Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

Pedestrian Injured on Local MUP - Cyclist Blamed

Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

Pedestrian Injured on Local MUP - Cyclist Blamed

Old 05-29-24, 07:53 PM
  #51  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,131

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Liked 2,955 Times in 1,637 Posts
Not being there to see exactly what happened, I won't comment on blame.

However, the description reminds me of one of my pet peeves. I'll be riding on a 2 lane with a car behind and one approaching from in front. What makes me crazy is when the passing driver times it so we all three are abreast on a narrow roadway. If the driver passes a second sooner or later, there would be plenty of room for anybody.

As described, it's a similar scenario. Coming up behind a pedestrian and looking to pass when someone is coming in the opposite direction set up the easily avoidable accident. So, I blame all 3, and leave apportionment to the lawyers.

Mixing pedestrians and bikes is comparable to mixing cars and bikes, and negates the reason MUPs were created in thr first place. IMO, busy MUPs are unsuited for adult sport or transit bicycling.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site

An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.

Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.

“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN

WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FBinNY is offline  
Likes For FBinNY:
Old 05-30-24, 06:17 AM
  #52  
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 30,036

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Liked 1,598 Times in 1,079 Posts
Originally Posted by FBinNY
Mixing pedestrians and bikes is comparable to mixing cars and bikes, and negates the reason MUPs were created in thr first place. IMO, busy MUPs are unsuited for adult sport or transit bicycling.
What do you think is the reason Multiple Use Paths were created?
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 06:54 AM
  #53  
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,728

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Liked 3,710 Times in 1,954 Posts
Originally Posted by FBinNY
Mixing pedestrians and bikes is comparable to mixing cars and bikes, and negates the reason MUPs were created in thr first place. IMO, busy MUPs are unsuited for adult sport or transit bicycling.
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
What do you think is the reason Multiple Use Paths were created?
(a post from a known trouble-maker ... )

MUPs were a bad idea to begin with.

A lot seem to have been designed to be both pedestrian recreation areas and also cyclist transit paths ... and the two are completely incompatible. I see this a lot less, but I used to see it all the time----people who don't ride bikes deciding what they imagine would be good for cyclists ....... never seen it done well.

Most multi-use paths are somewhere in the proposal or roll-out descried as an alternate route for cyclists to cross town, keeping bikes out of auto traffic. To justify the cost (for so few cyclists) the paths have to be cross-marketed as pedestrian playgrounds ... but obviously no one transiting (commuting, riding with a purpose) would ride through a playground ..... No one ever said "Pedestrians need a good trail system" because pedestrians have sidewalks for transit, and parking lots for playgrounds ... and playgrounds. However, to get all the board members on board, the planner needs to show that "Everyone is included and everyone benefits," but the sad fact is, an MUP infested with walkers, dog-walkers, skaters, (board, inline, or normal roller skates) most of whom are not treating the MUP as a transport route but as a playground/ recreation area, makes safe cycling impossible at anything over pedestrian pace.

Most MUPs are cycle paths sold as multi-use paths (there is a good stretch of MUP I sometimes used to ride that paralleled sidewalks for much of its length --- pretty obviously the path wasn't for people walking places, who used the sidewalk) ... I can think of a few exceptions such as paths connecting a series of shopping malls, which seems primarily to cater to shoppers walking so they don't have to drive short distances in horrendous traffic to get to a neighboring mall .....

As far as "the intended use" I guess you would have to go back to the actual planners and ask them about the origin and conception of each specific MUP ....

The point FBinNY made seems pretty cklear, and we all know it ... for a path to be a safe and useful Cycling path, pedestrians have to be segregated. One cannot usefully transit--travel purposefully form place to place--on a bicycle if there are pedestrians on the path, and in most cases, MUPs seem to have been imagined first and foremost as ways to et cyclists out of auto mobile traffic.

It is all opinions until someone introduces some facts ... anyone got any?
Maelochs is offline  
Likes For Maelochs:
Old 05-30-24, 07:33 AM
  #54  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 6,189

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Liked 7,750 Times in 3,104 Posts
Originally Posted by FBinNY
Not being there to see exactly what happened, I won't comment on blame.

So, I blame all 3...
Funny.
tomato coupe is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 07:38 AM
  #55  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,131

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Liked 2,955 Times in 1,637 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
What do you think is the reason Multiple Use Paths were created?
So politicians can spread spending to buy as many potential votes as possible.

Consider, in most states bicycling on sidewalks is illegal. So how much sense does it make to pave a new path and mandate cyclists and pedestrians share it?

