Advocacy & Safety - Beware, iPod zombie cyclists are on the rise

My wife was T-boned by some idiot cyclist jamming out to music in his own little world. She screamed at him while slamming on her brakes, but of course he didn't hear her. As she was lying on the pavement with a cracked frame he took off his headphones, said 'what?' and rode away, leaving her on the ground.

Beware, iPod zombie cyclists are on the rise
Chris Gourlay

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00652/Cyclist_652407a.jpg

WATCH out for the iPod zombies. Cyclists distracted by music blaring in their ears have become the latest menace on Britain’s roads.

The fashion for cyclists to wear earphones on crowded city streets is being held partly responsible for the recent upsurge in cycling injuries and deaths, as well as collisions with pedestrians.

Road safety groups are alarmed at the practice and this weekend Edmund King, the president of the AA, called on the Department for Transport (DfT) to launch a campaign warning cyclists of the risk. The number of urban cyclists has grown so sharply that safety groups say the risky behaviour of a minority can cause serious problems.

The latest DfT figures show that 820 cyclists were killed or seriously injured in the three months to June, a 19% rise on the same period in 2008. It is not known how many of these cases were caused by people listening to music because the DfT and the police do not record the information.

However, many cyclists believe the problem is increasing. Internet cycling forums are full of heated exchanges between indignant cyclists and seething motorists, railing against the “erratic behaviour” and “breathtaking stupidity” of riders who career through the traffic, sporting the telltale white wires of an iPod.

“If cyclists had to take a test, like all other road users do, and pay insurance, then perhaps there would be a lot less idiots riding their bikes, wearing their iPod or mobile phone earphones and expecting everyone else to not only give way to them but to also read their minds as to their next action,” said one blogger after the death of a London cyclist last week.

Another said that “iPod zombies are a menace. I saw a bus clip one of them the other day in Victoria who was oblivious to anything around him.”

This weekend Nicholas Gardiner, an Oxfordshire coroner, spoke out about the risks of riding with iPods, saying that cyclists’ careless attitude had to be challenged. “Frankly I find it quite frightening the things cyclists do,” he said. “They ought to take a minimum amount of care over their safety. It seems to me ridiculous to deprive yourself of what is the second most important of your senses.”

Last year he recorded a verdict of accidental death when Abigail Haythorne, 17, died after pulling out into an oncoming car. She had an MP3 player in her pocket, and her earphones tucked inside her neck scarf, and he said it was possible she was wearing them when she was struck by the car.

Pedestrians, too, have fallen victim to cyclists listening to music and apparently oblivious to those around them. In June, a six-year-old girl from Wallasey, Merseyside, suffered serious injuries after she was mown down on the pavement by an iPod-wearing cyclist who didn’t even stop to help her, according to witnesses. The girl underwent hours of surgery to reconstruct her shattered leg.

The issue of risky behaviour by cyclists has become a more pressing issue for motorists because ministers are considering whether to make them liable for crashes, even if they were not at fault.

Youth for Road Safety, a new group, is to launch a campaign called Tune into Traffic under the slogan “Your earphones could kill you”.

Manpreet Darroch, who is leading the campaign, said: “It’s a serious problem which is only going to get worse as the number of cyclists increases — lots of people are completely oblivious to what’s going on around them. People don’t realise how dangerous listening to music is on the roads — whether pedestrian or cyclist. It takes one of your key senses away. People shouldn’t do it.

“You can legislate until you are blue in the face. On the issue of iPods we just need to raise awareness.”

However CTC, the national cycling group, argues that people should be left to make their own judgments. “We encourage deaf people to cycle so we don’t think it’s essential to hear traffic in order to ride,” said a spokeswoman. “You have to be sensible. The most important thing is that you look around you all the time — especially over your shoulder.”

There is currently no legislation in place to govern either the use of music players or the wearing of helmets on the road, but cyclists can be prosecuted for dangerous riding — an offence that attracts a maximum penalty of £2,500.

