corrado33

Really?

Accident:
Literally the definition of "accident." People aren't perfect. We make mistakes. Accidents happen. They're UNINTENTIONAL.

adablduya

so, i can be parallel parked, decide to whip into the lane of traffic without first looking, and while NOT INTENDING to hit another car, i plow into someone anyway. since i didn't intend to do it, then you would call that an accident ? oh well, sh_t happens, i made a mistake, no problem. no accountability for me.

now, let's enter the real world. it is reasonable to foresee that if i whip into traffic without looking first, i may well hit another car already in the lane. Since that outcome is reasonably foreseeable, then i can modify my behavior (look first to see if the lane is clear), and thus, prevent the result of hitting another car.

or, if i stick my hand into a pile of wood where rattlesnakes are quite likely to be present, it's no accident if i get bitten. foreseeable ? yes. preventable ? yes.

the key here is the concept of "reasonably foreseeable". with any measure at all of analytical, proactive awareness, one can predict a possible undesirable outcome, and behave accordingly in order to prevent it.

in my opinion, the term"accident", even as applied in a dictionary reference, is a (convenient) generalization to describe the undesirable outcome of an incident, whether preventable or not.

Milton Keynes

Simple definition: Accident = something which happens unintentionally. Not an accident = done intentionally.

While someone not looking before pulling out and hitting another vehicle might sound intentional to some people, the intent was to pull out and move into traffic, not plow into another vehicle.

That's not to say that people who cause accidents aren't liable.

Wilfred Laurier

You, sir, have drank too much of the corporate Kool-Aid.

Error traps!
Human performance!!
Event free tools!!!

They will try to tell you that nothing happens 'by accident' then give all sorts of training courses to try to remove human error from the equation, but it is never 100%. Accidents are accidents, and they still happen, al the time, in all facilities. Saying it was an accident doesn't mean that nobody is at fault, it just means it wasn't intentional. Sometimes people are intentionally hit by cars, and sometimes police intentionally assault and kill people. But since it wasn't intentional (at least there is no indication that it was) then it was an accident - an accident that was 100% the fault of the cop, but an accident.

As I tell my kids, "not trying to" and "trying not to" are two different things.

JoeyBike

Exactly. Cop, taxi, bus, my cousin, whatever.

Occupied parked cars with the tail lights activating (indicating a driver present) and the front wheels turned my way....very sketchy situation. But getting clobbered "hit-man" style is virtually unavoidable.

I might have done something different on the bike, and my flashing front light might have grabbed the cops attention, but that's a tough one to avoid I gotta say.

OnyxTiger

I'd be going for a healthy compensation here. City insurance has to pay.

qajaq

It really doesn't matter what you call it or if a particular party is at fault. If you get hurt, you're hurt. The point is to avoid getting hurt. In certain circumstances you have to be very careful. Police, taxi, Domino's Pizza guy, car parked at the curb with the brake lights on, or a deer standing on the edge of the bike path.....you gotta recognize the red flags and act accordingly. This guy was in a tough spot, every indication made it appear the cop was turning right. But let's take away something from this incident. That cop you see may act in an unpredictable manner so don't get too close.

himespau 

Glad it was caught on tape (and the person causing it is so obvious). Best of luck in getting better.

corrado33

Do I need to define the word "unintentional" for you as well?

Did the cop INTEND to hit the biker? No. Therefore it was unintentional. It literally fits the definition of accident to a T. An unfortunate unintentional incident which caused damage or harm.

Let's make a list of other things that are accidents which are completely avoidable.

Car crashes (Don't drive.)
Slips and falls. (Never stand up.)
Crashing on your bike. (Don't bike.)
Having an allergic reaction to a new medicine. (Don't get sick enough to need medicine.)
Death due to extreme sports (skydiving, base jumping) (Don't do those things.)
A child swallowing something they weren't supposed to. (Don't have children.)

I mean, if you NEVER left your house or bed you could avoid ALL of those nasty things we like to call "accidents," they're all perfectly avoidable. Fortunately, most people live their lives with an acceptable amount of risk. Life would be extremely boring otherwise.

The driver made a MISTAKE and caused an ACCIDENT. It was a stupid mistake, yes, but a mistake nonetheless. The cop is accountable for his mistake, obviously. There's nothing else to this story. No conspiracy theory, no crazy tin foil hats. People are unpredictable. Mistakes are made, accidents happen. End of story.

adablduya

the long and short of it is, calling the incident an "accident', generally speaking, tends to diminish the responsibility and accountability of the person(s) involved and/or at fault. that type of superficial acceptance is indicative of the person who is not able to independently or critically evaluate the situation. the inability to be aware and proactive suggests that the incident is more likely to occur.

adablduya

you appear to be unaware of the concept of "reasonably foreseeable".

