OH306

Laws vary from state to state. In Ohio riding on the sidewalk IS permitted. Municipalities in Ohio may not force you to ride on a sidewalk (some have tried) but they may prohibit riding on a sidewalk.

Blue Jays

Ride a bicycle on that stretch of bridge and I guarantee no police officers will pull their cruisers to the side to write a ticket. They would rather cyclists be safe than bother someone minding their own business.

dobber

Beats me. But since we're compiling a list.

-Was the cyclist riding in a lawful manner
-Was the cyclist sober
-Did the cyclist suddenly swerve or somehow wander unpredictably

Car drivers aren't the only ones to be impaired, fail to observe traffic regulations or act in an unexpected manner.

When you can show the cyclist is above reproach in this situation then you can proceed with your self-righteous attack against the driver.

2manybikes

Laws are different in different states, towns, and even in the same town in different areas. It's legal in my state to ride on the sidewalk, and when on the sidewalk I have all the rights and responsibilities of a pedestrain. There are a lot of laws addressing speed, passing, crosswalks etc for bikes on sidewalks and cross walks.

As soon as I get on the road I am a vehicle..etc. etc.. In one town there are signs prohibiting bikes on one stretch of sidewalk. Not others. There are neighboring towns with opposite rules about riding on the sidewalk in my neighboring state.

2manybikes

I do.

gpsblake

In South Carolina, there is no bicycle law that prohibits riding on the sidewalk. But some local towns around here like Ridge Spring and Prosperity, SC have local ordinances banning it. Of course, we got very few sidewalks except in the business parts of town down here.

As far as the tragedic accident, if the driver was impaired with alcohol or illegal drugs, it should be 2nd degree murder. But otherwise, it's a sad accident and if the driver is at fault, the family probably could sue the driver.

As far as backpackers disliking bicycles, some off-road bicycles zoom by backpackers on trails going way too fast. Some backpackers don't like bicycles on off road paths because of the damage to the environment. My opinion is horses do far worse damage than bicycles do.

SweetLou

Please explain to me how this was murder. Are you just assuming that the driver purposely tried to hit the cyclist?

I really don't know what it means to run down a dog. I have never done it, nor do I know anyone that has, is this common where you live? Do people around you drive around looking for dogs to run over? I hope not, since I have always like going to Louisville and will have to stop going there when I have my dog with me. I have seen some accidents where the dog ran under the car. Are you saying that the cyclist threw himself in front of the van? That would make sense since the article you linked to had the driver saying the cyclist swerved into him.

I would appreciate it if you would not accuse someone of murder when you don't have the facts. If I had to guess, I would say something like vehicle homicide, not murder. But again, that can only be an assumption, because I don't have the facts.

jmb

Ky Venom
Thanks for this post .Keep beating the drum.
I find many of the responses to this incident repulsive.

Shavit

quote from notsofast: "(not every driver knows your stupid law, nor cares about YOUR STUPID LAW)."

then they shouldn't have a driver's license, especially in the state of Kentucky, where those questions are on the test ... just a question, are you 12?

Ky Venom ... thanks for posting, and keep up the advocacy work ...

maddyfish

Then take the whole lane.

maddyfish

Wrong- 15mph speed limit, heavily enforced, will pay for itself. Maybe even generate some extra revenue.

Gus Riley

An unfortunate and tragic death to be sure. Looking at the sidewalk I think I would have been on it too (regardless of the law). Sometimes I have to bow to the cagers to protect myself. I might not like it, but I like living better. Being right and legal but being dead does not appeal to me...I don't fancy being a Martyr for the cause.

Blue Jays

Reducing traffic to artificially-slow speeds will cause accidents. That would be like randomly reducing speeds to 30 m.p.h. on interstate highways. The confusion and varying speeds would create more problems than it would solve.

Tude 

KY - wow, I mean the bicycling groups need more people like you and everything, but man - you're hitting us across the forehead with a 2X4 here - like way too many times. We don't even have the answers. Cities are lucky to put bike lanes in, Bicycle clubs do no like bike lanes, OY.

Many (and I'm not even using the word I'd like to use - such as MOST) drivers are uninformed, meaning ignorant and really don't give a flying fart about cyclist legal rights on the road. I'm quite frustrated with this - but have found myself in some not good situations (try having a big, big man jump out of his car at you as you had just informed him "Thank you very much for cutting me off, @#$@, perhaps you should ..." -I think you can get the general picture) so I'm trying to be on my best behavior and not responding to some of the instances I have happen to me.

And as for the advocacy part - I'm entrenched in that too. Just have to keep trying to change and improve things. I personally am quite dismayed at the number of new drivers around me now that display a total disregard of anyone but themselves on the road - forget about even being a bicyclist. Personally I think the whole drivers license testing should be revamped anyway - and update it. I don't know how many questions a drivers test has on it now a days (took mine way too many years ago), but I sincerely doubt there's one about Other vehicles on the road besides motorists (bicyclists, Amish, for ex). So if no question - no need to read those pages of information in the manual. Meh.