The police claim to be getting tougher on cycling offences and Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, has promised “complete zero tolerance of cyclists who break the rules”. However, David Cameron, the Tory leader, last year rode unpunished through red lights in London.

Johnson plans to give even greater leeway to cyclists, to encourage people to switch to one of the greenest forms of transport. He is studying the possibility of allowing cyclists to shoot red lights on left turns at a junction.

Last week King called on the DfT to address the iPod issue. “They’re meant to be mobile, but if you are cycling, you need all your senses about you.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6936280.ece

Naw, just let them ride with earphones instead of headphones, and everything will work out ok.

lol I was being sarcastic because we just had a thread were some "experts" asserted that earphones are definitely different and safer than headphones, and it is completely ok to use them while riding a bike.

“If cyclists had to take a test, like all other road users do, and pay insurance, then perhaps there would be a lot less idiots riding their bikes, wearing their iPod or mobile phone earphones and expecting everyone else to not only give way to them but to also read their minds as to their next action,” said one blogger after the death of a London cyclist last week.

How is a cyclist wearing an iPod any different from a car driver with a huge set of amplifiers and the volume set to 11 any different? The real problem isn't the music player, it's operator inattention.

All of the collisions and incidents outlined in this story come down to the same factor, the operator of a vehicle not paying attention to what they are doing.

I find it interesting that the only solution for this problem amongst cyclists is licencing, testing and insurance, because none of those are resolving the problem when it comes to motorists.

Bicycle license? What the...

Then I won't get a bike, even though I am a law-abiding citizen, not to wear headphones/earphones while in a bike.

I ain't care if you wear your iPod or not. Just don't wear it while in a bike.

How is a cyclist wearing an iPod any different from a car driver with a huge set of amplifiers and the volume set to 11 any different? The real problem isn't the music player, it's operator inattention.

All of the collisions and incidents outlined in this story come down to the same factor, the operator of a vehicle not paying attention to what they are doing.

I find it interesting that the only solution for this problem amongst cyclists is licencing, testing and insurance, because none of those are resolving the problem when it comes to motorists.

This isn't a car forum, it's a bike forum. Why do some people get all defensive when someone points out bad cycling and shout 'but cars do xyz, and it's bad!'? I'm sure you can find a great car discussion on one of the many car forums that IB owns, but I'm hear to talk about bikes.

In case you haven't noticed, there are great differences between cars and bikes.

Sorry to hear :( . Easy way to get his attention carry a very small stick, when you see him again wing it at him and when he looks say "WHAT? Couldn't hear you with your Ipod blaring!" and keep going right on by! There are other things I would love to suggest far worse then that but I will be nice. Hate people on cells while they are driving, illegal here, but they still do it. I have hit a car on purpose with my bike to get their attention from running over a child in a crosswalk when they had the right of way before. Guy gets out and asks what the !@#$ my problem was and I simply pointed at the kid and said is your phone call worth more than his life a!@#$%4? Yeah when people are distracted bad things can happen. Some can multiplex very well some can't.


My wife was T-boned by some idiot cyclist jamming out to music in his own little world. She screamed at him while slamming on her brakes, but of course he didn't hear her. As she was lying on the pavement with a cracked frame he took off his headphones, said 'what?' and rode away, leaving her on the ground.

Beware, iPod zombie cyclists are on the rise
Chris Gourlay

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00652/Cyclist_652407a.jpg

WATCH out for the iPod zombies. Cyclists distracted by music blaring in their ears have become the latest menace on Britain�s roads.

The fashion for cyclists to wear earphones on crowded city streets is being held partly responsible for the recent upsurge in cycling injuries and deaths, as well as collisions with pedestrians.

Road safety groups are alarmed at the practice and this weekend Edmund King, the president of the AA, called on the Department for Transport (DfT) to launch a campaign warning cyclists of the risk. The number of urban cyclists has grown so sharply that safety groups say the risky behaviour of a minority can cause serious problems.

