Bike Forums

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Advocacy & Safety (https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-safety/)
-   -   Another hit and run (https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-safety/1179437-another-hit-run.html)

GailT 07-26-19 05:20 PM
Another hit and run
 
Another hit and run near Boulder, CO. Quote from an article in the Daily Camera. I hope he recovers and that they find the driver.

The Colorado State Patrol is investigating a hit-and-run crash that left a Boulder cyclist with life-threatening injuries on Saturday.
Andrew “Bernie” Bernstein was biking west on Arapahoe Road near Legion Park on Saturday at around 4:30 p.m. Saturday, Bernstein’s family told the Daily Camera. Gloria Liu, Bernstein’s fiancee, said Bernstein was riding by himself from Erie back to Boulder when it appears he was struck by a vehicle on a flat stretch of road after cresting a climb in the area. “There were no witnesses, but it appears he got to the top of the hill and was hit from behind by a car,” Liu said. A passing motorist saw Bernstein on the side of the road and called 911. Bernstein was transported to Boulder Community Health’s Foothills Hospital, but later airlifted to Denver Health due to the severity of his injuries. Bernstein’s brother, Eric, said his brother suffered severe internal injuries and broken bones, and has been sedated ever since the crash.

As Bernstein recovers, investigators are trying to piece together more information on the crash. Colorado State Patrol Trooper Gary Cutler said a piece of the suspect vehicle left behind at the scene traced back to a 2000 Dodge Ram van. “The severity of the crash makes it hard to believe the individual driving is not aware they hit someone,” he said. “It’s very upsetting to realize this person noticed and knew what they had done and left my brother to die on the side of the road in the rain.” Anyone who saw anything related to the crash is asked to call Colorado State Patrol at 303-289-4760.

bakerjw 07-29-19 04:52 AM
IMHO. Distracted, stoned or drunk. Leaving the scene was the easy way out.

Best hopes for a full recovery for the cyclist.

brooksmurphyt 08-12-19 02:52 PM
We have to stop these horrible accidents! This way past out of hand.

Brocephus 08-14-19 01:06 PM
Originally Posted by brooksmurphyt (Post 21072152)
We have to stop these horrible accidents! This way past out of hand.
Short of banning cars and trucks, it ain't gonna happen. We can "educate", and sign petitions, and hold candlelight vigils till the cows come home, but society is going bat**** crazy, and it's only getting worse.

Riveting 08-14-19 01:22 PM
Much, much stiffer penalties for hit and runs, along with more rear facing HD cameras on bikes, will reduce these incidents. Eventually.

MattTheHat 08-15-19 04:32 AM
Originally Posted by Riveting (Post 21075497)
Much, much stiffer penalties for hit and runs, along with more rear facing HD cameras on bikes, will reduce these incidents. Eventually.
I see cameras mentioned all the time. Can someone explain to me how running a camera is going to keep a distracted/drunk/stoned driver from hitting a cyclist? Even a driver who just up and decides to run over a cyclist one day out of pure meanness...do we expect they’re going to check for a camera first?

If the argument is that the camera content is going to be used after the fact to prosecute the driver...do we really think that’s going to help? Security cameras don’t keep convenience stores from getting robbed.

Run a camera if if you like, but to think it offers any protection seems like a false hope to me.

-Matt

Riveting 08-15-19 05:45 AM
Originally Posted by MattTheHat (Post 21076345)
I see cameras mentioned all the time. Can someone explain to me how running a camera is going to keep a distracted/drunk/stoned driver from hitting a cyclist? Even a driver who just up and decides to run over a cyclist one day out of pure meanness...do we expect they’re going to check for a camera first?

If the argument is that the camera content is going to be used after the fact to prosecute the driver...do we really think that’s going to help? Security cameras don’t keep convenience stores from getting robbed.

Run a camera if if you like, but to think it offers any protection seems like a false hope to me.
The existence of a camera on your bike (or in a convenience store) doesn't offer direct protection, just as the existence of a police force in your town doesn't offer direct protection. Both are used AFTER an incident has occurred to bring the perpetrator to justice, and in doing so, and making those cases public (via newspaper or TV news) will cause future perpetrators to "think twice" and hopefully not perform the incident in the first place. It's called a "crime deterrent", Google it.

MattTheHat 08-15-19 08:12 AM
Originally Posted by Riveting (Post 21076386)
The existence of a camera on your bike (or in a convenience store) doesn't offer direct protection, just as the existence of a police force in your town doesn't offer direct protection. Both are used AFTER an incident has occurred to bring the perpetrator to justice, and in doing so, and making those cases public (via newspaper or TV news) will cause future perpetrators to "think twice" and hopefully not perform the incident in the first place. It's called a "crime deterrent", Google it.
Oh, I understand the idea, I just don't personally see any evidence that it's working. Convenience stores are still getting robbed. Cyclist are going to continue to get run over.

