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

Child Endangerment?

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.

Child Endangerment?

Old 04-10-13, 04:19 PM
  #26  
unterhausen
Randomhead
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 22,033
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 1,637 Times in 1,174 Posts
it's legal to use a cellphone while driving in Pennsylvania. In fact, the most recent law outlawed texting but prohibited municipalities from outlawing cellphone use
unterhausen is offline  
Old 04-10-13, 04:30 PM
  #27  
-=(8)=-
♋ ☮♂ ☭ ☯
 
-=(8)=-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 40205 'ViLLeBiLLie
Posts: 7,902

Bikes: Sngl Spd's, 70's- 80's vintage, D-tube Folder

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by fritz1255 View Post
I live in Pennsylvania, I am silently cursing the guy for being enough of a moron to ride on that road during morning rush hour, I see that he has a passenger, a small child in a bike seat. I was appalled. Disregarding your own safety is bad enough, but the child has no say in the matter. Is he breaking any laws? If so, I will report him the next time I see him.
Sad.
Spay and neuter your human.
Im very familiar with that stretch of road, and I agree, this individual needs to reassess his arrogance in this matter. Not smart at all.
Almost as sad, I lived in PA long enough to remember when 896 was a rural, very sparsely traveled road. We moved away from PA
due to the unrestrained ****/development of those areas
__________________
-ADVOCACY-☜ Radical VC = Car people on bikes. Just say "NO"
-=(8)=- is offline  
Old 04-10-13, 05:01 PM
  #28  
Zorba
"The Veiled Male"
 
Zorba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Merritt Island, Fl
Posts: 223

Bikes: Biria

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Only in America...
Zorba is offline  
Old 04-10-13, 07:39 PM
  #29  
Metal Man
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Call the police and let them know that on a daily basis you see cars passing bikes illegally on this stretch of road and you would like to see some enforcement of the law there.
Metal Man is offline  
Old 04-10-13, 08:11 PM
  #30  
bluegoatwoods
Senior Member
 
bluegoatwoods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Central Illinois
Posts: 686
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Sorry OP, but you're preaching to the wrong choir.

We are a group whose lives really are threatened regularly by drivers who are too selfish to simply avoid doing so.

You're going to find sympathy here for the bicyclist, as opposed to the motor traffic, in a ratio of about 10 to 1.
bluegoatwoods is offline  
Old 04-10-13, 08:45 PM
  #31  
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 28,552

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked 595 Times in 385 Posts
Originally Posted by unterhausen View Post
it's legal to use a cellphone while driving in Pennsylvania. In fact, the most recent law outlawed texting but prohibited municipalities from outlawing cellphone use
Thanks for the clarification of PA law on cell phone use.

I think it is important to make the distinction between talking on a phone, and mucking around with the apps, texting or other functions requiring staring at the screen of the phone.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 04-10-13, 09:35 PM
  #32  
dynodonn 
Out on Parole
 
dynodonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: U.S. of A.
Posts: 7,466
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1258 Post(s)
Liked 46 Times in 41 Posts
Locally, if one is operating a vehicle on a public roadway, legally one cannot have a cell phone in their hand, period.
dynodonn is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 03:00 AM
  #33  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,643
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1314 Post(s)
Liked 91 Times in 58 Posts
I bet the statistics show a fair # of child deaths in motor vehicles on route 896. Motoring creates the real child endangerment.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 04:47 AM
  #34  
Essex
Senior Member
 
Essex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Northeast United States
Posts: 1,147

Bikes: Tarmac, Focus Urban 8, Giant Hybrid

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I would report the cyclist. Child endangerment. From the description there seems to be no true reason why the kid should be on the cycle? There are laws to protect children from acts of stupidity. If there is clear and present danger related to the child's safety the law can step in and through legal processes do something to abate dangerous behavior on the part of the parent.

That said - it will take time because it becomes a legal matter.