The latest DfT figures show that 820 cyclists were killed or seriously injured in the three months to June, a 19% rise on the same period in 2008. It is not known how many of these cases were caused by people listening to music because the DfT and the police do not record the information.

However, many cyclists believe the problem is increasing. Internet cycling forums are full of heated exchanges between indignant cyclists and seething motorists, railing against the �erratic behaviour� and �breathtaking stupidity� of riders who career through the traffic, sporting the telltale white wires of an iPod.

�If cyclists had to take a test, like all other road users do, and pay insurance, then perhaps there would be a lot less idiots riding their bikes, wearing their iPod or mobile phone earphones and expecting everyone else to not only give way to them but to also read their minds as to their next action,� said one blogger after the death of a London cyclist last week.

Another said that �iPod zombies are a menace. I saw a bus clip one of them the other day in Victoria who was oblivious to anything around him.�

This weekend Nicholas Gardiner, an Oxfordshire coroner, spoke out about the risks of riding with iPods, saying that cyclists� careless attitude had to be challenged. �Frankly I find it quite frightening the things cyclists do,� he said. �They ought to take a minimum amount of care over their safety. It seems to me ridiculous to deprive yourself of what is the second most important of your senses.�

Last year he recorded a verdict of accidental death when Abigail Haythorne, 17, died after pulling out into an oncoming car. She had an MP3 player in her pocket, and her earphones tucked inside her neck scarf, and he said it was possible she was wearing them when she was struck by the car.

Pedestrians, too, have fallen victim to cyclists listening to music and apparently oblivious to those around them. In June, a six-year-old girl from Wallasey, Merseyside, suffered serious injuries after she was mown down on the pavement by an iPod-wearing cyclist who didn�t even stop to help her, according to witnesses. The girl underwent hours of surgery to reconstruct her shattered leg.

The issue of risky behaviour by cyclists has become a more pressing issue for motorists because ministers are considering whether to make them liable for crashes, even if they were not at fault.

Youth for Road Safety, a new group, is to launch a campaign called Tune into Traffic under the slogan �Your earphones could kill you�.

Manpreet Darroch, who is leading the campaign, said: �It�s a serious problem which is only going to get worse as the number of cyclists increases � lots of people are completely oblivious to what�s going on around them. People don�t realise how dangerous listening to music is on the roads � whether pedestrian or cyclist. It takes one of your key senses away. People shouldn�t do it.

�You can legislate until you are blue in the face. On the issue of iPods we just need to raise awareness.�

However CTC, the national cycling group, argues that people should be left to make their own judgments. �We encourage deaf people to cycle so we don�t think it�s essential to hear traffic in order to ride,� said a spokeswoman. �You have to be sensible. The most important thing is that you look around you all the time � especially over your shoulder.�

There is currently no legislation in place to govern either the use of music players or the wearing of helmets on the road, but cyclists can be prosecuted for dangerous riding � an offence that attracts a maximum penalty of �2,500.

The police claim to be getting tougher on cycling offences and Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, has promised �complete zero tolerance of cyclists who break the rules�. However, David Cameron, the Tory leader, last year rode unpunished through red lights in London.

Johnson plans to give even greater leeway to cyclists, to encourage people to switch to one of the greenest forms of transport. He is studying the possibility of allowing cyclists to shoot red lights on left turns at a junction.

Last week King called on the DfT to address the iPod issue. �They�re meant to be mobile, but if you are cycling, you need all your senses about you.�
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6936280.ece

I got run over by a deaf lady in an electric wheelchair. That was lame.

I'd get all alarmist about it, but I haven't the energy at the moment.

I got run over by a deaf lady in an electric wheelchair. That was lame.

I'd get all alarmist about it, but I haven't the energy at the moment.

Speaking of those electric wheelchairs, hoverrounds and what not. Do they count as a motor vehicle or as a pedestrian?