But rather than argue, I'll just point out that I qualified my statement as follows: IMO, busy MUPs are unsuited for adult sport or transit bicycling.

Last edited by FBinNY; 05-30-24 at 07:55 AM.
FBinNY is offline  
Likes For FBinNY:
Old 05-30-24, 08:08 AM
  #56  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Elevation 666m Edmonton Canada
Posts: 2,523

Bikes: 2013 Custom SA5w / Rohloff Tourster

Liked 342 Times in 257 Posts
This makes NO sense. If the path is that NARROW, then one or both the bikes should be slowing and adjusting speed to give way. What clods.
We have a busy commuter bridge sidewalk like this, all users get along well.
Why did the ped end up in the middle??
I adjust what I'm doing on highway shoulders all the time as well.

Last edited by GamblerGORD53; 05-30-24 at 08:14 AM.
GamblerGORD53 is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 08:09 AM
  #57  
Cantilever believer
 
RCMoeur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2021
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,663
Liked 1,971 Times in 886 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
What do you think is the reason Multiple Use Paths were created?
Since it's been brought up, the term for these facilities used in technical and other references is "shared use path". Multiple simultaneous non-motor-vehicle user types in a mixed environment.
__________________
Richard C. Moeur, PE - Phoenix AZ, USA
https://www.richardcmoeur.com/bikestuf.html
RCMoeur is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 08:40 AM
  #58  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,131

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Liked 2,955 Times in 1,637 Posts
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
Funny.
I guess it is. This happens from time to time with stream of consciousness writing. I suppose I could have gone back rephrased the opening.

While I'm here, has anyone considered the possible outcome if the pedestrian did not move over?
FBinNY is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 08:43 AM
  #59  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South shore, L.I., NY
Posts: 7,079

Bikes: Flyxii FR322, Cannondale Topstone, Miyata City Liner, Specialized Chisel, Specialized Epic Evo

Liked 2,206 Times in 1,251 Posts
Originally Posted by GamblerGORD53
This makes NO sense. If the path is that NARROW, then one or both the bikes should be slowing and adjusting speed to give way. What clods.
We have a busy commuter bridge sidewalk like this, all users get along well.
Why did the ped end up in the middle??
I adjust what I'm doing on highway shoulders all the time as well.
After Hurricane Sandy, when the 6 mile long wood boardwalk in the Rockaways got relocated in many pieces a half mile north, NYC, against many objections of some locals, rebuilt as a 30 ft wide concrete boardwalk/MUP (the locals wanted wood). It’s a very nice design that won’t move when the tide comes in again. About 12 ft or so of the north side is clearly marked with 2 way bike lane markings. The remaining 18 ft. Is clearly marked pedestrian. Yet the bike lane is just constantly filled with joggers and dog walkers. There’s plenty of room to go around, so no big deal, but pedestrians are brain dead.
Steve B. is online now  
Old 05-30-24, 10:56 AM
  #60  
Randomhead
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,525
Liked 3,819 Times in 2,602 Posts
It seems to me that pedestrians are responsible for their own safety on a mup. If a pedestrian was walking on the road and moved sideways because of a vehicle and got hit by another vehicle, it would barely make the news. I know people expect to be able to wander aimlessly when they are walking, but that doesn't make sense on a mup. I have ridden on paths near D.C. during bike commute time, and walkers were unwise to be taking a stroll at that time. But a few brave souls were there walking. Darwin probably takes care of the ones that don't walk in a straight line.
unterhausen is offline  
Likes For unterhausen:
Old 05-30-24, 11:26 AM
  #61  
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 30,036

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Liked 1,598 Times in 1,079 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs
The point FBinNY made seems pretty cklear, and we all know it ... for a path to be a safe and useful Cycling path, pedestrians have to be segregated. One cannot usefully transit--travel purposefully form place to place--on a bicycle if there are pedestrians on the path, and in most cases, MUPs seem to have been imagined first and foremost as ways to et cyclists out of auto mobile traffic.

