There are many articles of the "Driver kills bicyclist, driver gets no or little penalty" sort. And usually some reasonable person chimes in about how the driver might have had the sun in his eyes or whatever. Just to remind us of what happens when someone driving a vehicle that doesn't have "car priviledge" hurts someone read this:
"Police arrested a 53-year-old Seattle man, who authorities found nearby with a bicycle shortly after the accident. They booked the man into King County Jail Thursday morning for investigation of manslaughter."
"Wednesday night, police spokesman Rich Pruitt said witnesses told police it did not appear as if the person had been intentionally pushed, though a bicyclist who may have been involved in the incident was being questioned by police."
The details are sketchy but it appears we're talking about an accidental incident contributing to a ped/bus death leading to a manslaughter arrest. Contrast that to the usual car/truck crushes bicyclist nothing happens...
(And no I'm not suggesting that the bicyclist shouldn't be held accountable if his/her actions caused someone to be hurt. I'm suggesting that drivers ought to be held to the same standard.)
Thoughts?
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.
Well one thing is the same as most biker as victim reports. This tells us almost nothing. But out of almost nothing there are two facts.
1) There were several witnesses
2) The incident happened on the sidewalk.
Both are different from most accident reports. The vast majority of accident reports have no witnesses, in that situation police and D.A.s know they have a very hard job getting any conviction and drop the case.
Number 2 may also be very significant. If as in many cities cycling on hte sidewalk in hte business district is illegal then the cyclist involved was already in the wrong before the incident.
Hardly seems a double standard.
cycleup
Number 2 may also be very significant. If as in many cities cycling on hte sidewalk in hte business district is illegal then the cyclist involved was already in the wrong before the incident.
Hardly seems a double standard.
Again I'm not excusing the cyclist, but as far as I know biking on the sidewalk is legal in Seattle.
gpsblake
Not every CAR vs BIKE death is a criminal act.
Bekologist
without commenting on the seattle cyclist-ped- bus death,
there IS a double standard, nationwide and unwritten, whereby a car-bicycle accident that results in a death usually carries minor or no charges, yet a car-car accident where a driver dies, the charges carry the appropriate weight.
drivers that kill bicyclists in america are dealt with much greater leniency that auto-auto fatalities and there is a seroius double standard there.
i see in some motorcycling websites mention of an advocacy organization that works to get motorcycle deaths automatically punished as homicide or manslaughter or something harsh like that, and it sounds like one i'd give money to if they incorporated bicycles in their mission statement.....
bragi
Have there been any detailed statistical studies of bicycling fatalities? Some things to consider:
1. How many deaths? (what, about 700 a year or so?)
2. How many deaths were car vs. bike? (the majority? a small percentage?)
3. Of these, in what proportion were motorists at fault? Were there many cases in which the bicyclist made a fatal error and got him/herself killed?
4. In those cases where motorists were at fault, how many involved criminal negligence, substance abuse, or pure malevolence (assault/manslaughter/first degree murder)?
5. In those cases where state action was appropriate, how many actually resulted in criminal charges being brought against the motorist in question?
I ask these questions out of a sincere desire to know. My gut feeling is that Bekologist is right, but then I'm not a purely unbiased observer, and neither are most people on this forum. We often read posts about motorists who kill bicyclists seemingly with gusto, but don't hear much about bicyclists who veer in front of oncoming semis, or who break their necks on a steep high-speed MTB descent.
tomcryar
I'd like to read a lot more about this one incident before I make any judgements. The articles weren't clear on much of anything.
cycleup
This more complete article makes it appear that the cyclist was drunk at the time of the accident. I probably should have waited longer before making that original post....
If he was in fact, a drunk cyclist, he should be prosecuted according to whatever law......if they did find him "hiding" according to the article, that would assume some guiltiness, but not neccasarily so. It would be hard to prove he actually caused the accident.
John E
I came across strong evidence of a double standard when I served on a panel of prospective jurors for a vehicular manslaughter trial. The victim was a bicyclist, and during voir dire, everyone who did more than casual and infrequent bicycling was excused, leaving a 12-member jury of essentially non-bicycling motorists.
sbhikes
Of course there is a double-standard. Its source permeates almost every discussion here. That source being the belief that:
a) people who ride bikes are poor or lost their license or playboys out having fun at other people's expense
b) people who drive cars are hard-working people out doing important business
rs00
I ask these questions out of a sincere desire to know. My gut feeling is that Bekologist is right...
I would also like to know the answers to those and similar questions. And I also think that Bekologist is right, but it would be nice to have hard evidence.
recursive
Of course there is a double standard.
It shifts better than a triple standard.
Thank you, thank you. I'll be here til Tuesday. Try the fish. Don't forget to tip your waitress.