The Human Car

https://lovelybike.blogspot.com/2010/...void-side.html

from Lovely Bicycle! by Velouria

I was cycling across town with a friend today, who suggested that we take the side streets instead of my usual route along the major roads. We were cycling on one of these quiet streets, when a sedan passed us too closely and hit my friend's bicycle with the side of their car.

The impact was not strong enough to knock the bicycle over, but it did happen - and the driver kept going until forced to stop at a red light. We caught up to the driver, and my friend quickly took a cell-phone picture of the license plate - at which point the driver stopped the car and came out, expressing annoyance. My friend said, "You hit me with your car." The driver replied, "Well, you should have been more careful!" (More careful? We were cycling in a straight line in broad daylight!) At that point my friend took out their phone and called the police - telling the driver that they were going to file a report. Bewildered ("The police? But you're fine!") the driver got back in their car, pulled over to the side of the road, and we all waited.

The officer arrived and asked whether anybody was injured and whether there was any damage to the bicycle. When we replied in the negative, the officer seemed confused: "So there is nothing to do here then." We repeated that the driver hit my friend with their car, to which the officer (politely) replied, "Well, if nobody was injured and there is no damage to your bicycle, that's not a crime. That's an accident." He then proceeded to file a report of the "accident," stressing verbally that there has been no injury or material damage. Both my friend and the driver gave testimony, and I gave testimony as a witness. We were then informed of where and when we could pick up a copy of the report, and everyone went their separate ways.

And this brings me to my question. Is it correct, that unless a driver actually injures a cyclist or damages a bicycle while hitting them, then hitting a cyclist in itself is not illegal? That is basically what the officer was telling us, but it does not sound right to me. What about the "passing no closer than 3 feet" rule? If a driver hits a cyclist while passing, does that not automatically mean that they were closer than 3 feet? The driver was unapologetic about what happened, and did not deny that they saw us prior to hitting my friend's bicycle. Yet the officer did not even ask the driver why they did not pass us at a safer distance. Perhaps what the officer meant to express, was that there was no way to determine what actually happened without video cameras or tangible evidence (such as injury or damage to the bicycle) - but his words did not come across that way.

Regardless of the outcome, I am glad that my friend filed a report. As I understand it, these things get entered into the DOT statistical data, and can lead to the development of safer infrastructure on that street if enough such incidents are reported. But I remain confused about what type of collision between motor vehicle and bicycle constitutes an illegal act versus what constitutes an accident. Can any of the cycling activists out there fill me in?

https://lovelybike.blogspot.com/2010/...void-side.html

ianbrettcooper

If there is a 3ft passing law in your state (some states merely have wording relating to a 'safe distance' - I believe Maryland may be one of them - even so, hitting the bike kind of implies an unsafe pass), then I'd assume that the driver must have broken the law. On the other hand, it's probably going to be your word against the driver's, since many times drivers claim that the cyclist was riding erratically. But I think the problem here has more to do with the fact that most police officers treat laws that apply to cycling with about the same level of seriousness and diligence with which the average two year-old treats a time-out.

I would write a letter to the police department listing the officer's badge number, his response to the incident and the relevant law. Ask the department why the law was not treated seriously in your case.

[Edit] Just looked up MD law. Can't find any safe passing distance rule for cars.

Bekologist

that is a case of police reluctance to perform their sworn duties and a distinct anti-cyclist bias.

I doubt colliding with ANY type of vehicle is 'okeydokey' in a strict reading of the traffic codes in any state. Definitely a violation of something!

The Human Car

I probably should note and highlight that the op is something I found on the web and is located in Boston. I'll chime in with some of my own thoughts after some more responses.

Bekologist

massachusetts traffic code is a morass of legalese. good luck deciphering the traffic codes in that state, but massbike probably has a fair interpretation.

i beleive mass has a newly ratified safe passing law that requires a motorist give due care and pass safely, the motorist would definitely be guilty of failing to follow that traffic statute!


massbikes page on the bike safety/ safe passing legislation

a provison, paraphrased by Massbikes ....