But if they're blonde and hot and riding in a skirt ... they get a pass.

Had to deal a FEW times on the MUP with iPod-ed joggers and bike riders -- call out to them, HOLLER at them, then just a drill-sergeant-loud "YO!" about six feet behind them. I'm sure they all thought I was an a-hole, much like I thought they were.

If I call to you 2x, and you don't show some sign of recognition that someone else has encroached on your little world, I'll blow by you, and LMAO if you fall over.

I personally don't ride w/ earphones -- tried it, took away from the ride experience. If you can roll them and still function, party on. If you can't, leave 'em at home. There ARE responsibilities when you're in public, mainly to not act like the last human on earth. Or the only one that matters....

Had to deal a FEW times on the MUP with iPod-ed joggers and bike riders -- call out to them, HOLLER at them, then just a drill-sergeant-loud "YO!" about six feet behind them. I'm sure they all thought I was an a-hole, much like I thought they were.

If I call to you 2x, and you don't show some sign of recognition that someone else has encroached on your little world, I'll blow by you, and LMAO if you fall over.

I personally don't ride w/ earphones -- tried it, took away from the ride experience. If you can roll them and still function, party on. If you can't, leave 'em at home. There ARE responsibilities when you're in public, mainly to not act like the last human on earth. Or the only one that matters....

Do you honk at every car you pass when driving too? If you can't pass another rider safely that sounds like your problem.

How are earphones safer than headphones? I'm sure cyclists will opt for the in-ear ones because the other kind keeps falling out.
Listening to music through headphones handicaps a cyclist. Your sense of hearing should be fully alert whenever you have to navigate roads full of people and cars!

Yawn. Someday, when you learn to ride without the training wheels, you may figure it out.

Do you honk at every car you pass when driving too? If you can't pass another rider safely that sounds like your problem.

If you're passing with only one lane each direction, the law in most states does specify honking before passing.

Most motorists don't bother, and it doesn't usually result in an accident, but if you want the overtaken car to have the burden of staying to the right and not increasing speed while you pass, then yes, you're supposed to provide an audible signal before overtaking.

Whether this is a legal requirement for cyclists varies by jurisdiction -- an audible signal when overtaking pedestrians or cyclists is required on most of the bicycle paths and multi-use paths I use, but not all of them.

Speaking of those electric wheelchairs, hoverrounds and what not. Do they count as a motor vehicle or as a pedestrian?

Generally, adaptive devices are treated as pedestrians in most respects in most states, but there's quite a bit of variation.

If you're passing with only one lane each direction, the law in most states does specify honking before passing.

Most motorists don't bother, and it doesn't usually result in an accident, but if you want the overtaken car to have the burden of staying to the right and not increasing speed while you pass, then yes, you're supposed to provide an audible signal before overtaking.

Whether this is a legal requirement for cyclists varies by jurisdiction -- an audible signal when overtaking pedestrians or cyclists is required on most of the bicycle paths and multi-use paths I use, but not all of them.

That may be true, but the burden of passing safely most definitely is on the overtaking vehicle (bike or car). In urban traffic the idea of acknowledging every passing vehicle is ridiculous and anyone who is "blowing" by other users of an MUP should be on the road anyways.

That may be true, but the burden of passing safely most definitely is on the overtaking vehicle (bike or car). In urban traffic the idea of acknowledging every passing vehicle is ridiculous and anyone who is "blowing" by other users of an MUP should be on the road anyways.

The original post specifically referred to a MUP, not urban traffic.

I'm free to ride blithely down the center of an un-laned MUP, to veer left or right or speed up without watching for overtaking traffic.

If, however, an overtaking rider has signaled his intent to pass, I must stay to the right side of the MUP and not speed up or turn left until the overtaking vehicle has passed.

The overtaking rider may choose to pass without signaling, but if I happen to drift left while he's doing it, and he runs into me, it's his fault, not mine.

