Advocacy & Safety - E Tennessee cyclist hit. 3 foot law not enforced.

We had a local cyclist get hit from behind by a ComCast cable van. Supposedly swerved to avoid a car coming from the other direction. Rumor has it that he was fiddling with his cell phone. He hit the guy with the right mirror on the shoulder.

http://greenevillesun.com/story/304704

F***ing cop didn't issue a ticket even though we have a 3 foot law.

From what was posted on the NTMBA.org forum today.

As of this morning this is what we know about Jay:
1) compound fracture to the left femur
2) broken left ankle
3) broken left scapula

He was in surgery until 1:30 this morning, receiving 19 units of blood in and having his spleen removed in the process. He was returned to surgery this morning to try to find the location of more bleeding. The extent of the damages to the bones has not been completely determined as they are trying to solve more important issues first.

Sorry to hear about this, my state is in the process of getting this law. The view among experienced riders is that it's just another law the cops won't enforce.

I was hit by a redneck in a truck trying to thread the needle between me and an oncoming SUV. His side mirror hit my arm. I followed him back to his house, called police, and they did NOTHING since I didn't have serious injury. I guess having no front plate or tinted windows are more pressing issues.

Sorry to hear about this. if the driver was fiddling with his cell phone the cyclist's attorney should be able to subpoena his cell phone records to confirm. Plus, Comcast is a deep pocket, don't forget to name them in the lawsuit.

I was hit by a redneck in a truck trying to thread the needle between me and an oncoming SUV. His side mirror hit my arm. I followed him back to his house, called police, and they did NOTHING since I didn't have serious injury. I guess having no front plate or tinted windows are more pressing issues.

will the police continue to do nothing if you hit his car back? if so, you may have your solution. :)

IMHO there are more pressing issues in this case than the 3 ft law. Failure to yield sounds like a slam-dunk. After all, how can you prove the van didn't give 3 ft to pass, and then hit the guy? But obviously there was a failure to yield, or the guy wouldn't have been hit.

But yes, more publicity is needed in general w/r/t the 3 ft law among others. I previously asked (not on BF) about what it would take to get a bit of airtime on 1620 AM (the Highway advisory radio network) here, but no one seemed to know.

it's kind of obvious that if someone hits you they weren't following the three foot passing law, yes?

it's kind of obvious that if someone hits you they weren't following the three foot passing law, yes?

No. An out of control cyclist can easily swerve more than 3ft off line as can a cyclist who merges without first checking if there is rear approaching traffic.

As to this specific case though the motorist admitted to swerving right before cyclist was hit.

No. An out of control cyclist can easily swerve more than 3ft off line as can a cyclist who merges without first checking if there is rear approaching traffic.

As to this specific case though the motorist admitted to swerving right before cyclist was hit.

OK so motorist admitted swerving... where's the ticket?

That is the part that puzzles me... Often when a motorist hits another motorist, fault is assigned via an issued ticket. But here a motorist hits and admits fault... and yet there is no ticket... what gives?

Now indeed motorists do sometimes get tickets, even when alcohol is NOT involved... I bear witness to that, as a ticket was issued to the motorist that hit me... many many years ago. That motorist was given a "failing to yield ROW" as they left a stop sign and hit me. So I know cops do issue tickets to motorists even when it is only a cyclist that is hit.

Looking at the picture of the road, it is single lane with the no passing double yellow line. You pretty much have to take the lane or ride on that small shoulder. Most likely the cyclist was riding as far right as possible and the van thought he could pass him in the same lane. Such a pass leaves no room for error though.

It sounds like he had plenty of room to pass the cyclist, but the vehicle on the other side coming at him was partially across the centerline. So, if the cyclist had been taking the lane.....................

We had a local cyclist get hit from behind by a ComCast cable van. Supposedly swerved to avoid a car coming from the other direction. Rumor has it that he was fiddling with his cell phone. He hit the guy with the right mirror on the shoulder.

http://greenevillesun.com/story/304704

F***ing cop didn't issue a ticket even though we have a 3 foot law.

