Southern California - Hollywood Bus Driver runs down cyclist...

...and the cyclist is the one arrested (+ his wife)...

http://laist.com/2007/09/24/hollywood_bus_d.php

Effin aye... :(

Maybe we all should send complaints to the MTA about this (even though it wasn't us).

Dang, what a story. I sometimes ride through that corner. I hope I don't run into the same bus driver.

Bus driver is very definitely wrong and should lose her job (and should have been cited).

However, the cyclist did not act appropriately either, IMO. He should have taken down the license plate number on the bus and reported it. But to stand in front of an angry MTA driver (sorry, but I use to ride the buses out here years ago, and those drivers are often very hassled and angry) and a 10 ton bus is not the smartest thing to do. He could have been killed.

Standing our ground as cyclists is necessary, but getting killed over it, is...well...a waste, teaches nothing and betters no one's safety. As for the cyclist being arrested, that sucks, but then again, there was a better, and more importantly, SAFER way to handle it.

Wow...that was biased.


Bus driver was wrong for honking and being a 'typical bike hater'.
Rider was wrong for standing in front of the bus and escalating the situation.
Karate Kid was just wrong...and should get squish, just like grape.
Author of the article was wrong for imposing his opinion on something he didn't witness.

Note that the only quotes are the bus driver...screaming, yelling, etc. But the cyclist is described to have said what he said in a calm, rational, legal manner. Life rarely works out that way.


*edit* Just read that it was the author of the article that was the 'cyclist' in question. Still...biased as all get out. Case in point:
"Deputy Parrott and Supervisor Dunn looked at each other with a synchronized “WTF” look on their humbled faces and for a moment the only sound that could be heard was the thundering roar of systemic incompetence resounding down the boulevard."

Puhleeze.

I second merider's thoughts...

I'd also like to see what the Metro/MTA is telling their drivers about cyclists rights to the road. In the downtown area, most of the time everything works really well: both bus's and cyclists accommodate each other, because both know that they've got to get somewhere quick and on time. Even the non-local bus's (such as the Montebello, SM, and Foothill lines) know what's up around downtown.
I just wonder if the MTA covers this topic in their training of drivers.

i live and ride in hollywood and i've encountered the bus squeezing past thing before. its a weird passive aggressive thing, i think. the worst place this has happened to me is hollywood blvd. just west of la brea where the road on the right side is really, really chewed up. usually i'm just on my way to riding in the hollywood hills which is a drag when i don't feel like riding hills. the alternative seems to be sidewalks, which i unashamedly ride on when it seems less dangerous than the roads/drivers, or taking my bike to another part of town (the park, the rosebowl, the beach). needless to say i've gotten better at climbing.
LA should be the best city on the west coast for bike commuting but its the worst.
i'm torn between what merider suggests and what the cyclist actually did. perhaps i'm too cycnical, but i highly doubt that if the cyclist had taken the bus license number and time of day etc. that any supervisor would have done anything. as he says, probably the the big fat (one assumes) driver is still out there driving as aggressively as she pleases -queen of the road!- and hasn't been spoken to or admonished or written up or anything. trying to detain the bus driver to make a citizen's arrest however might have been more than was appropriate, though, because now the bus driver and all the bus drivers she tells the story to, will just walk away from it thinking that these bicyclists are crazy and that the bus driver-"you go girl!"-was somehow justified in bus-nudging the bicyclist out of the way.

i'm also troubled but not surprised by the reaction of the cops. like the bus is somehow part of, what?, the "establishment?", and is somehow entitled to be dickish towards the citizenry in the same way the police themselves are. for example i cannot imagine a world where the police would show up and put the bus driver in handcuffs.

I agree, Brian, that the bus driver doubtfully received so much as a slap on her wrist. But something to caution everyone out there about is that these bus drivers are "working," and they take the stance that they have to be at the stops within a reasonable time of when the stops are planned (i.e. preferably on time) and that they provide transportation to the public (thus, making them somehow slightly above the law in terms of using the roads). I've had buses nudge me (not literally, but almost) in my CAR. They have cut me off dangerously close and couldn't care less. With that said, there are actually some very nice drivers out there who follow the laws and would be appalled at that driver's behavior. This isn't just a motorist vs. cyclist thing - this is the buses vs. all others on the road!