Generally, adaptive devices are treated as pedestrians in most respects in most states, but there's quite a bit of variation.

Thank you, that makes sense. And sadly a lot of people who use them seem to think that they can "drive" them at full speed and expect everyone else to get out of their way. So much so that the VA that I go to has signs in all areas reminding those operators to use the slow mode.

The original post specifically referred to a MUP, not urban traffic.

I'm free to ride blithely down the center of an un-laned MUP, to veer left or right or speed up without watching for overtaking traffic.

If, however, an overtaking rider has signaled his intent to pass, I must stay to the right side of the MUP and not speed up or turn left until the overtaking vehicle has passed.

The overtaking rider may choose to pass without signaling, but if I happen to drift left while he's doing it, and he runs into me, it's his fault, not mine.If I ran into someone on the MUP, wrecking my bike and possibly myself, the fact that it was his fault would be no consolation.

There all over Austin.

The original post specifically referred to a MUP, not urban traffic.

I'm free to ride blithely down the center of an un-laned MUP, to veer left or right or speed up without watching for overtaking traffic.

If, however, an overtaking rider has signaled his intent to pass, I must stay to the right side of the MUP and not speed up or turn left until the overtaking vehicle has passed.

The overtaking rider may choose to pass without signaling, but if I happen to drift left while he's doing it, and he runs into me, it's his fault, not mine.

Care to cite that? Most rules regarding bike paths and lanes require users to stay to the right and signal any intention to slow or turn, just as on the street. That being said, your final sentence makes my point, it is the duty of the overtaker to pass safely regardless of what the passed cyclist is doing (rocking or zoning out.)

Speaking of those electric wheelchairs, hoverrounds and what not. Do they count as a motor vehicle or as a pedestrian?

In Minnesota you can get a DUI in an electric wheelchair.

Do you honk at every car you pass when driving too?

Don't know where DX-MAN is from, but here in Massachusetts it is the law that a cyclist has to sound an audible warning before passing a pedestrian. It's always nice if the pedestrian responds in some way to indicate that they heard you. Kind of closes the loop.

Speedo

In Minnesota you can get a DUI in an electric wheelchair.

Steve,

That's good to hear. As I've seen some people in those electric wheelchairs that behave worse then the worst scofflaw cyclists that we've heard complaints about.

I gave up on listening to music while riding as a courier in the 80's after almost getting smoked.

Don't know where DX-MAN is from, but here in Massachusetts it is the law that a cyclist has to sound an audible warning before passing a pedestrian. It's always nice if the pedestrian responds in some way to indicate that they heard you. Kind of closes the loop.

Speedo

Wise thinking. A bell works well. While on a MUP, I can generally whistle the theme from "The Addams Family". Seems to do the job. I can do "andy griffith" as well.



But if they're blonde and hot and riding in a skirt ... they get a pass. :D

Only if said skirt is exceptionally short.

Don't know where DX-MAN is from, but here in Massachusetts it is the law that a cyclist has to sound an audible warning before passing a pedestrian. It's always nice if the pedestrian responds in some way to indicate that they heard you. Kind of closes the loop.

SpeedoSure is, as they look over their left shoulder and unconsciously step left into your path. :trainwreck:

This isn't a car forum, it's a bike forum. Why do some people get all defensive when someone points out bad cycling and shout 'but cars do xyz, and it's bad!'? I'm sure you can find a great car discussion on one of the many car forums that IB owns, but I'm hear to talk about bikes.

In case you haven't noticed, there are great differences between cars and bikes.



You missed all three of the points I made, all related to cycling BTW.

1) Cyclists with head phones or ear buds are not the only road users who probably can't hear what is going on. Not so much of a problem if the volume is set reasonably and the operator is paying attention.

2) The person on bicycle isn't paying attention to what they are doing, which is a bigger problem then the headphones/earbuds. This isn't a problem limited to cyclists either.