In many, many case, the driver stops. There's no need for a camera to identify them. And the drivers are often not charged because they claimed their vision was obstructed or some other equally lame excuse.

Now, as a prosecutorial aid, sure a camera could *possibly* be of some use. At least to identify the owner of the vehicle. But I wouldn't go as far as calling that protection.

I-Like-To-Bike 08-15-19 08:24 AM
Originally Posted by MattTheHat (Post 21076566)
Oh, I understand the idea, I just don't personally see any evidence that it's working.
This is BF A&S; wishful thinking trumps absence of credible evidence when it comes to validating cherished beliefs.

MattTheHat 08-15-19 08:29 AM
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike (Post 21076586)
This is BF A&S; wishful thinking trumps absence of credible evidence when it comes to validating cherished beliefs.
I honestly hope I'm wrong. Time will tell.

Paul Barnard 08-15-19 09:50 AM
Originally Posted by MattTheHat (Post 21076566)
Oh, I understand the idea, I just don't personally see any evidence that it's working. Convenience stores are still getting robbed. Cyclist are going to continue to get run over.

In many, many case, the driver stops. There's no need for a camera to identify them. And the drivers are often not charged because they claimed their vision was obstructed or some other equally lame excuse.

Now, as a prosecutorial aid, sure a camera could *possibly* be of some use. At least to identify the owner of the vehicle. But I wouldn't go as far as calling that protection.
I don't think that's the correct measure to determine if video cameras are having a deterrence effect. Has the incidence of robberies decreased since the use of cameras has become widespread? I don't know the answer to that.

I completely get your point about the presence of a camera having no effect on a distracted driver. The presence of cameras on bicycles will never move the distracted driver needle. But will it ever deter someone from driving off after they hit a cyclist? I suspect so. I am a technotard, aren't some cameras able to record to a remote site/cloud? If so motorists may not be as willing to take any cameras the cyclists may have had.

MattTheHat 08-15-19 09:54 AM
Originally Posted by Paul Barnard (Post 21076742)
I don't think that's the correct measure to determine if video cameras are having a deterrence effect. Has the incidence of robberies decreased since the use of cameras has become widespread? I don't know the answer to that.
I agree, 100 percent. Perhaps I should have simply asked for proof that cameras reduce bicycle collisions.

Paul Barnard 08-15-19 09:56 AM
Originally Posted by MattTheHat (Post 21076751)
I agree, 100 percent. Perhaps I should have simply asked for proof that cameras reduce bicycle collisions.
What? This is the internet. I am pretty sure that is illegal.

MattTheHat 08-15-19 10:08 AM
Originally Posted by Paul Barnard (Post 21076742)
But will it ever deter someone from driving off after they hit a cyclist? I suspect so. I am a technotard, aren't some cameras able to record to a remote site/cloud? If so motorists may not be as willing to take any cameras the cyclists may have had.
I suspect that in some cases, yes, *if* the motorist recognizes there is a camera, they may stop and render aid. In many cases though, rendering aid will be too little, too late and the cyclist will die. In such a case, was the cyclist protected?

I can think of other scenarios where the driver (especially those of the criminal persuasion) would purposely not stop *if* they knew there was a camera.

Again, I could be wrong. But I see many posts where cameras are mentioned as making a cyclist safe. I'd just like to see some evidence that supports it.

Daniel4 08-18-19 02:23 PM
Originally Posted by MattTheHat (Post 21076785)
I suspect that in some cases, yes, *if* the motorist recognizes there is a camera, they may stop and render aid. In many cases though, rendering aid will be too little, too late and the cyclist will die. In such a case, was the cyclist protected?

I can think of other scenarios where the driver (especially those of the criminal persuasion) would purposely not stop *if* they knew there was a camera.

Again, I could be wrong. But I see many posts where cameras are mentioned as making a cyclist safe. I'd just like to see some evidence that supports it.
There are also a lot of cars with dash cams these days but we don't find driving to have improved lately. I also doubt that if a driver installs a dash cam in his own car, he'd suddenly be a better driver. And if he does get into a collision, his first reaction would be to erase what's on the dash cam.

However, we can only hope that other dash cams and bike cams can provide evidence for some sort of conviction.

JW Fas 08-19-19 09:28 AM
We don't penalize bad behavior in a car anywhere harshly enough. Stuff like distracted driving now accounts for 25% of all crashes yet is met with low fines and a few points. You're more likely to crash while texting now than you are while drunk, yet DUI/DWI has fines an order of magnitude higher. Adding insult to injury, only two states (IL & NH) require follow-up road testing to retain your license, but it's only after a certain age (usually 75). By then you already have one foot out the door anyway. We hand driving licenses to teenagers and basically tell them, "By the way, you'll never have to prove you can safely operate a motor vehicle again. Just stop by once every four years to renew this card."


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:10 PM.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.