It is all opinions until someone introduces some facts ... anyone got any?
You certainly are free to imagine that your fact-free opinions about bicycling safety and travel are set in stone points that "we all know." In fact Your "clear point" is first and foremost that only troublemakers don't share your fact-free opinions about what MUP conditions make bicycling "safe," what makes bicycling travel "useful," and what is required to "travel purposefully."
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 11:50 AM
  #62  
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 30,036

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Liked 1,598 Times in 1,079 Posts
Originally Posted by FBinNY
Mixing pedestrians and bikes is comparable to mixing cars and bikes, and negates the reason MUPs were created in thr first place. IMO, busy MUPs are unsuited for adult sport or transit bicycling.
Originally Posted by Maelochs
The point FBinNY made seems pretty cklear, and we all know it ... for a path to be a safe and useful Cycling path, pedestrians have to be segregated.
Logically anyone who shares these opinions of the requirements necessary for "safe and useful" bicycle travel should be advocating for bicycling only on segregated facilities in order to be "safe" from mixing with motorists or pedestrians.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 11:59 AM
  #63  
Senior Member
 
Trakhak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 5,711
Liked 3,252 Times in 1,856 Posts
Originally Posted by unterhausen
It seems to me that pedestrians are responsible for their own safety on a mup. If a pedestrian was walking on the road and moved sideways because of a vehicle and got hit by another vehicle, it would barely make the news. I know people expect to be able to wander aimlessly when they are walking, but that doesn't make sense on a mup. I have ridden on paths near D.C. during bike commute time, and walkers were unwise to be taking a stroll at that time. But a few brave souls were there walking. Darwin probably takes care of the ones that don't walk in a straight line.
Disagree. Pedestrians get along fine in the absence of bikes. It's only when bikes show up that questions of responsibility arise. It's the idiot cyclists who don't have the brains to adapt to the conditions -- and to the iron rule that conditions.on.MUPs.will.never.change.and.neither.will.whining.about.it.on.Bike.Forums -- who are always the problem. Always.

Approaching pedestrians on MUPs, just slow way the hell down. Or even get off the bike and walk with it until clear. Everyone is absolved of responsibility. And equally happy. Or at least roughly equally and mildly inconvenienced -- the ultimate goal in any civilization.

I write all that as one who abhors walking. My local supermarket is three blocks away. My local Chinese restaurant is one block away. I invariably ride a bike to both.
Trakhak is online now  
Old 05-30-24, 12:32 PM
  #64  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,220
Liked 771 Times in 457 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs
Wow, what a stupid post.

If I am cycling at about walking speed, as I would if I were riding among crowds of pedestrians, and an oncoming cyclist called "On your left!" which usually makes pedestrians jump to their left ....... and that person jumps right across the path of the cyclist approaching from behind and hits me and knocks me down and I break my collarbone ... I should "suck it up" because ... what?

I am sorry, but that is just not a reasonable idea at all.

The scenario described was this:

Equally if I am passing a pedestrian at a walking pace and that person, startled, jumps left when I say "On your left" (happened to me enough that I expect it) and hits me and knocks me down and I break a collarbone ... suck it up?

You ASSUME every cyclist on the MUP is speeding ... which makes me wonder how you and your friends ride ..... and you ASSUME that the cyclist, and MUP riders in general, refuse to brake ... because ... well, no ad hominems, but only a bonehead would assume that, unless it was true about that bonehead and his friends.

Plenty of cyclists ride the MUPs responsibly, and slow and use great care when passing peds ... and still can get taken out by peds who can do crazy things for no reason.

yeah, there are guys trying to max speed and shouting "Strava!" and expecting the way to clear ... but there are also peds who freak out, release their dogs, jump, spin ... endanger cyclists in a lot of way .

Since no one knows what happens ... it is kind of dumb to Assume that you are superior to everyone and everyone else is an idiot who needs to "suck it up," or to assume everyone who had a collision with a ped on an MUP is at fault.

Sorry, just dumb.
You'll be ok.

Try not to jump out in front of me.
CrimsonEclipse is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 12:34 PM
  #65  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,220
Liked 771 Times in 457 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs

MUPs were a bad idea to begin with.
Speaking of stupid posts:

MUP's are a compromise.
Making the best solution with the resources at hand.

I suggest that you stay on the road.
CrimsonEclipse is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 12:40 PM
  #66  
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 30,036

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Liked 1,598 Times in 1,079 Posts
Originally Posted by Trakhak
Disagree. Pedestrians get along fine in the absence of bikes. It's only when bikes show up that questions of responsibility arise. It's the idiot cyclists who don't have the brains to adapt to the conditions -- and to the iron rule that conditions.on.MUPs.will.never.change.and.neither.will.whining.about.it.on.Bike.Forums -- who are always the problem. Always.

Approaching pedestrians on MUPs, just slow way the hell down. Or even get off the bike and walk with it until clear. Everyone is absolved of responsibility. And equally happy. Or at least roughly equally and mildly inconvenienced -- the ultimate goal in any civilization.

