ghettocruiser

https://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...path=News/News

Another case of Toronto area road riders run down from behind and injured/killed.
Another elderly motorist who *was not injured* in the *accident*.
Another ongoing police investigation is "appealing for witnesses".
Another case in which "no charges have yet been laid".
Another newspaper report that says basically nothing.
Another thread in the A&S forum we all could have done without.


This was on northbound Warden and 14th, right in the middle of my usual road riding drag. I have ridden almost all the way from Major Mac to Ravenshoe without being passed by a car or seeing a bike. It is a VERY quiet stretch of road by GTA standards.

Do we really have any doubt how this one will end?

No witnesses will be located.
No charges will be laid.
No further newspaper reports are likely.
Nothing will be learned.

We'll get to do the same thing again soon.

genec

This won't stop the carnage, but it might make people think... have you thought about putting a ghost bike in the area?

https://www.ghostbike.org/

slowandsteady

Carnage? Really this is carnage? Exagerate much? Boy, people really have no clue what an actual crisis is.

genec

In the small population of cyclists... two deaths in a similar manner in a similar location is "carnage."

But apparently the death of 45,000 motorists annually is not. (the number of motorists that die each year in the U.S.)...

It all depends on your point of view.

sbhikes

When that elderly man ran down the farmer's market in Santa Monica he did get slapped with some charges. As did both of the recent women in Montecito who ran down pedestrians and didn't even stop to render aid. As did the asphalt truck driver who ran down Kendra Payne on her bicycle on a narrow mountain road. The carnage won't stop but it's possible charges will be filed.

On another note, why is it people on this forum always say that hit from behind is so rare yet that is by far the most common kind I ever hear about, especially when someone dies because of it?

slowandsteady

Small population of cyclists?? I don't think so.

In 2004 there were 40 million cyclists in the US. That is not small to me. There were 492,900 injuries and two in 100,000 deaths. Car occupants on the other hand had 20 in 100,000 deaths.

Here is a great website about cycling safety and fear mongering.
https://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/health/risks.htm

Phantoj

It's rare, but it's more frequently fatal than the other types of bike-car mishaps.

genec

It is a rare accident... but unfortunately it also tends to be a fatal one. So you hear about these most often here.

You don't hear so much about the "I got hit and bent the frame" accidents here... or the even more common... "I caught my front wheel and went down without warning" accidents.

genec

LOL 40 million cyclists... of which how many have ridden in the past month?
How many of those 40 million bikes are sitting dusty in garages?

How about comparing actual road time to accidents to get a real statistic. Oh, that's right, most accidents go unreported. And no cyclist reports their milage... oh well... so much for the real picture.

This is not about fear mongering, but two cyclists killed in a similar manner in a similar location (as I understood the OP)... that might mean there is a problem there.

BTW rather ironic you chose Ken Kifer as an example... he too was killed by a motorist.

ghettocruiser

The only study of bicycle collision types that I consider meaningful for cycling in Toronto was conducted in Toronto. And it revealed that "motorist overtaking" events were the most common cause of fatalities.

I do not consider studies from other parts of the world with the same weight as this, plain and simple.

And how is comparison to the risks of driving helpful anyways? I know a number of people who have been killed or seriously injured in car crashes. Who suggested driving was a benchmark for safety?


And about the ghost bike memorial idea... I am already under pressure from some family members to give up riding for safety reasons. Placing such a feature just up the road from their house will hardly strengthen my counter-arguments.

I suspect other advocates in the community may place one, though, and that's fine.

slowandsteady

Read the link it does exactly what you ask, road time. Go to other sites. I am guessing fatalities do not go unreported. Cycling is NOT dangerous at least if you compare it to other forms of transporation and recreational activites. You are more likely to die of a disease than get killed on a bike. Yes, that's right LIVING is more dangerous than biking.

I am not trying to minimalize this particular tragedy, or say we couldn't do more with safety education, but it isn't carnage, and it isn't an overwhelming threat.

genec

Look, generally I agree with you.... that cycling is generally quite safe when done according to the rules of the road... however, go back to that same site and you will see a comparison of fatalities per million miles... and based on that, cycling doesn't fare as well as driving. Further... we have no idea of where those cycling miles that those "40 million cyclists" ride are actually ridden... were those cyclists riding on the road, an isolated path, a sidewalk or even offroad... some of these areas are far safer (in that one is NOT likely to be hit by an overtaking motorist) than riding in the street... And park/Sunday riders will obviously be riding in these safer locations. (some sidewalks ARE safer if they are not crossed by driveways).

Bottom line is that I generally agree with you.

Now what you are arguing is that this cannot be "carnage" as only two cyclists were killed. I dispute that as you have no idea if these were the only two cyclists that ever went this way, or if they are two out of 100 (more likely). But based on the low number of cyclists that regularly ride on the street, AND the fact that two cyclists were killed in relatively the same location (as I believe the OP indicates), this is an anomaly, and thus deserves to be called "carnage."

Go you one further... how many cyclists have to be killed at one location before you will call it "carnage?"

Now as a comparison... there is a road that I ride quite frequently in my area that is quite fun due the relative speed and flatness of the road. Two cyclists were killed there at nearly the same spot in two years time. It was enough to warrant a ghost bike, a ride of silence, a review by the street division and a change in the bike lane routing. Two! That's all it took.

One is an accident, two is a pattern, three is needless suffering.

donnamb 

+1. I think people greatly underestimate regional differences as they apply to cycling, automobile traffic, etc.

genec

I believe that studies in other areas also show the overtaking collision as being the most fatal type also... not the most frequent type of collision, but indeed the most fatal. Therefore there is not that much of a regional difference. The differences are more subtle... but the overall results tend to point to very similar statistics.

slowandsteady

Last I checked...it takes a lot longer to ride a million miles than it does to drive a million miles. They also clarify the stats with this obvious fact. They also go on to compare it to driving/riding time and cycling is safer. Nice of you to dig through all of the stats that don't support your position to find the ONE that does.

genec

I believe Samual Clemens once said "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."

So you honestly believe there was no bias in that web page toward making cycling appear safe?

And you honestly believe that "all those miles" that were discussed were actual "on road" miles verses folks on paths or in parks doing an occasional ride?

I really wish there were 40 million cyclists on American streets daily.