dobber

Standing behind something thats so blatantly wrong doesn't make it right.

apricissimus 

Of course not. Logic and sound reasoning makes it right

bgilchrist

You're kidding right? You're suggesting that if you pass a bus on the right and you collide with someone stepping off it's their fault?

Oh well, at least you're in Vancouver, and I don't have to worry about you showing up on my commute.

bgilchrist

Which your argument has none of.

From this post and the previous post, it is apparent that you think your need to possibly save 5-10 sec on your ride is infinitely greater than a) the safety of children b) traffic law c) the general impression of cyclists by drivers, which has the possibility of influencing drivers when they encounter cyclists in future situations.

I'm happy to say I have never encountered this during my riding. I think this would be cause to chase the offending cyclist down utilize 'bike pump justice'

apricissimus 

Did you read the thread cited by the OP?

In that thread I stated that no child was put in danger by passing a stopped bus (with lights on) ten feet on the right, while no child was actually present. I'm not anxious to save 5 or 10 or 60 or 120 seconds, I was just saying that the OP of the bus thread didn't do anything drastically wrong since no children were in any danger.

Speedo

Part of my commute is on a MUP and on the way home it is usually dark. This year there seems to be more pedestrians using it than last. That's no problem except that quite a few seem to be walking on this dark path in dark clothing without lights or reflectors. Even with my 10W headlight I've been surprised by a few. I'm definitely riding more cautiously now.

Speedo

bgilchrist

So because he didn't hit a child that means the OP didn't do anything wrong? What if his actions were the same but a child walked off the bus and the OP collided with them? would he still not have done anything drastically wrong? (guessing also of course that above actions are probably contrary to the HTA in the OPs jurisdiction) His actions were the same.

The argument that he didn't do anything wrong because the OP didn't collide with anyone is invalid.

Allister

You conclude that from the above 'logic', right?

I counter your 'argument' with the All's Well That Ends Well Defense

Saving Hawaii

There's a huge difference between the line-of-sight available to a driver and a cyclist as well as their vehicle's respective handling. A driver trying to slide past a school bus is making a serious gamble, as their bumper is jutting out yards ahead of their actual line-of sight; if a child is about to run out from behind the bus, the driver will be closer to that child by the time he sees it than the cyclist will (as his head will be at the same location as the cyclist or worse, but the front bumper of his car is yards ahead). On a bicycle, I can easily stay well away from the bus and have a huge margin of error between me and the bus as well as an excellent line-of-sight. A driver is limited by the bulk of his vehicle and can't get as far right as a bicycle, so both his reaction time (the child has less distance to run from behind the bus) and his line-of-sight (being further right provides a steeper angle) is vastly inferior. Not to mention that drivers tend to have a under-appreciation for the speed of their vehicle and its associated force.

In this respect a cyclist and driver are an orange and apples comparison, and I see nothing wrong with a cyclist passing a school bus, given that the cyclist does so in a cautious, vigilant, and controlled manner. Fixie kid whipping past the kindergarten bus with a locked rear wheel because it's cooler that way probably doesn't fit the above considerations.

Dchiefransom

Hmnmmmmmm, how many times have I heard someone that drank alcohol and drove say it was safe and they knew what they were doing?

Saving Hawaii

Apples and oranges.

DCCommuter

Here's a link to the last Washington, DC fatality we were discussing:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...020301735.html

frymaster

i think what it means is not that the rare cyclist killing a pedestrian is "alright" but that if we are really actually concerned about stopping the loss of life we should be put more effort into addressing the dangers of cars.

did you really misunderstand that sentiment?

gnarus

I have struck a pedestrian before. UT vs Florida game on campus a drunk florida fan walked into the street as I was flying down a hill i moved over to left lane to get by. As I got closer he all of a sudden started running right in front of me. I yelled "DUDE! STOP!" he payed no attention and ended up running into the side of me almost knocking me off.

It was a very scary situation he put me in especially sense I was at the time recovering from surgery due to a cycling accident. If I had struck this guy and killed him I can honestly say I would not have felt at fault or any remorse whatsoever.

I stop at lights and try to behave as much like a car as I can while cycling , and then somebody like this doesn't have the sense of a 5 year old to look both ways before crossing the street almost gets me seriously injured.

ProsecutedBiker

I've never heard about a biker killing a pedestrian, how exactly did it happen?

like, what was the exact cause of death?

JusticeZero

In Melbourne, the pedestrian crossed properly, and was broadsided by a cyclist running a red light moving at full highway speed. (One of several running that light) Death was from, iirc, internal trauma from the impact. Possibly head injuries from impacting the pavement were involved, I don't recall.