Of course, all of the above is my opinion only, but it is based on my experiences riding those buses, almost being hit by those buses, and hearing stories like the one in that article. I steer clear of buses if at all possible or give them all the room they want.

I ride through there all the time. On Sunset, I have to play "leapfrog" with the bus. When it pulls into the bike lane to drop people off, I have to go into traffic to pass the bus, then the bus roars by me only to stop a few blocks later... repeat until the diesel fumes make you sick. I've also had buses push me into cars. I was in West Hollywood on Santa Monica a month or so ago, and a bus came so close it pushed into another cars mirror. Freaking scary.

Of course, the best way to protect yourself from the evil bus is to stay away from the evil bus. I rarely use Hollywood/Sunset, I always try to use Fountain or some other back street.

I usually take Fountain when I ride to and from work.

I just read this on the road cycling section. I agree that the driver was wrong but the cyclist should not have blocked the bus. Simply text or write down the vehicle number and write a letter to the company later.

As someone who has stood in front of buses before, and will do so again if necessary, I have to wonder why so many of you true roadies don't think it's a good idea. Vehicular assault is a crime, and detaining a criminal is perfectly legal and appropriate. Furthermore, if you've ever tried to file a report with the MTA, you are doubtless aware that there is a peculiar law of physics that governs these complaints: as soon as they are filed, they become dark matter and their existence can only be implied. Do you honestly think that there would have been any meaningful result whatsoever had the cyclist simply phoned in a complaint to Metro's Bermuda Triangle of Customer Service?

Unfortunately, unless there's an injury involved, you sometimes have to create a big scene like this to get the attention of the MTA authorities.

As someone who has stood in front of buses before, and will do so again if necessary, I have to wonder why so many of you true roadies don't think it's a good idea. Vehicular assault is a crime, and detaining a criminal is perfectly legal and appropriate. Furthermore, if you've ever tried to file a report with the MTA, you are doubtless aware that there is a peculiar law of physics that governs these complaints: as soon as they are filed, they become dark matter and their existence can only be implied. Do you honestly think that there would have been any meaningful result whatsoever had the cyclist simply phoned in a complaint to Metro's Bermuda Triangle of Customer Service?

The only applicable law of physics I can think of is: "get hit by bus, get damaged or die" Neither one is worth making this point.

Whether or not a complaint to the MTA would have achieved anything, filing a police report with a witness should have done something, I could well be naive.

As someone who has stood in front of buses before, and will do so again if necessary, I have to wonder why so many of you true roadies don't think it's a good idea. Vehicular assault is a crime, and detaining a criminal is perfectly legal and appropriate. Furthermore, if you've ever tried to file a report with the MTA, you are doubtless aware that there is a peculiar law of physics that governs these complaints: as soon as they are filed, they become dark matter and their existence can only be implied. Do you honestly think that there would have been any meaningful result whatsoever had the cyclist simply phoned in a complaint to Metro's Bermuda Triangle of Customer Service?

Sigh...oh, the "true roadie" crap again. For the love of Pete, give it a rest already. And by all means, stand in front of that bus and hold it back with your super powers. :rolleyes:

If only the world was so, PC, that we could all stop a speeding bullet with our bare hands. We can't and this isn't an issue of true-roadie-ism (something you so love to bring up and mull over and over and over again), but an issue of a vehicle that can run your ass over. I think the level-headed mere mortals of this world are better served by at least attempting to use the system. It doesn't always fail - you nor anyone else knows for sure that the MTA wouldn't have done anything about this situation had it been reported without the cyclist standing in front of the bus to "stop" it from moving. And, as others in here have pointed out, the article is completely biased. There is more to this story than what was reported by the "cyclist" I'm sure.

From the article:

"[Metro] Supervisor Mike Dunn stands on the sidewalk explaining in his most earnest manner, “But you have to understand, that’s how they are trained to drive. They are told to honk at road hazards!”

