The Inquistion has begun!
Originally Posted by Carusoswi
Nos88 – reading your original post and then your follow up:
So, you “swung” around her. Do you mean you approached her – sort of like a car on a two lane highway, then, swung around to pass her on the left?
So, you were moving along at sufficient speed to do this?
So, in other words, you were moving along with some degree of velocity, right?
No, I had slowed to about 5 to 7 MPH.
Originally Posted by Caruoswi
I’m curious what path you were on – are there lanes marked on the path specifically defining the direction of traffic for all users as on a road? If not, then, I would assert that a pedestrian has no responsibility to “be on the right.” She can, if she chooses, legally walk in any direction on any part of the path.
I was on the Schuylkill River Trail near the Betzwood Bridge section. If you have ever been on that portion of trail you know that it is clearly marked, "Keep to the right" and as the paths begin from normal starting places, there are lines marking lanes to make it abundantly clear that there are two lanes on the trail.
Originally Posted by Caruoswi
The only problem is that she evidently didn’t hear you, or, if she did, was so absorbed in what was coming through her ear buds that she did not process your warning. That others heard and processed your warning is irrelevant. Not that this was the case, but you might have been overtaking someone who was hard of hearing – one never knows.
As it turns out, I myself am hearing impaired. Even with my hearing aids, I only hear about 25% of what most people hear. I went to high school with the first young woman in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to receive a full driver's license. She spoke to my driver's education class in my junior year. Because of my hearing impairment, I was most interested in what she had to say. She said that because she could not hear, she was held to a higher standard in terms of using her other senses. Specifically, when she was tested, they tallied the number of times she visually scanned left to right, looked in her rear view mirror, etc. She had to be much more skilled in using her eyes to compensate for her lack of hearing. Hence, it seems to me, that if you want to impair your hearing, you should be held to the same standard (at least common sense of the survival type would suggest). Hence, it was NOT a good idea to swing across an entire path to make a turn around without looking first.
Originally Posted by Caruoswi
Ok, conceded. She didn’t hear you. Are you suggesting this as a justification for striking her?
Once again the Inquistion arrives.... Justification, hell no. I rather view it as a matter of logical consequences. You don't pay attention in traffic and it greatly increases your chances of getting hit.
Originally Posted by Caruoswi
She probably should have looked. From what you have written about her reaction after the accident, it sounds as if she has accepted at least partial responsibility.
So, which is it, really? You were only crawling or you were moving fast enough to “hit her pretty good on the arm and shoulder”? . . . and “she's going to have some nasty bruises tomorrow” Sounds to me as though you still had some significant forward momentum.
I weight 240 lbs and was riding a 17 lbs bike. She was maybe 110 lbs soaking wet. I was moving at between 5mph and 7 mph. I would guess she was moving at between 4 and 5 mph. At that combined speed, 257 lbs clipping you leaves bruises.
Originally Posted by Caruoswi
It also sounds as though you expect peds on a path to observe vehicular rules of the road – stay to the right, check to the rear before moving left, etc – all good practices for pedestrians, but not required of them.
I expect "peds" to exercise reasonable caution. Choosing to be hearing impaired (via ear buds) and then sweeping across the full lane was not reasonable caution. I feel that I did exercise reasonable caution, otherwise she would (and perhaps I as well) have been seriously injured. It seems, following your logic, that "what is required" of peds is that with which I should be concerned. Rather, I'm concerned with establishing reasonable behaviors for those that use public places. Yes, in my mind, my behavior was reasonable; hers was not.
Originally Posted by Caruoswi
Having recently experienced my own “boo-boo”, I’ll be the last one to cast judgmental “stones”. But your experience provides good discussion fodder for a situation that all of us face on MUP’s from time to time.
Caruso, I must confess that the tone of your remarks feels judgmental.