, the Tigard principal. "This is a huge loss to Tigard High School. He was just revered by people in the community."
The crash occurred about 6:30 a.m. as Kautzky's bicycle and the car traveled west on Southwest Tualatin-Sherwood Road at Wildrose Place in Sherwood.
Detective Sgt. Dwight Onchi of the Sherwood Police Department said witnesses told investigators that Kautzky was in a well-marked bicycle lane when he was struck from behind and thrown into the windshield of the car.
Kautzky was wearing a helmet, Onchi said, but appeared to have severe head injuries.
Onchi identified the car's driver as Joel Flores, 18, of Vancouver. No citation was issued immediately.
Sherwood officers were familiar with Kautzky because they frequently saw him riding in the area, Onchi said.
Kautzky rode in bicycle races with Team Rose City.
****, I know this road and where he was riding. I ride it every day I ride to work.
Bike lane is well marked, and there are very few intersections to this highway. The road speeds are high (50+ without traffic) and the traffic volume is high. There are lots of cars and trucks on the road at 6:30am as this is a major highway, meaning there is no way to stay in the center of the lane (on a bike) for very long. The road is four lanes (two each direction) with a center turn lane. The traffic is heavy enough that you will not be welcome taking the lane at any place but at the approach to an intersection. The bike lane is not some po-dink thing, it is the full 5 feet wide, bordered by a sidewalk curb. Bike lanes go to the left of right turn only lanes, though there are only 4 or 5 intersections between Tualatin and Sherwood.
If you want my guess, the driver fell asleep or zoned out at the wheel. I can imagine myself in that situation, zoning out, approaching the cyclist, and panicing, perhaps making the wrong decision (should have swerved) and trying to brake and not being able to slow fast enough, or even accidentally hitting the accelerator. I know at 18, I was not the most skill of drivers, and I sometimes made some bad decisions. I also know that all throughout my highschool years, I was perpetually sleep deprived. I almost fell asleep at the wheel once, and a classmate of mine did, killing her father. I very much doubt that this was malicious.
My condolences to Mr. Kautzky. May he rest in peace.
Helmet Head
If we get hit riding in the centre of the lane, and we will eventually if we ride there, the only difference in outcome will be the police report will be more likely to blame us.
First, no one here is advocating riding in the center of the lane when there is someone behind you and it is safe and reasonable to be off to the side (whether in a bike lane or not). The only thing I advocate is riding in the center of the lane when NO ONE is immediately behind you, and moving aside when someone is approaching from the rear after you have gotten some feedback that they are AWARE of your presence. Why is this so hard to understand? How do I have to say this so that no one misunderstands it to mean "you should be in the center of the lane all the time no matter what", and writes about it as if that's what I am saying?
Second, I, for one, have noticed that when I ride by bicycle in the center of the lane, and stay there when there are cars behind (because it is either unsafe or unreasonable to move aside), I get a lot more space than I do when I drive a car.
Brian Ratliff
Not to criticize Mr. Kautzky's riding skills, let me just say, in case he wasn't a mirror user, a rear-view mirror might've saved him. But, even with a mirror, someone can sneak up on you in-between rearward scans, which you do every 2 - 5 seconds.
No, there is no way to swerve fast enough to avoid a 6 foot side car coming at you with >30mph closing speed. There is even a curb bordering the bike lane on this road which would need to be hopped. The best one can do with a mirror in that situation is to see your accident coming.
Brian Ratliff
First, no one here is advocating riding in the center of the lane when there is someone behind you and it is safe and reasonable to be off to the side (whether in a bike lane or not). The only thing I advocate is riding in the center of the lane when NO ONE is immediately behind you, and moving aside when someone is approaching from the rear after you have gotten some feedback that they are AWARE of your presence. Why is this so hard to understand?
Second, I, for one, have noticed that when I ride by bicycle in the center of the lane, and stay there when there are cars behind (because it is either unsafe or unreasonable to move aside), I get a lot more space than I do when I drive a car.
Not in this case. This is my turf. The traffic is heavy even at 6:30 in the morning.
Helmet Head
But, Brian, if you're using a mirror and riding in the center of the lane, you can use your lane position to get the motorist approaching from behind to be aware of your presence, and, then, using your mirror, when he's 2-3 seconds behind you, move aside into the bike lane.
Now you're in exactly the same position, in the bike lane, by the time the motorist reaches you as was Eric Kautzky, accept that you have at that point taken actions that he hadn't to get on the motorist's "awareness radar."