5. Don’t Squeeze Bicyclists in Narrow Lanes : If the lane is too narrow for a motorist to pass a bicycle (or any other vehicle) at a safe distance while staying in the lane, the motorist must use another lane to pass, or, if that is also unsafe, the motorist must wait until it is safe to pass.

sudo bike

FWIW, I was in a similar situation, but as a driver.

I was driving the hotel shuttle (back in the bellman days), and I was pulling out of a driveway with a hedge on the right side, severely limiting visibility down the sidewalk. I checked left, then right, then proceeded to crawl out (I always pulled out slow due to poor visibility). Sure enough, two cyclists come flying down the sidewalk (from my right, hence against traffic). Thankfully, I was paying attention, and was able to stomp on the brakes fast enough that the poor girl just toppled over (wasn't injured at all, again thank God). The man, who I assume was her boyfriend, was furious. He yelled "You need to watch where you're going". I told him that he was riding very fast on the sidewalk (there was a bike lane) and against traffic, there was no way I could see him in time. He insisted I was at fault and said he would call the police. I asked if anyone was injured, and if it was okay with him if I continued to drop the guest off and meet back with him at the hotel. He agreed.

When I got back the officer was already waiting, and asked if anyone was injured or if there was any damage. We all replied in the negative, and he told us there was nothing to do. He told them to ride the right way and in the bike lane, and me to be more careful, and we went our separate ways.

Truthfully, this would probably be how it would go down if it were a no damage car collision. Now, in my case there was no passing involved or anything like that... but I still think this is generally how it would have gone down anyway.

In the OP, the only thing that could really be cited is a ticket for an unsafe pass, which there is no actual proof of. If you live in a state that allows it, you could ask to go to court and attempt to get the driver ticketed on that, but generally an officer doesn't write tickets for an offense that can't be proven (at least in a two party situation, like this). That would be up to the victim to press, if able to by state law.

I really don't see anything extraordinary here.

lechatmort

that's like saying 'shooting at someone is okay as long as you don't hit them'

Bekologist

the scenario posted by thehumancar is clear cut violation of newly minted safe biking legislation. the failure of the policeman to cite the motorist after everyone admitted to what happened is A CLEAR CUT CASE OF lazy policeman failing to serve the public coupled to anti-bike sentiment predominant in the law enforcement community.

sudo bike

It may indeed be a case where there should have been a citation issued... but I think it's fairly standard practice, even with a no-injury no-damage car collision. I think it's less anti-bike, and more dysfunctional justice system.

Bekologist

dysfunctional cop, you mean. this motorist did not get cited. Motorists get cited for running red lights and speeding all the time, and they do not necessarily involve injury collisions.

fairly standard practice by lazy cops with a likely anti-cyclist bias.

I was involved in a case where a motorist was harrassing me badly for almost a mile for taking the lane, then cut me off, and swerved into me to do so. Despite several witnesses to this case telling the police the motorist swerved his vehicle right at me and the motorist stopping (probably afraid he would be guilty of hit and run) the police told me to 'be careful out there, the cars are a lot bigger than a bike' and did not cite the driver.

my case, and the one in boston, didn't get a CHANCE to get into the 'justice system.'

sudo bike

Well, by "justice system" I meant police enforcement in general, not just enforcement of bike collisions. I doubt it's a "one cop" thing, as I had a near identical situation (except in my situation, he could have cited the cyclists). But, as I understand it, this is pretty much how all non-serious, no-damage, no-injury collisions are treated, whether it's right or not.