3) The proposed solution (licencing, testing, insurance) hasn't worked for other road users, to resolve this problem, so why will it work for cyclists.

My wife was T-boned by some idiot cyclist jamming out to music in his own little world. She screamed at him while slamming on her brakes, but of course he didn't hear her. As she was lying on the pavement with a cracked frame he took off his headphones, said 'what?' and rode away, leaving her on the ground.



I'm going to play devils advocate here!

So hold on, your wife was not hit buy this guy? Cause she has a cracked frame, if he did hit her his front tire would be a taco. She screamed at the same time she slammed on her brakes so she did not see him either until the last min. Of course he heard her....he took off his headphones on responded. Obviously he did not give a rats azz if she had injuries or not since he pedaled away. So who is to blame? She did not see him and he did not see her? If you cannot do an emergency stop with out cracking your frame....get a steel bike or learn to brake properly in that situation.

Alright you can blast away at me now!

Sometimes it's better to accelerate to avoid the T-Bone.

Helps you win Figure-8 races too!

Sure is, as they look over their left shoulder and unconsciously step left into your path. :trainwreck:

Yeah, sometimes.

Speedo

Yeah, sometimes.

Speedo


I and my bike are so quiet they don't realize I am there until I am shoulder to shoulder with them....I don't do it to old people though because I don't want to give anyone a heart attack!

I'm going to play devils advocate here!

So hold on, your wife was not hit buy this guy? Cause she has a cracked frame, if he did hit her his front tire would be a taco. She screamed at the same time she slammed on her brakes so she did not see him either until the last min. Of course he heard her....he took off his headphones on responded. Obviously he did not give a rats azz if she had injuries or not since he pedaled away. So who is to blame? She did not see him and he did not see her? If you cannot do an emergency stop with out cracking your frame....get a steel bike or learn to brake properly in that situation.

Alright you can blast away at me now!
He came flying out of a blind ally into her. She clearly had the right of way. He was on some P.O.S. MTB and she was on a nice road bike; neither I nor my wife have any idea what happened to his front rim as it really wasn't on her mind as she was lying on the ground. His front rim wouldn't necessarily taco on impact with my wife. He was clearly at fault.

He came flying out of a blind ally into her. She clearly had the right of way. He was on some P.O.S. MTB and she was on a nice road bike; neither I nor my wife have any idea what happened to his front rim as it really wasn't on her mind as she was lying on the ground. His front rim wouldn't necessarily taco on impact with my wife. He was clearly at fault.

I am being myself now...no devils advocate. Your right depending on the strength and size of the tire and rim on the *** MTB..it might have had no effect on the front tire at all. I am sorry this happened and wish the best for you and the wife.
I just think headphones were not the problem here, it was not paying attention to the surroundings. I've seen cyclists do it without headphones, You have to see what is around in all angles..that is just a fact...Headphones are no different than loud stereos in cars IMO. Just saying.

I am being myself now...no devils advocate. Your right depending on the strength and size of the tire and rim on the *** MTB..it might have had no effect on the front tire at all. I am sorry this happened and wish the best for you and the wife.
I just think headphones were not the problem here, it was not paying attention to the surroundings. I've seen cyclists do it without headphones, You have to see what is around in all angles..that is just a fact...Headphones are no different than loud stereos in cars IMO. Just saying.

I think headphones did play a role due to the isolation to all outside noises that the provide. People tend to 'space out' more when all they can hear is music. While loud stereos might be a danger, they don't actively isolate someone like music directly pumped into one's ears does. FWIW, many places have laws against driving with headphones, as well as ones against stereos which are too loud.

In my wife's case I think the headphones contributed to his not paying attention due to the distraction and isolation that the music provided. That and the guy was simply a prick.

as well as ones against stereos which are too loud.

Understood I had a ticket for this in my younger days 100 bucks.


In my wife's case I think the headphones contributed to his not paying attention due to the distraction and isolation that the music provided. That and the guy was simply a prick.