Car crashes (Don't drive.) no, drive with awareness, make sure your vehicle is in proper operating condition, slow down in bad conditions. you can't control someone plowing into you, but you can be as proactive and aware of most mitigating actions for occurrences that are REASONABLY FORESEEABLE.
Slips and falls. (Never stand up.) no, be careful in situations that dictate (icy, wet, etc.) running on an icy sidewalk, slipping and busting your ass, is not an accident. REASONABLY FORESEEABLE.
Crashing on your bike. (Don't bike.) no, be sure you're situationally aware, keep your bike in good running condition, don't ride in the door zone. resulting incidents are REASONABLY FORESEEABLE.
Having an allergic reaction to a new medicine. (Don't get sick enough to need medicine.) this is not a reasonable statement.
Death due to extreme sports (skydiving, base jumping) (Don't do those things.) no, make sure your equipment is in proper operating condition. a bird crashing into you on the way down is not REASONABLY FORESEEABLE, and yes, woud be an accident
A child swallowing something they weren't supposed to. (Don't have children.) no, just don't leave small objects laying around.

it's NOT reasonable to suggest that absolutely EVERYTHING is avoidable and that some things in life are without risk. however, MOST "accidents" are avoidable, and again. my point is that the use of the word "accident" is far too casually used in situations where they were very avoidable, and not really accidents at all, but the result of carelessness, complacency, or inattentiveness.

Dunbar

This would be a hard situation to avoid because of how quickly the cop car darts sideways (illegally) to go around a stopped car to run a stale yellow light. The video starts with the silver BMW edging into the bike lane so you would probably want to be in the middle of the bike lane. The rider's Youtube comments say he was doing 25mph at the time of impact so I'd probably move out into the traffic lane in that situation. It gives you more time to react if a car does something stupid. Not just cars in the turn lane but also cross traffic making a right turn through the bike lane. I do occasionally accelerate for yellow lights but a sudden burst of acceleration like that probably doubles your stopping distance so it's best to do it only when the coast is clear. Plus, riders tend to get tunnel vision when they're trying to make a stoplight like that. Best case it looked like the cyclist was going to run a light that had just turned red so I can't see he was entirely without fault. Overall, I'm going to say this would be a hard one to see coming.

rebel1916

It wasn't illegal. An emergency vehicle is exempt from a lot of traffic laws. This is one of the reasons that emergency vehicles should be given a wide birth, because the exigencies of the job may result in them doing unpredictable things. Again, please note that I am in no way saying the officer was not at fault.

auldgeunquers

And how is it that simply sitting behind the wheel of a modern police car does not qualify as distracted driving? Eh?

This regarding have now I long wondered about.

Dunbar

I doubt they can break traffic laws at will unless they are responding to an emergency (with emergency lights on.) It would be pretty easy to establish if that were the case. I'm not saying a fellow officer would ticket them for this stunt but I seriously doubt it's allowed under the law.

rebel1916

I don't disagree that the letter of the law may say lights must be activated. And this is a good reason why anyone driving an emergency vehicle should activate their lights before making a move. But the people who are saying that the cop was doing something illegal, and who seem to be saying that they shouldn't have to be more careful around emergency vehicles are missing the point. Emergency vehicles do erratic stuff sometimes. It's the nature of the beast. Give em a wide berth.

Milton Keynes

Good advice. You shouldn't have to, but you definitely should do it.

wphamilton

If you intentionally do something wrong (negligent, reckless, illegal) while disregarding the possible repercussions, is that still an accident even though the specific outcome was unintentional? I don't think so. An accident is unintentional and determined by chance.

We all know better than to pull that stunt at a traffic light. We know why. No doubt, so did that cop yet he deliberately, intentionally pulled out into the through lane. His wrong action was intentional, the resulting event is one reason why it's wrong. Misbehavior, not an accident.

CliffordK

Find me where emergency vehicles are exempted from using turn signals.

mrchaotica

So, we can expect the SFPD officer in question to be charged and convicted of exactly the same moving violations a normal driver who hit another car under the same circumstances would get... right?

Insurance payouts are not enough. Criminal charges must be filed!

I won't hold my breath, though.

rebel1916

Szcerbiak vs Pilat NYS Court of Appeals found that a police officer who hit and killed a kid on a bike, en route to a fight call, was not liable civilly. This in spite of the fact that he had traveled over 800 feet with out activating his emergency lights, and was in fact looking down to activate them at the moment he hit the kid. What a lot of people misunderstand, is that if a cop does something, while having an objective belief at the time that he is acting reasonably, he has a pretty good chance of being OK criminally and civilly. I bet this guys dept will take some vacation days from him, and at $300 or more a day, that's a bigger fine than any of you would get were you involved in a similar situation.

rebel1916

Just looked up California. If he was heading to an emergency his immunity looks even stronger than NY. https://www.justia.com/trials-litiga...i/700/730.html I know you guys want to make the law up as you go along, and get your pound of flesh, but so sorry.

Paul Barnard

Where should the bicyclist have been to have given the cop car a wide berth?

Paul Barnard

You mean if he was headed to an emergency, sounded his siren, activated his emergency lights and proceeded with due care. It appears given the whole of the circumstances that the officer was not operating within the limited privileges afforded him by law.

rebel1916

He is going to say that because the bike was in his blind spot he didn't feel it was going to be reasonably necessary to activate his lights an siren as he pulled out. The cyclist is going to get a settlement from the city, the cop is not going to be charged or civilly liable.