Sometimes you wonder how children make it to their teen years when you have a parent(s) unable to make simple choices related to their health & safety.
Essex is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 05:26 AM
  #35  
fritz1255
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Posts: 216

Bikes: Vintage French road bikes, older "rescue" mountain bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by mulveyr View Post
Looking at the more rural sections of Rt 896 ( and the developed ones, for good measure ) in Google Street View - those shoulders are fine, and in some cases, absolutely huge.
True in the Delaware section, not in PA.
fritz1255 is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 10:29 AM
  #36  
elcruxio
Senior Member
 
elcruxio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Turku, Finland, Europe
Posts: 2,002

Bikes: 2011 Specialized crux comp, 2013 Specialized Rockhopper Pro

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 442 Post(s)
Liked 57 Times in 44 Posts
Originally Posted by Essex View Post
I would report the cyclist. Child endangerment. From the description there seems to be no true reason why the kid should be on the cycle? There are laws to protect children from acts of stupidity. If there is clear and present danger related to the child's safety the law can step in and through legal processes do something to abate dangerous behavior on the part of the parent.

That said - it will take time because it becomes a legal matter.

Sometimes you wonder how children make it to their teen years when you have a parent(s) unable to make simple choices related to their health & safety.
Now I have to wonder, what if the cyclist doesn't own a car?
elcruxio is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 11:12 AM
  #37  
prathmann
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Bay Area, Calif.
Posts: 7,239
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 659 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Essex View Post
I would report the cyclist. Child endangerment. From the description there seems to be no true reason why the kid should be on the cycle?
Maybe to take the child to daycare/school while the parent continues on to their work location? Not familiar with the road in question, but it doesn't sound all that different from parts of my daily commute to work years ago when our daughter was little. (And the parts of the road I spot-checked in PA looked fine for riding.)

Last edited by prathmann; 04-11-13 at 11:19 AM.
prathmann is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 11:17 AM
  #38  
Commodus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 4,144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Essex View Post
I would report the cyclist. Child endangerment. From the description there seems to be no true reason why the kid should be on the cycle? There are laws to protect children from acts of stupidity. If there is clear and present danger related to the child's safety the law can step in and through legal processes do something to abate dangerous behavior on the part of the parent.

That said - it will take time because it becomes a legal matter.

Sometimes you wonder how children make it to their teen years when you have a parent(s) unable to make simple choices related to their health & safety.
Well, obviously the father of said child believes there is a good enough reason to be there. Now while it's possible he's some strung-out crackhead cycling desperately to his next 'fix', it's also possible that he is regular guy, perhaps a bit 'down on his luck', and significantly more familiar with his situation than the posters here. Perhaps he is also more familiar with the actual dangers of his conduct, as opposed to the op who is clearly seeing it through the eyes of a motorist.

Perhaps some local could instruct us as to whether there is a viable alternate route.
Commodus is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 12:37 PM
  #39  
wsbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 317
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked 5 Times in 2 Posts
The OP's story raises some good points. In many road situations, vulnerable road users are obliged to rely on people driving motor vehicles, not to collide with them. Riders themselves can evaluate the degree of risk, and make the choice based on the relative danger considered, to ride in a given situation, or not. A child being transported on a bike ridden by another person, or in a trailer behind a bike, most likely wouldn't have such a choice.

Vulnerable road users, such as a person riding a bike, don't have complete control over people driving. Riders can wear visibility gear, use lights to aid visibility of their presence to other road users, clearly signal directional intention on the road, but ultimately, riders have no control whatsoever, over the person driving a motor vehicle, that for whatever reason, happens to veer from the main lane into a person on the shoulder of a road, or fail to stop for them in many situations in the main lanes of roads as well, resulting in a collision with a vulnerable road user. People riding can create greater distance between them and motor vehicles on the road, such as that's possible, but that's about it. People directly responsible for the care and protection of a child, have to keep the child's safety, the first priority.
wsbob is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 01:28 PM
  #40  
howsteepisit
Senior Member
 