Yeah why did he just pedal away???? Shocking IMO.


sorry just sometimes i like to go against the grain...It is just me...I Hope your wife is doing fine...And she is cool with riding again after a crash. I like your temper...I wish more people would do what you do! I'll see you around!!! Peace!

I've seen iPod riders and even cellphone riders. Next they'll be texting.

Plug in, tune out, and wreak havoc. :(

I've seen iPod riders and even cellphone riders. Next they'll be texting.

Plug in, tune out, and wreak havoc. :(


Way less dangerous than cagers??? But still dangerous.

Way less dangerous than cagers??? But still dangerous.
It depends on if we rate 'dangerous' according to damage potential or according to the potential to cause an accident.
I'm not even sure if it's a case of apples to oranges.
I'd probably have a better chance of surviving an incident with an iPod rider though. ;)

I'd probably have a better chance of surviving an incident with an iPod rider though. ;)




:)

My wife was T-boned by some idiot cyclist jamming out to music in his own little world. She screamed at him while slamming on her brakes, but of course he didn't hear her. As she was lying on the pavement with a cracked frame he took off his headphones, said 'what?' and rode away, leaving her on the ground. The implication here is that the music player use was the cause of the accident -- though it probably wasn't. If you're screaming at another cyclist to stop, it's probably already too late. And it seems quite obvious (if he said "what?") that he DID hear her.

Odd that he hit her hard enough to break her frame -- but not hard enough to damage his own bike badly enough to have to even look for damage. Or that her frame (usually really hard to break) was broken, but she wasn't injured (if she was hurt, I'd expect that to more worthy of mentioning than her broken frame.)

It seems to me that the bigger issue is that this person caused an accident by not paying attention (this is the assumption made, though perhaps your wife caused the accident?) and then didn't even stop long enough to work out who was at fault before leaving. (Assuming that the story given is 100% accurate, of course.) Any alleged iPod use is tertiary to these two issues.

And as for this being a bike forum rather than a car forum, yes, but the situation of a car with the stereo turned up to 11 is exactly analogous -- except that he's surrounded by two tons of metal and possibly going 70 rather than 25. And most people who post here do either own cars, drive, or interact with cars (possibly with the stereo turned up to 11) on a regular basis as they ride, so comparisons with cars are certainly appropriate.

Edit: reading further into the thread, the accident was explained further -- it does sound like the accident was his fault. Still doesn't blame the iPod, however.

I've seen iPod riders and even cellphone riders. Next they'll be texting.

Plug in, tune out, and wreak havoc. :(

That seems to be there mantra.

The implication here is that the music player use was the cause of the accident -- though it probably wasn't. If you're screaming at another cyclist to stop, it's probably already too late.

Odd that he hit her hard enough to break her frame -- but not hard enough to damage his own bike badly enough to have to even look for damage. Or that her frame (usually really hard to break) was broken, but she wasn't injured (if she was hurt, I'd expect that to more worthy of mentioning than her broken frame.)

It seems to me that the bigger issue is that this person caused an accident by not paying attention (this is the assumption made, though perhaps your wife caused the accident?) and then didn't even stop long enough to work out who was at fault before leaving. (Assuming that the story given is 100% accurate, of course.) Any alleged iPod use is tertiary to these two issues.

And as for this being a bike forum rather than a car forum, yes, but the situation of a car with the stereo turned up to 11 is exactly analogous -- except that he's surrounded by two tons of metal and possibly going 70 rather than 25. And most people who post here do either own cars, drive, or interact with cars (possibly with the stereo turned up to 11) on a regular basis as they ride, so comparisons with cars are certainly appropriate.

Given that the bike that was ridden by the iPod wearer was described as a *** department store bike the wheels on those things are usually heavier and able to take more punishment then the wheels that one is likely to purchase at their LBS because the manufacturers of those *** department store bikes know that they are more likely to be abused.