I write all that as one who abhors walking. My local supermarket is three blocks away. My local Chinese restaurant is one block away. I invariably ride a bike to both.
B-b-b-ut allegedly almost all of us know that slowing down for any purpose when traveling will invalidate the usefulness of the bicycling travel for A&S stalwarts in the creed of Speed and Efficiency™ trumps all other objectives when bicycling "purposefully."
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Likes For I-Like-To-Bike:
Old 05-30-24, 12:48 PM
  #67  
Newbie
 
AirPhantomPhoto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2023
Location: Mid-Atlantic/DMV
Posts: 27
Liked 12 Times in 10 Posts
okay, since every single time I try posting pics the flippin system throws a fit then we'll go linkage.

From this.. Cape Gazette- Rail2Trail work


to this, DEs version of a MUP, they call it a Rail2Trail.





What used to be wide enough for rail transit cars has been narrowed down to 2 bikes side by side & maybe a ped inbetween. Piss poor design in my book, they could have kept it wider. But then again I havent tackled the whole route, that is a future plan once summer tourons are gone. I've measured it in ridebygps & currently it stands at about 15 miles between georgetown & lewes done, one way but since there are few parking places I doubt there are many walkers outside town. It was pushed mainly as a way for bikes to get off overpacked rt 9 when traveling between the 2 towns, & the other part runs between Lewes & Rehoboth to keep bikes off killer rt 1.

The one between Lewes & Reho I think is a touch wider as they expected more runners than walkers fighting with the bikers.


I feel for the person injured in the OPs post, as has been said media will spin anything & everything to their supported agenda, no matter what subject it is about. It comes down to.. do I ride the mup & get hurt or do I ride the roadway & get hurt, which one is the worst case scenerio.
AirPhantomPhoto is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 12:59 PM
  #68  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 39,131

Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter

Liked 2,955 Times in 1,637 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
Logically anyone who shares these opinions of the requirements necessary for "safe and useful" bicycle travel should be advocating for bicycling only on segregated facilities in order to be "safe" from mixing with motorists or pedestrians.
Or, like me and feel it's safer to ride with traffic on well maintained roads.

But, it always boils down to details, and there are situations where separated bike lanes make great sense.

Also note that not all MUPs are crowded, nor are crowded MUPs crowded all the time. By the same token, it's hard to generalize about cyclists, who's only commonality is that they ride on (usually) two wheels.

So, it's not about rules, but adapting to situations as they arise. I use the same logic on MUPs as i do when choosing roads, namely choose routes that get me to my destination safely and expeditiously, and avoid those that don't.
FBinNY is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 01:57 PM
  #69  
Senior Member
 
zandoval's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bastrop Texas
Posts: 4,610

Bikes: Univega, Peu P6, Peu PR-10, Ted Williams, Peu UO-8, Peu UO-18 Mixte, Peu Dolomites

Liked 1,720 Times in 1,107 Posts
I had a Ped step off a curb in front of my bike without warning or concern. Luckily I was going slow enough to stop before slamming into him. He looked at me in surprise that I was even there. I immediately asked him if he was from California. He replied he was from Seattle. I replied that this was Texas and when ya step of the curb you are taking your life into your own hands. He then countered, dont pedestrians have the right of way? And I replied, if you live long enough to exercise it.

One thing I have noted lately is that there are quite a few people walking the MUPs that are not used to walking out doors and on uneven terrain. I have to give them credit as they are obviously inside people and not used to traffic. Another thing is when we come up on these people on our bicycles we have no idea of their handicaps, physical, mental, or emotional. I came up on one lady quietly and when I voiced, "on your left", she screamed and nearly jumped out of her skin. That day I made a sincere apology.

Just a rant...
__________________
No matter where you're at... There you are... Δf:=f(1/2)-f(-1/2)
zandoval is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 05:05 PM
  #70  
meandering nomad
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Newport,Rhode Island
Posts: 446

Bikes: eleven bikes no car

Liked 16 Times in 12 Posts
In my state: RI the state wants peds to walk on the left facing bicycles just like the law is on roads with no sidewalk. This method works very well as everyone sees the other ones coming. Some people are better at following the rules and some don't know or care. I calmly tell folks "wrong side, face the bikes". My own preference is to ride MUPs on weekdays before "dog thirty". I find saying on your left only works on spandexd riders and has been said results in the ped moving left.When I see a squeeze potential with slow users and another cyclist I try to time it so we don't all meet. I also have no problem using the grass. I would never expect someone to move out of my way it's my responsibility to not hit anyone in front of me. it is possible to ride 18 mph on the MUP just use your brakes and work on acceleration.I see some road bikers practically brush people or riding a pace line, that is ****** baggery.
billew is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 07:14 PM
  #71  
Dharma Bum
 
Join Date: May 2024
Location: Urban setting
Posts: 10

Bikes: 1989 Nishiki Altron

Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Pedestrians do have the right of way, unless ...