If Dunn actually said that, it would seem that there is an attitude problem at the highest levels in the MTA organization.

Part of a bus driver's job is to stay cool under tough conditions. Being mindful of public safety goes with the territory. If the driver can't control her emotions to the point where she is willing to risk harm to a human "road hazard," she shouldn't be behind the wheel. Period.

This all assumes the facts presented in the story are true. It is a little tricky to pick through all the colorful prose to separate fact from opinion.

I'll drop Dunn an email and post his response, if any, back here.

As someone who has stood in front of buses before, and will do so again if necessary, I have to wonder why so many of you true roadies don't think it's a good idea. Vehicular assault is a crime, and detaining a criminal is perfectly legal and appropriate. Furthermore, if you've ever tried to file a report with the MTA, you are doubtless aware that there is a peculiar law of physics that governs these complaints: as soon as they are filed, they become dark matter and their existence can only be implied. Do you honestly think that there would have been any meaningful result whatsoever had the cyclist simply phoned in a complaint to Metro's Bermuda Triangle of Customer Service?
The bus struck the cyclist (clipped his hand) while passing. That constitutes a hit and run felony if the driver does not stop. Metro might not do anything, but they will have no choice but to respond to an accident report from the DMV. In the cases where the bus does not strike the rider, it's water under the bridge. If I took the time to report every driver who endangered my life, I wouldn't have time to ride anymore!

If Dunn actually said that
Play the sound clip in the article. It's pretty convincing.

The bus struck the cyclist (clipped his hand) while passing. That constitutes a hit and run felony if the driver does not stop. Metro might not do anything, but they will have no choice but to respond to an accident report from the DMV. In the cases where the bus does not strike the rider, it's water under the bridge. If I took the time to report every driver who endangered my life, I wouldn't have time to ride anymore!

I don't read where the bus clipped this guy's hand:

"The motorist with the heavy horn hand turns out to be Metro Bus Driver #XXXXX and she passes the cyclist so closely that his left hand touches the side of the bus as it speeds past him."

Not that it makes the bus driver's behavior anymore tolerable, but I think for fair discussion, we should keep the "biased and questionable" details of the article straight. From what the cyclist wrote, it can be assumed that the bus did not strike him prior to him approaching the bus and stepping in front of the bus (he touched the bus with his left hand). She scared him and was entirely too close to him (unacceptable), but she did not strike him. Besides, if that bus had struck his hand, I think he would have gone down or have a broken hand at the very least.

Fair enough, I did misquote him. I will say that my shoulder has been struck by sideview mirrors before with no affects, so it's possible. But yes, the author says his hand touched the bus. In that case, I would have still written a complaint to Metro and called it a day, not expecting to hear back from anyone.

I would be interested to know if local vehicular code specifies a minimum passing distance between vehicle and cyclists. I know some areas do have such a specification.

A six-foot-tall person has a six-foot "wingspan". For the sake of argument, if the cyclist here had his left arm fully extended and the bus merely "caressed" ;) his middle fingertip, that means the bus passed within 2-3' of him.

Again, just wondering if that is within the rules of the road. I'll see if I can find anything on it.

Fair enough, I did misquote him. I will say that my shoulder has been struck by sideview mirrors before with no affects, so it's possible. But yes, the author says his hand touched the bus. In that case, I would have still written a complaint to Metro and called it a day, not expecting to hear back from anyone.

I feel it was less a misquote, Brian, than what you thought you read (interpretation). The author (cyclist) wrote it so that it was more hyperbole than truth. He wrote that his left hand touched the bus in lieu of just saying, "the bus was so close, I could touch it." This leads the reader to believe his hand came into contact with the bus as if there was no choice, when in fact, if you really read it, HE (who owns the hand connected to his arm) touched the bus. I had to go back and re-read it myself. This is why I'm so skeptical of this guy and this article. It just seems out of balance and over the top. Regardless, I'm in agreement with you that he should have done the complaining/reporting after the fact and not stood in front of it in effort to stop it from moving.