From what was posted on the NTMBA.org forum today.

As of this morning this is what we know about Jay:
1) compound fracture to the left femur
2) broken left ankle
3) broken left scapula

He was in surgery until 1:30 this morning, receiving 19 units of blood in and having his spleen removed in the process. He was returned to surgery this morning to try to find the location of more bleeding. The extent of the damages to the bones has not been completely determined as they are trying to solve more important issues first.

I hope he recovers.

It is incidents like this, that are the reason why, I 'take the lane' and, I don't allow motorists to shove me to the side of the road.

Unfortunately, par for the course in Tennessee. (http://bicycling.com/blogs/roadrights/2009/07/02/false-protection/)

Wow. I've ridden in a lot of places and I've learned quickly that the drivers out in the East Tennessee (tri-state) area are some of the absolute worst drivers out there. And by worst, what I really mean is that these people are very, very, very intolerant of cyclists on the road. They just don't accept that cyclists should be on the roads at all.

Wow. I've ridden in a lot of places and I've learned quickly that the drivers out in the East Tennessee (tri-state) area are some of the absolute worst drivers out there. And by worst, what I really mean is that these people are very, very, very intolerant of cyclists on the road. They just don't accept that cyclists should be on the roads at all.

I'll have to disagree with the statement. I ride exclusively in the far NE part of the state (Sullivan, Carter, and Washington counties) and I have had relatively few incidents. I meet a lot of very considerate drivers which is surprising considering the nature of some of the climbs around here and my uphill speed (or lack thereof).

Now over in Greene County and that area may be a different story. I am mainly speaking of the Tri city area.

I'll have to disagree with the statement. I ride exclusively in the far NE part of the state (Sullivan, Carter, and Washington counties) and I have had relatively few incidents. I meet a lot of very considerate drivers which is surprising considering the nature of some of the climbs around here and my uphill speed (or lack thereof).

Now over in Greene County and that area may be a different story. I am mainly speaking of the Tri city area.


Oops. Sorry. I didn't mean tri-state area. I meant the tri-city area. I've had the complete opposite experience as you there. Don't get me wrong. It's a beautiful area, the people are nice. That is, when they are not in their cars. Out on the road, however, and look out. The narrow roads outside of JCity and Kingsville aren't helpful, but drivers out there are just intolerant of cyclists. Just my opinion.

Unfortunately, par for the course in Tennessee. (http://bicycling.com/blogs/roadrights/2009/07/02/false-protection/)

so, can the basturds be sued for failure to enforce?

Can anyone say with certainty that the investigation is COMPLETED yet? It is not unusual in my area for citations to NOT be issued when serious injuries occur, until the ultimate status of the injured person is known. If a motorist is cited, and pays the fine, and the cyclist later dies, well, guess what? That citation will be the ONLY possible legal punishment, from the criminal/traffic law side of things. (Remember the legal protection from double jeopardy?)

If the investigation is not yet complete, and/or higher charges are possible at a later time due to injuries or death, it is perfectly understandable that no ticket/citation has been issued. I am not saying local LE will do this right, but ranting too soon does not make us look good.

That being said, we can certainly expect more such "defenses to prosecution" as three-foot and safe-passing laws come into being. While it is generally not legal to "have an accident to avoid an accident," the so-called doctrine of competing harms can always be argued, and there will be police and juries who will think it better to hit a cyclist going the same way rather than risk a head-on collision.

"Chris Gunter, operator of Wheeled Sports, a bicycle sales and repair shop on Bernard Avenue, said this morning that he feels charges should have been placed in connection with the accident. "

Well if Chris thinks charges are warrented, then let's dispense with any investigation and just lay blame, right?

Maybe it happened exactly as the driver of the Comcast vehicle said it did. Thirty years ago I was involved in a fatal auto accident when an oncoming car crowded the centerline. That's a pretty significant shoulder there, rider and car should have been easily able to pass each other.