Originally Posted by CrimsonEclipse
Peds have right of way, so it kinda IS the biker's fault.
Pedestrians do have the right of way, unless of course, the pedestrian has a general disregard for on coming traffic. Hard to prove even with witnesses who will assume the pedestrian is not at fault.
UserX is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 07:26 PM
  #72  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,220
Liked 771 Times in 457 Posts
Originally Posted by UserX
Pedestrians do have the right of way, unless of course, the pedestrian has a general disregard for on coming traffic. Hard to prove even with witnesses who will assume the pedestrian is not at fault.
Yes, that's my point.

I'll take a few seconds to slow down go around instead of a few minutes getting back up or a few years in court.

It's not about being legally correct, it's the path of least resistance.
CrimsonEclipse is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 08:28 PM
  #73  
Newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 29
Liked 12 Times in 10 Posts
I was curious about the type of MUP so a did a search and quickly found the incident. I am responding because I think many are imagining the type of typical MUP cyclist - walker/runner interaction. But this was unique in that it was a stairway entrance down to the paved path for the walker. (The video from the news broadcast is available as of May 30, 2024. often these disappear.) It is was very unfortunate timing – I hope all those involved recover quickly.

The video available only provides a very limited view and is not conclusive of fault. But, on my large display, it appears to me that the pedestrian was not paying full attention when entering the path.
https://www.king5.com/article/news/l...f-1dc40502175c
Video captures bicyclist hitting pedestrian on popular Sammamish trail, sending woman to hospital - www. king5 .com
letrebici is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 08:58 PM
  #74  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2022
Location: Albuquerque NM USA
Posts: 557
Liked 345 Times in 217 Posts
Originally Posted by letrebici
I was curious about the type of MUP so a did a search and quickly found the incident. I am responding because I think many are imagining the type of typical MUP cyclist - walker/runner interaction. But this was unique in that it was a stairway entrance down to the paved path for the walker. (The video from the news broadcast is available as of May 30, 2024. often these disappear.) It is was very unfortunate timing – I hope all those involved recover quickly.

The video available only provides a very limited view and is not conclusive of fault. But, on my large display, it appears to me that the pedestrian was not paying full attention when entering the path.
https://www.king5.com/article/news/l...f-1dc40502175c
Video captures bicyclist hitting pedestrian on popular Sammamish trail, sending woman to hospital - www. king5 .com
The pedestrian stepped out onto the trail. She only seems to look towards the cyclist after she placed herself in front of them a split second before impact. Looks like it is 100% the pedestrians fault. That cyclist that hit her didn't seem to be moving fast at all. If that cyclist had much speed, they would have done more than fallen forward a bit. Though of course it's hard to judge with such a short clip and poor angle. The first cyclist with the bell doesn't seem to have any involvement at all.
Mtracer is offline  
Old 05-30-24, 10:40 PM
  #75  
Senior Member
 
79pmooney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 13,050

Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder

Liked 4,077 Times in 2,639 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs
This is asinine.

If I jump in front of a speeding car, it is my fault. If I am on an MUP and step in front of an oncoming bike, it is my fault.

Fromt he OP (the accuracy of which is unknown) this pedestrian heard a bell, and deliberately moved-----in an unsafe direction, but the pedestrian chose which way to go and chose to step in front of oncoming traffic.

As a pedestrian, cyclist, or driver, I have to accept the same rights and responsibilities as any other road user. Almost every state (the forty-odd I have researched) have similar language. That means Not behaving in a dangerous fashion---like stepping in front of oncoming traffic without warning and such that the oncoming walker/rider/driver cannot safely avoid you.

Everyone on the road/MUP has a responsibility to be aware of his/her surroundings and to operate safely for himself and others .... The idea that pedestrians can do no wrong and everyone else is automatically to blame is not correct.
But, if it comes to trial, the jury will be composed to drivers, not cyclists. We are not likely to win even if we are "right". (We can hope for a Mechan-like to-the-letter judge and jury selection.but I won't hold my breath.)
79pmooney is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Your Privacy Choices -

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