Yeah I misunderstood. Still, I should read more carefully. My brother and half of my students hang on single words like they are the Bible, so I should be used to that :D

Since that statement about his hand touching the bus was open to interpretation, I posted a question about it on the blog. Let's see if the author himself will clear up all speculation by responding.

I would be interested to know if local vehicular code specifies a minimum passing distance between vehicle and cyclists. I know some areas do have such a specification.
A six-foot-tall person has a six-foot "wingspan". For the sake of argument, if the cyclist here had his left arm fully extended and the bus merely "caressed" ;) his middle fingertip, that means the bus passed within 2-3' of him.
Again, just wondering if that is within the rules of the road. I'll see if I can find anything on it.

There is currently no legislation that defines the amount of room that must be present between the two. Also remember that if such a law were to be implemented, then when passing you (and we are both on bikes) I would have to be 3 feet away, (based on the current definition in the law being debated) otherwise I could get a ticket.

The idea, while having merits, is impractical, based on supposition, and virtually unenforceable... and what good is a law if it is not enforced...

critical mass! take back the streets!

Did anybody read down this far?

The next day the cyclist calls the Metro and reports the incident. Within hours he receives an email from an official at the Metro contradicting Supervisor Mike Dunn and with Bus Drive Instructions in the subject line. “Bus operators are not told to honk at cyclists. As a matter of fact, the policy states that cyclists have the same rights on the road as motorists and that operators are to follow at a safe distance or pass with 3-4 l/2 feet of right side clearance.”

Stephen Box is part of a (growing) group of cyclists rolling along the mean streets of LA who are well-schooled in their legal rights and assertive about them...if he wants to play martyr to the cause I for one can only admire him. He'll go into a courtroom if he has to with very little fear.

MTA is better over the last couple years but they have a way to go. I wonder sometimes if the timetables the drivers are expected to meet are always realistic given the traffic.

oh and send a compaint if you are moved to. I will...

Stephen Box is part of a (growing) group of cyclists rolling along the mean streets of LA who are well-schooled in their legal rights and assertive about them...if he wants to play martyr to the cause I for one can only admire him. He'll go into a courtroom if he has to with very little fear.



I assume you mean..."if he wants to [get injured or killed for the cause] I for one can only admire him."?????? :eek:

Your point (and selection of text from the article) actually brings home another one - why didn't he just report this after taking the license number of the bus? I don't read in the article that his having stood in front of the bus and the ensuing argument that followed brought forth his cause or furthered his martyrdom any better.

Sorry, this topic is hot button for me. I guess as a cyclist, I worry about my safety enough that I get nervous with the whole vigilante idea when it comes to crazy motorists. I've said this before in other discussions on similar topics...we, humans on aluminum/steel/carbon/titanium bikes, are absolutely NEVER, EVER matches against 2,000+ pounds of steel. When will folks really get that through their heads? When they are missing a limb or dead? (in which case, I think the point is moot).

The system fails - I get it. People are A-holes - I get it. Life isn't fair - I get it. But regardless, there are always steps to take - which may be ineffective when all is said and done - that will get the cyclist out of harms way first before he/she fights the issue. Going up against motorists (when they are behind the wheel of a a car/bus/truck/motorcycle/scooter/lawn mower) is a dangerous tactic, and one that I will never believe is effective or does the cycling community any good...


...IMHO.

. . . . virtually unenforceable... and what good is a law if it is not enforced...
Do I hear an Amen??:)

Since I wasn't there I'll limit my response to just saying that it seems a bit one sided.

. . . Going up against motorists (when they are behind the wheel of a a car/bus/truck/motorcycle/scooter/lawn mower) is a dangerous tactic, and one that I will never believe is effective or does the cycling community any good...
...IMHO.
The fact that you, and many others who are not involved with the cycling community, have read about the incident has done some good simply by bringing it to the public's attention. If you don't want to expose yourself to the potential for injury, that is your choice, but don't be contemptuous of the efforts of others who are trying, in their own way, to make the public aware of a problem. They may not share your desire to engage in the futility of useless bureaucratic paper trails.

