View Single Post
Old 10-18-12, 07:48 PM
  #21  
ratdog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 875
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by cycronin View Post
Assuming they drive on the same side of the street in NYC as the rest of the country, you are mistaken. This was a six lane road so I had to clear three lanes of traffic coming from the left before I had to legitimately be aware of traffic from the right. But just to reiterate for those who are blocking it out because they never want to side with motorists in the event of an accident, I had a green light. Which means traffic coming from either direction had a red. A pedestrian or runner would have a no walk signal. A runner who runs through an intersection like that is also probably getting hit. The guy on the bike had both a no walk signal and a red light. And he still barreled through it, so yeah he was at fault. I hope that clears things up enough.

Your sarcasm aside, if you read my posts carefully, you will see that I never questioned whether the biker was at fault since it was obvious he was.

What I question was that now there are laws that while biking on the sidewalk, one must bicycle in the direction of vehicular traffic according to what some other post. I find this a bit hard to believe and would like some proof of these new laws otherwise I think it's BS being thrown about.
ratdog is offline