You can give people all the information, talk to them more - and again - and you hit your head on the wall cause they just don't freaking get it.

But I'll still keep trying too.

But gotta say, you've been whacking us with this and have seen the responses .... I do admit though there were a few backpacker responses that were nasty - but I wonder if that was because of the biclying(loveshack) versus backpacker(mallwalker) thing ... I like to think that when the bicyclists vacation on the backpackers area - it's in good fun, pokes here and there. Hey, having a sense of humor is awesome. Meh.

But since you've posted this in three forums, perhaps it's time to take this to League of American bicyclists and their associated partners ---- cause I'm at a loss here as what to do. Especially seeing the crass comments that have evolved from the initial postings.

Time to let go - or try to change things the legal way.

mike

+1 That looks like a pretty cozy sidewalk to me. I know that some folks ride in the street to make a statement, but when you are on a long, tight bridge like that, it is better to leave arguments for another time. Right or wrong, legal or not, a bicyclist simply does not win the battle against an automobile in a collission.

Some argue that it is against the law for bicyclist to ride on the sidewalk, but in cases like this, it is probably better to fudge a little and ride the sidewalk anyway.

If the bicyclist was on the sidewalk and the autmobile jumped the curb to hit him (like what happened in Wisconsin this month), well THAT is an even more frightening circumstance.

Blue Jays

Precisely. You are 100% correct. The goal is to stay alive so the discussion of bicycle rights can continue with as many ambassadors as possible.

michiganboy

I think vehicular manslaughter would be appropriate.

MrCjolsen

What is the speed limit on the bridge? That is the all-important question.

It makes the difference whether "I didn't see him in time" is a legitimate excuse or not. If the speed limit is 30, then the driver was either speeding or not paying attention. And I would have no problem taking the lane on a bridge where the speed limit was low and it had two lanes in each direction.

why2not

I think that calling it murder is extreme, that is unless you subscribe to the theory that the driver had malicous aforethought... "hey, there's a cyclist, I'm going to kill him for kicks". Vehicular manslaughter would be more appropiate. That requires criminal negligance or a violation of traffic safety laws. Perhaps the family could hire someone to recreate the accident and show that the van driver must have been exceeding the speed limit by 20 MPH or something to throw the cyclist that far. That might get them a "violation of traffic safety laws" angle.

Otherwise, they have to rely upon criminal negligance... that is, that the driver did not act with the caution of a reasonable person under the circumstances. Quite obvioulsy the accident investigator did not find the dirver to be criminally negligant, thus no charges were brought against him.

Just because someone (wheter another driver, a pedestrian, or a cyclist) is killed by a vehicle, does not make it murder. It does make it tragic, which this was.

maddyfish

There wouldn't be varying speeds. Enforce the limit very aggressively. $1500 fines for the first offense, loss of license and $2500 for the second.

Interstates are limited access, limited use roads, they would require different rules.

joejack951

How is the speed limit important? How could you not see someone in your lane in plenty of time regardless of how fast you were going with sightlines as straight as they are on the bridge?

My gut feeling is that the cyclist riding over that bridge was probably riding too far to the right and letting motorists squeeze by on his left. He may have swerved a bit to the left at the wrong time while this guy was passing and got hit. By riding so far right, motorists coming from behind were not likely to notice him as he wasn't causing traffic to change lanes.

I'm not taking side on who's fault the accident was but I will say that regardless of lane width or the presence of a sidewalk, I see no problems with riding in the traffic lane (in the middle of it, like I belong there) over that bridge. There's a passing lane which means any delay for motorists will be minimal as I doubt that bridge is jam packed 24 hours a day. Even if it was, it takes what, 5 minutes to ride a bike a mile? Which means a motorist who's such a bad driver that they can't pull off a lane chage would have to go 12mph for 5 minutes instead of 50 for a total delay of less than 4 minutes. Oh the horror

slagjumper

While cycling on the sidewalk is technically illegal, now since there has been an accident what judge would fault you for riding on the sidewalk?

https://www.louisvilleky.gov/BikeLoui...ws/default.htm

I am glad that in Pittsburgh, we may ride on the sidewalks without getting a ticket, (except in business districts).

recursive

People are dying. What is the correct "proportion"?

dynodonn 

My condolances to the bike rider and his family, and I will not pass judgement on the motorist since I wasn't there, and since the facts available are too sparce. If I ever had the oportunity to ride on that bridge, I'd probably be on the sidewalk, but if I did choose the roadway I'd have blinkies with a enough firepower to make motorists think they're in Time Square.

dmac49

My sympathy to the family and friends. If you are so intent however to cross this bridge, the sidewalk is an option. Yes, I know it's illegal, but it is an affirmative defense in court. Court you say... try this....it is better to be judged by 12 than buried by 6. I'm truly sorry for a fellow bike riders death however in light of this maybe the present coarse is not the correct one. I say use the sidewalk and your legislators.