The fact that you, and many others who are not involved with the cycling community, have read about the incident has done some good simply by bringing it to the public's attention. If you don't want to expose yourself to the potential for injury, that is your choice, but don't be contemptuous of the efforts of others who are trying, in their own way, to make the public aware of a problem. They may not share your desire to engage in the futility of useless bureaucratic paper trails.

That is completely subjective (the system doesn't fail folks 100% of the time, after all) and misses the point about injury to the rider. Also, the article is one-sided; we do NOT know the whole story. I'm not willing to call this guy a hero so quickly based on what HE has written. And lastly, I'm not contemptuous and I'm sorry if I'm coming across that way. I'm simply just as dogmatic in my views (as some are in theirs, albeit opposite of mine) that there are better and more efficient ways (even if it doesn't seem so in the short term) to fight these issues than pit ourselves against motorists who, although they may not run us over in that instance, may take it out on the next cyclist they encounter. We owe it to ourselves and others to at least try to find a way to push our rights to be out on the road without having to play chicken with vehicles.

Sorry,
Why try to tell us how hard it is for the bus driver,everyone is trying to work or get to work etc,bus drivers are paid by the hr not the amount of stops they make.I have encountered a few rouge bus drivers on Colorado bvld in eagle rock in my time.Their attitude towards cyclists was hostile and the seem to think only about how much of a rush they are in.If its a crappy job sorry!i got problems too but my using a bicycle to get to work is part of the solution....to try to defend these people is unacceptable.

Sorry,
Why try to tell us how hard it is for the bus driver,everyone is trying to work or get to work etc,bus drivers are paid by the hr not the amount of stops they make.I have encountered a few rouge bus drivers on Colorado bvld in eagle rock in my time.Their attitude towards cyclists was hostile and the seem to think only about how much of a rush they are in.If its a crappy job sorry!i got problems too but my using a bicycle to get to work is part of the solution....to try to defend these people is unacceptable.

No one is defending the driver in question in any way. If you see that, please quote it...???. Pointing out that they are working, rushed and hassled is not defending the actions of the bus driver in this situation - it's just a fact. You are correct, and as I and others have pointed out - they CAN be very hostile toward cyclists, pedestrians and other cars.

If I'm not mistaken, the 3-to-4-1/2 right-side clearance mentioned in the article is MTA's internal policy, not the codified law. (Per Extort's comment that there is no such law.)

If there were such a law, it would actually be enforceable under certain circumstances: if a law enforcement officer witnessed a violation; if an accident occurred and was captured on video, with distances that could be determined by fixed points in the imagery; if an accident occurred, and the evidence at the scene proved that the vehicle had to have invaded the cyclist's no-go zone.

But, true, just calling in a complaint because someone breezed by too closely wouldn't result in police action.

(P.S. Am I the only one cracking up at the image of the bus passenger vigilante who hopped out and assumed the Kung Fu stance? Hiiii-yaaah!)

If I'm not mistaken, the 3-to-4-1/2 right-side clearance mentioned in the article is MTA's internal policy, not the codified law. (Per Extort's comment that there is no such law.)

If there were such a law, it would actually be enforceable under certain circumstances: if a law enforcement officer witnessed a violation; if an accident occurred and was captured on video, with distances that could be determined by fixed points in the imagery. But, nope, just calling in a complaint because someone breezed by too closely wouldn't result in police action.

(P.S. Am I the only one cracking up at the image of the bus passenger vigilante who hopped out and assumed the Kung Fu stance? Hiiii-yaaah!)

I find that pretty funny too, Allez. :lol: And personally, I WISH there were police enforcing the "stay 3 feet away" law (even if it meant I couldn't grab Extort's hot ass when riding next to him on a bike :p), but that is never going to happen. We kind of have to hope for drivers to give us "safe distance" when riding.

hope for the best but expect the worst.....

