velosprinter

Why is it that cyclists get hit, run over, killed and the drivers get a slap on the hand?
https://www.koat.com/news/25470853/detail.html

Then in the comments the "Drivers" say good for the car they gave that cyclist what they deserved.
Anyone care to help me spam the comments?

zeppinger

Why is running over a cyclist "leaving the scene of an accident" and not "manslaughter? " It seems pretty apparent that it was not an "accident."

Titmawz

As far all of that goes this is how I see it... Wanna take someone out in America ??? Just run them over and tell the cops you thought you hit a branch.... oohhh and throw a mangled bicycle by the corpse.

CbadRider

Welcome to A&S.

bhop

It's not manslaughter because no one died... but I agree that it should be a little more harsh, maybe attempted murder or something..

RichMac

I think you were going for attempted manslaughter.

As horrible as this incident is, and as much as I think the driver should be punished, I think it speaks more to how detached drivers become when they're insulated inside a vehicle. Real live human beings become abstract.

It's also another example of how easy it is to fall into a pattern of us vs them.... as is very evident in so many topics on this forum...

Chris516

Excellent description!!

velosprinter

+1 RichMac

I am sure most of the drivers out there that post scary things like, "Good for the car" or "they got what they deserve" and even the ones that run over a bicycle in anger would not do the same face to face. TV makes us think differently but the % of the population that would actually look into someones eyes and take their life is very small.

When I put some space around this and look deeply I see that the driver is suffering and seeking some release from this suffering. Isolated, frustrated, they are in real pain and can't see that driving is what got them there. So much worry, will it get scratched, will there be traffic, will I get to work on time, can I afford to fix it when it breaks, if I am late I will lose my job. They saw the commercial of how happy that car would make them but are not happy. I have never heard someone come into the office talking about how great the trip down the interstate was and how they love sitting in traffic.

Chris516

Drivers who are so egocentric about the road, despite the traffic law permitting bikes on the road, should lose the use of their car for a month. Maybe by then, they will realize that their dependency on OPEC is a waste.

DX-MAN

I agree it should be attempted murder, or at the VERY least, aggravated assault.

But (tongue in cheek here, but just barely) it's 'leaving the scene of an accident' because no state government has passed a law against 'leaving the scene of an on-purpose'.

Chris516

That is how I felt when, I was 'run off the road', in 2007.

trek2.3bike

It's out fault. Cyclists just ***** on the internet. They need to get in the face of police chiefs, prosecutors, judges, and, most importantly, legislators. ONLY WE CAN MAKE IT A "BIG DEAL" TO KILL/INJURE A CYCLIST.

The cyclist is just as dead if hit by a reckless teenager than a distracted old fool. If the police continue to treat Motor Vehicle Homicide as a petty offense, drivers will never learn.

The local cycling community needs to take a page from the MADD playbook and hound the police, prosecutor, and courts with all the publicity they can generate.
The media WILL cover any demonstration with 30 or more participants. Use the internet, picket the police department and the prosecutor's office space. Pack the courtroom.
Talk to the press, the radio people, and the TV folks. Use political ACTION and EMOTION (show the family, distribute photos, humanize the deceased cyclist). It works.

If MADD could do it, cyclists can.

This should be done in every location, every time a cyclist is killed. Stop whinning on the internet and put a stop to leniency for these KILLERS. Call them what they are -- KILLERS, not murderers but ordinary, garden variety careless, negligent, reckless KILLERS. And demand appropriate punishment for their HOMICIDE. This was not an "accident."

myrridin

Two points.

1. Most of the time criminal charges are not filed, because the incident is not believed (by the DA) to be provable in a criminal case (or because they don't think a jury would convict) since the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt is fairly high and the costs for such prosecution are high as well.

2. Even when criminal charges are not filed, the victim has the option to pursue civil liability which has a much lower standard of proof. In a country that awards millions of dollars to idiots who spill hot coffee on themselves, it wouldn't be hard to punish the driver by bankrupting them. Personally I think this is the appropriate method to hold a driver responsible in most of these incidents.

Fasteryoufool

Well... he wasn't dead.

However, it should've been assault with a deadly weapon and attempted murder as well.

dougmc

The fact that you've brought up the scalding coffee case here (and gotten the dollar figure wrong) strongly suggests you don't really understand the scalding coffee case.

Read up on it here and here. The main points I'm making is in this situation that it was not a frivolous lawsuit at all and in the end they finally paid out less than $600,000.

You are correct though that the civil courts are an appropriate place to look for justice in a case such as this.

dougmc

If a tandem bike crashes on the Canada/US border, where do they bury the survivors?

Hint: the cyclist is not dead.

Fasteryoufool

Not to sidetrack the issue, but it WAS a frivolous lawsuit. She PUT THE COFFEE CUP BETWEEN HER LEGS. Coffee is hot. If you have issues with remembering that (not you personally) then perhaps you shouldn't drink coffee.

McDonald's coffee is bad enough as it is, or was. Dear god, making them serve it cold because you're too stupid to not put hot beverages in fragile containers between your legs? Unbelievable.

People need start taking responsibility for their own actions.

009jim

In our society, the car is seen as an essential element of business and authorities are reluctant to do anything which might be a hindrance to business. This attitude needs to change as it's a significant driver of environmental destruction. Our economic system needs to change from one which rewards people who contribute to economic growth, to one which rewards people who prevent environmental destruction. The two are mutually exclusive, i.e. economic growth must of necessity cause environmental destruction.

Cyclists should be provided with discounted taxes in recognition of their reduced environmental impact. But no, what our society does is reduce taxes for people who run businesses that destroy the environment.

dobber

Article reads like two idiots in a dick waving contest.

How is one sucked under a car that was stopped?

Dchiefransom

You REALLY do need to read up on the legal aspects of that case. Coffee from anywhere else would have given her a minor burn. McDonald's intentionally had their coffee temperature higher and had not responded to complaints. I could buy a cup at McDonald's, take the time to put cream and sugar in it, go over and eat my breakfast, then take a sip of the coffee 10-15 minutes after I bought it and STILL burn my lips and tongue. If the suit had come down to where she placed the cup, she would have lost.

Fasteryoufool

I'm aware that it was the temperature that made a difference - it was still friggin' moronic of her to put it between her legs. That in my eyes makes it her friggin' fault. I know better than to put a fragile paper or styrofoam cup of coffee between my legs in a car, no matter where it's from or at what temperature it has been served. Basically, I'm too intelligent to want even a 1st degree burn in that area.

DX-MAN

As she should have -- yes, 2nd-degree burns are worse than 1st-degree, but being burned is being burned; if you step too close to lava flowing in Hawaii, burn through your shoes and lose a toe, is it Hawaii's fault? Personal responsibility would have kept her from placing herself in a position to get burned from something that's KNOWN to be hot (TOO hot is a moot issue).

KD5NRH

Best analogy I've heard is that it's like shooting yourself in the groin with a .44 Magnum, then suing the manufacturer because it did so much more damage than a .25ACP would have.

SlimAgainSoon

Whoa ... the comments on that story were some of the worst ever.

Let me scratch Albuquerque off my list.