Bekologist

right, drivers don't get cited for speeding or running red lights, got it.


you must not be familiar with the prevalence of anti-cyclist bias by police.

bob mionske has written some good articles about this issue. are you familiar with bob mionske and his bicycling law website? He writes a column featured in bicycling magazine every month, take a read of his lawyerly look at cops and their virtually wholesale failure to enforce the laws when a bike is involved in a traffic collision.

sudo bike

Fine, deliberately misread my point. Those are not the same as a collision. Were you to accuse someone of running a red light, you'd have to take it to court. There was actually a case of this not long ago where a cyclist took a driver to court for what was (I think) an unsafe pass. The cop wouldn't write a ticket on the spot because he was not present, and there was no proof. AIUI though, not all states allow you to do what is essentially citing a driver yourself to prove in court.

(Btw, why do you have to act like a jerk, right off? Chill, dude.)

Oh, I agree there is plenty of anti-bike sentiment or simple ignorance which varies from region to region. I just don't think this is an example of it.

RobertHurst

What does this have to do with side streets? Is she under the impression that a bicyclist can't get sideswiped on a major road? I don't get that part.

Bekologist

and what does this have to do with car-car collisions?

This is a case of a collision by a motorist with a vulnerable road user in a state with a newly minted bike safety/safe passing law!

sudo bike

Well, you claimed this was an example of anti-bike sentiment. I noted that it was probably standard procedure for all vehicles. If you think that bikes should be treated differently, that's valid and I can probably get on board with that; but that's not really the same as saying this is an example of an anti-bike cop. More likely it's just the procedure they are told to follow with all minor collisions.

pacificaslim

I don't think I'd be in favor of allowing police officers to issue citations based only upon the word of a third party witness. If there was an injury or damage or some other evidence the officer can go off of, then sure. But issuing a "passing closer than 3ft." ticket just because the cyclist says so? No thank you. I don't want that can of worms opened because it can just as easily be used against us. I mean, do you really want cars to start forcing us to pull over and stay there until a cop comes and writes me a ticket for rolling a stop sign or something just because the motorist swore he saw me do it?

Bekologist

its not just me that thinks this way, see the newly minted bike safety law from the commonwealth of massachusetts. you can probably get on board with collisions between vulnerable road users and motor vehicles being treated differently than car-car collisions? I think i see some humanity shining thru the internets.

Bekologist

In this case, even the motorist admitted he collided with the bicyclist. he was virtually asking for his citation. The policeman failed in his duties, failed to subscribe to the letter of the law in the new bike safety law in that state. I certainly chalk it up to likely anti-bike sentiment. sudobike chalks it up to SOP. Fine. it is still a failure on the part of the cop in light of the new laws he has dutifully sworn to uphold.

FAIL.

The Human Car

I am going to assume they have residential streets like we do here and that they are not striped and are less then two standard lanes wide and allow two way traffic. You cannot effectively control a 16'+ lane width against an aggressive driver, especially before a stop light.

Or at least that is how I relate to the op.

sudo bike

I've no doubt - but this is still not the same as saying this is an example of anti-bike sentiment.

I don't get what you're trying to say or what this has to do with my point, sorry.

Bekologist

to thehumancar..... the poster being more concerned about the road type than the laws protecting cyclists is a look in the wrong direction. but that was just the title.

their blog entry was primarily about the protections afforded cyclists under law, if and when a motorist is guilty of a traffic infraction if they collide with a bicyclist.

The Human Car

Primary, secondary smechonondary .... since when has any thread stuck to just the "primary" issue? Heck at least Robert's post had something to do with the op, so far we are doing better then most threads around here so I'm not going to complain (yet).

Bekologist

the blog post was primarily about 'was the cop right in not citing the motorist?' with a initial boast of his riding prowess in the title 'why i avoid side streets?'

Quiet streets can be quite pleasant to bicycle, dontchyaknow?

The Human Car

My point is there are exceptions to every rule, here is a quiet residential two way street in my hood: https://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&...,48.7,,0,34.03
Note the car is parked about halfway in parking lane and leaves little room to pass. Put a cyclists in that position (halfway in the travel lane) with a motorist who thinks cyclists don't belong in the road or in a hurry to get ahead of you for a light and you get an unsafe pass.