Hmm, tried to do an image linky-dink to this comic, (http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc/fighting.086.html) but was denied, so you just gotta do that extra click if you're curious. ;)

That is completely subjective (the system doesn't fail folks 100% of the time, after all) and misses the point about injury to the rider. Also, the article is one-sided; we do NOT know the whole story. . . . there are better and more efficient ways (even if it doesn't seem so in the short term) to fight these issues than pit ourselves against motorists . . . . We owe it to ourselves and others to at least try to find a way to push our rights to be out on the road without having to play chicken with vehicles.
I don't know what you consider subjective, but I can tell you that there is very little in the law that provides for preventing conduct which causes injury or damages, but a whole lot of law that provides for compensation of injury or damages after the fact. Public awareness of conduct that can potentially cause injury or damage can bring about changes in behavior that prevent injury. Spending time in futile efforts is NOT efficient. Whether the article is biased, or the facts are totally accurate can always be an issue, but the motive seems pretty obvious, bring public attention to a problem which appears to have been experienced by other members of the cycling community as well.

Besides, if that bus had struck his hand, I think he would have gone down or have a broken hand at the very least.

Depends a lot on the rider, as Urbanknight says.

I can take a pretty solid hit without going down, and have watched my GF have a door opened into her as she passed and just get bounced to the side. She got a big bruise on her hip, but hardly wobbled.

I feel it was less a misquote, Brian, than what you thought you read (interpretation). The author (cyclist) wrote it so that it was more hyperbole than truth. He wrote that his left hand touched the bus in lieu of just saying, "the bus was so close, I could touch it." This leads the reader to believe his hand came into contact with the bus as if there was no choice, when in fact, if you really read it, HE (who owns the hand connected to his arm) touched the bus. I had to go back and re-read it myself.

that's actually a standard move in a tight back or around any moving obstacle approaching you from the side. It lets you manage your distance from the object or other rider a lot better and reduce the chance of an impact while possibly steering along with whoever or whatever is coming down on you.

I don't know what you consider subjective, but I can tell you that there is very little in the law that provides for preventing conduct which causes injury or damages, but a whole lot of law that provides for compensation of injury or damages after the fact. Public awareness of conduct that can potentially cause injury or damage can bring about changes in behavior that prevent injury. Spending time in futile efforts is NOT efficient. Whether the article is biased, or the facts are totally accurate can always be an issue, but the motive seems pretty obvious, bring public attention to a problem which appears to have been experienced by other members of the cycling community as well.

Gene, regardless of motive, the point I am personally trying to make is that his efforts are JUST AS FUTILE than if (as you believe) the system is. I agree fundamentally with the idea of "we share the road" or I wouldn't be out there riding on the very roads that motorists are on. My whole beef is with the method in which people choose to fight (like this guy who is standing in front of a BUS). Am I doing anything other than running my mouth here? NO. :p But, by the same principle, I'm not out making it "worse" either. And one could argue that the cyclist's behavior, in this case, could be perceived by those that WERE there (again, this is speculation, but we only have one view - the cyclist's! Personally, I would like to hear from some of the passengers on the bus and some eye witnesses!) as the "problem" - and this could influence the treatment by motorists of cyclists in the future - not to mention the fact that the guy could have been killed (I don't know him personally, but that would have been tragic and stupid and a waste, period!). Yes, my argument is a flawed one as I realize that it is not our job to be psychologists and teach world peace. But it IS our job, if we want to ride another day and...oh...um...LIVE, to NOT fight on the streets against angry, unpredictable motorists. You want to keep arguing THAT??? Seriously????? There has to be a better way. Has to be.

that's actually a standard move in a tight back or around any moving obstacle approaching you from the side. It lets you manage your distance from the object or other rider a lot better and reduce the chance of an impact while possibly steering along with whoever or whatever is coming down on you.

Regardless, the bus didn't STRIKE him - nor did he indicate that this was a defensive move. And given that HAD the bus "struck" him, "hit" him, etc., this would have aided his story. I think he would have used stronger wording than he did. Just my observation and opinion.

However, again, I reiterate, I do NOT believe this justifies the driver at all. She was completely in the wrong and should have been at the very least, cited. I am NOT defending the driver. Let me make that clear.