So it doesn't surprise me that the higher quality bike sustained more damage then the *** department store bike did.

Given that the bike that was ridden by the iPod wearer was described as a *** department store bike the wheels on those things are usually heavier and able to take more punishment then the wheels that one is likely to purchase at their LBS because the manufacturers of those *** department store bikes know that they are more likely to be abused.

So it doesn't surprise me that the higher quality bike sustained more damage then the *** department store bike did.Personally, it sounded to me that the `department store bike' business was more intended to paint him as somebody who wasn't a serious cyclist rather than anything about how sturdy it was. And besides, department store bikes are usually less sturdy than higher price bikes of the same type -- if it's sturdy, it's because it's a mountain bike, not because it's a department store bike.

But her frame broke. Frames are tough, even on light road bikes. To hit her hard enough to brake her frame (and not injure her) and not do any damage to his bike? That seems unlikely. It's not a matter of more damage -- it's a matter of catastrophic damage (broken frame = ruined bike) vs. no damage at all, not even a taco'd wheel, broken spoke or bent fork -- all of these would have likely had him stopping to figure out what happened to his bike.

A dept store bike hitting another bike on the side - I expect more damage done to the bike hit on the side. There's a lot more stress put on a frame if you hit it on the side than on the front. Also, the dept store bike is probably a lot heavier (and the rider probably is too). Most of the dept store bikes I've seen are pretty sturdy, if very heavy. But I'm generally looking at the stuff they carry at Target for adults, not the cheap stuff they sell for kids in Wal*Mart around Christmas. I've seen racks of bike-shaped-objects there for $25; those probably can barely hold the weight of the kid.

While loud stereos might be a danger, they don't actively isolate someone like music directly pumped into one's ears does.

I think I'd have to deafen myself with headphones to achieve the level of acoustic isolation I get in my car with the windows up and even a moderate level of radio volume. When I drive the company work truck, the engine noise is far louder than I'd ever have headphones at.

A dept store bike hitting another bike on the side - I expect more damage done to the bike hit on the side. There's a lot more stress put on a frame if you hit it on the side than on the front. Also, the dept store bike is probably a lot heavier (and the rider probably is too). Most of the dept store bikes I've seen are pretty sturdy, if very heavy. But I'm generally looking at the stuff they carry at Target for adults, not the cheap stuff they sell for kids in Wal*Mart around Christmas. I've seen racks of bike-shaped-objects there for $25; those probably can barely hold the weight of the kid.

Agreed the "bikes" that I've seen at Target, Sears, etc. look to be heavier and of a better "quality" then those that one finds in Wally World. And I would not want one of them running into me, nor their operator. Also it wouldn't surprise me that the iPod cost more then his P.O.S. department store bike did.

Edit: reading further into the thread, the accident was explained further -- it does sound like the accident was his fault. Still doesn't blame the iPod, however.
I think both the isolation of the headphones and distraction of the music contributed to the accident as they both kept his attention from what he should have been doing, which of course was watching where he was riding. Like it or not, the fact of the matter is that a lot of people space out while listening to music with headphones. I know this because I'm one of them. Try walking down a crowed city street or a busy train station with headphones to see what I mean. For some reason music that isn't played on headphones doesn't have the same effect on me. (To the guy who says that it doesn't happen to you; great but not everyone is like you, and take note that I qualified my statement. Thanks.)

To the guy who says that it doesn't happen to you; great but not everyone is like you, and take note that I qualified my statement. Thanks.

If I'm that guy, I didn't suggest I never lose some situational awareness while on the road. I do it far more often than I'd like. But it's a lot easier for me to miss things in a car than on a bike, headphones or not. Thanks.

I got run over by a deaf lady in an electric wheelchair. That was lame.

I'd get all alarmist about it, but I haven't the energy at the moment.

Yea those deaf ladies are pretty dangerous! I guess that is lame as well!