. . . .There has to be a better way. Has to be.
Front page headline;

BUS PASSING CYCLIST CREATES HAZARD
ok??:D

Front page headline;

BUS PASSING CYCLIST CREATES HAZARD
ok??:D

Of? The Peloton at the Rose Bowl made the LA Times, but is their plight any better? My point being, the actions of the cyclist has not affected change - sensationalism aside. :)

EDIT: of course, I will admit, this remains to be seen. Perhaps, Arnold, himself, was on that bus that day (for public relation purposes) and witnessed the whole thing. Maybe tomorrow everywhere in LA will have wide, clean, clearly marked bike lanes!)

Of? The Peloton at the Rose Bowl made the LA Times, but is their plight any better? My point being, the actions of the cyclist has not affected change - sensationalism aside. :)
. . .
Are you sure? I seem to recall some regulatory action being considered by the Pasadena City Counsel that got tabled after public awareness of high ranking police official efforts to impose restrictions on what seemed to be an othrwise lawful activity. But that's a different debate involving the consent of willing participants.

Even though this particular cyclist may not have succeeded in gaining support for his claims of potential criminal assault, the fact his bike had to be removed from under the bus could well provide the basis for a civil action resulting in the payment of monitary damages. And it's amazing how much a major damage award can influence internal policy on matters of conduct.

Are you sure? I seem to recall some regulatory action being considered by the Pasadena City Counsel that got tabled after public awareness of high ranking police official efforts to impose restrictions on what seemed to be an othrwise lawful activity. But that's a different debate involving the consent of willing participants.

Even though this particular cyclist may not have succeeded in gaining support for his claims of potential criminal assault, the fact his bike had to be removed from under the bus could well provide the basis for a civil action resulting in the payment of monitary damages. And it's amazing how much a major damage award can influence internal policy on matters of conduct.


You know what? You're right. Damnit that he didn't get run over and disemboweled! Hell, we could have not a "hand struck" - as insinuated by the author - but a leg lost. OR, the bus could have run over him, smashed him up into the grill of some car, and the interview could have been conducted as bits and pieces of him were removed by the Fire Department. Holy cow! What a media opportunity! What a coup by our community to prove - oh, yeah, a bus can smush a human! Now, THAT would have gained real support. As I see it, the jerk failed us as he is still living and breathing, and walking and talking and...cycling...

:rolleyes: and, again... :rolleyes:

Regardless, the bus didn't STRIKE him - nor did he indicate that this was a defensive move. And given that HAD the bus "struck" him, "hit" him, etc., this would have aided his story. In my reading of the article, the bus *did* strike the cyclist. Perhaps not by striking his hand in passing, but certainly once the cyclist positioned himself in front of the bus.

Until we hear from the cyclist/author, any speculation on whether the bus brushed his bar-gripped knuckles, or was simply in arm's reach, is just that: speculation.

Beyond the knuckle-scrape debate, per the author, the bus driver not only "bumped" him that first time, but then backed up, and bumped him again. Intentionally.

This, to me, is the most telling part of the story: that the driver knowingly sought to use her superior firepower (the bus) to intimidate the cyclist. Thinking that she could get away with indulging her anger, as bullies will do.

If a warm body is blocking the bus driver's path, she needs to just stop. Doesn't matter if the body blocking her path is a cyclist; a crazy nekkid person doing the watusi; a high-falutin' public official; or anyone else. Yeah, it's inconvenient and aggravating to the driver and passengers, but so are bus-breakdowns. It's part of the reality on the street.

If a warm body is blocking the bus driver's path, she needs to just stop. Doesn't matter if the body blocking her path is a cyclist; a crazy nekkid person doing the watusi; a high-falutin' public official; or anyone else.

What if it was a cold, dead body? Can she run over it then?

Think of the headlines that would create!!! :D

What if it was a cold, dead body? Can she run over it then?

Think of the headlines that would create!!! :D

Good point.

She can run it over if she dodges the body-shots of Patron, and the hamachi sushi strips.

Headlines, be damned! Bring on the food and drink. :D