howsteepisit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 4,305

Bikes: Mecian

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 500 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
So at what point does riding with a child in a trailer or carrier become endangerment? Its pretty well documented that some drivers do not notice cyclists at any location, so you could argue that there is no place excepting bike and multi-use paths is safe to carry a child on a bike or trailer. I am not willing to go there, so I must conclude that there is no endangerment occurring in the case of the OP. If there is an actionable endangerment, then I submit that all car free parents are endangering their children and should have their parental rights terminated.
howsteepisit is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 01:40 PM
  #41  
prathmann
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Bay Area, Calif.
Posts: 7,239
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 659 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by wsbob View Post
Vulnerable road users, such as a person riding a bike, don't have complete control over people driving.
Nor do any other road users. Unfortunately car drivers and their passengers die with some regularity on our roads and many of them were driving completely legally at the time. Most of the statistics that I've seen place the risk of bicycling somewhere between that of driving and that of walking in a city/town. Since the latter activities with a young child aren't considered excessively dangerous then normal bicycling shouldn't be either.
prathmann is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 01:41 PM
  #42  
Ferrous Bueller
absent
 
Ferrous Bueller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: DC
Posts: 621
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
^^Might be easier to simply outlaw cars.
Kids who are passengers in them constitute the largest number of accidental deaths in this country.
Ferrous Bueller is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 05:20 PM
  #43  
Essex
Senior Member
 
Essex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Northeast United States
Posts: 1,147

Bikes: Tarmac, Focus Urban 8, Giant Hybrid

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Commodus View Post
Well, obviously the father of said child believes there is a good enough reason to be there. Now while it's possible he's some strung-out crackhead cycling desperately to his next 'fix', it's also possible that he is regular guy, perhaps a bit 'down on his luck', and significantly more familiar with his situation than the posters here. Perhaps he is also more familiar with the actual dangers of his conduct, as opposed to the op who is clearly seeing it through the eyes of a motorist.

Perhaps some local could instruct us as to whether there is a viable alternate route.
Possibly. However, in the US you are not allowed to:

Have your kid beg in the street for money
Put the child in peril (safety)
Not have a helmet for a kid under the age of 12

The objective facts are: it's a small kid, in a roadway where cars are moving swiftly. Maybe, if this individual is reported maybe it triggers the process of social services -that's if he is so destitute that he has to resort to this mode of transportation? Or maybe he's just like some of the dumb ____ I see from time to time in Central Park with their 5 year old kid on the handlebar, no helmet having a ride with their uber-cool dad, wearing Persol shades while taxi cabs whiz by?
Essex is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 05:25 PM
  #44  
wphamilton
Senior Member
 
wphamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280

Bikes: Nashbar Road

Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2932 Post(s)
Liked 333 Times in 223 Posts
Originally Posted by Essex View Post
Possibly. However, in the US you are not allowed to:

Have your kid beg in the street for money
Put the child in peril (safety)
Not have a helmet for a kid under the age of 12

The objective facts are: it's a small kid, in a roadway where cars are moving swiftly. Maybe, if this individual is reported maybe it triggers the process of social services -that's if he is so destitute that he has to resort to this mode of transportation? Or maybe he's just like some of the dumb ____ I see from time to time in Central Park with their 5 year old kid on the handlebar, no helmet having a ride with their uber-cool dad, wearing Persol shades while taxi cabs whiz by?
Or maybe there's no particular danger, and your judgment based on inadequate facts is lacking. In that case reporting him to CPS would represent the worst side of our nanny-society, disrupting their lives for no particularly good reason. Just maybe, this guy knows better than you do about his situation and his transportation choices. Live and let live.
wphamilton is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 05:34 PM
  #45  
Essex
Senior Member
 
Essex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Northeast United States
Posts: 1,147

Bikes: Tarmac, Focus Urban 8, Giant Hybrid

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by wphamilton View Post
Or maybe there's no particular danger, and your judgment based on inadequate facts is lacking. In that case reporting him to CPS would represent the worst side of our nanny-society, disrupting their lives for no particularly good reason. Just maybe, this guy knows better than you do about his situation and his transportation choices. Live and let live.
I have a very different perspective on this. Given the context - I have liability associated with not being vigilant / direct about situations which may pose risk to individuals under the age of 18. I would rather be conservative and sleep at night knowing I did the right thing.

I give you an example - I see kids (middle school) playing between subway cars on the elevated line here in NYC. The rest of the passengers riding the subway car make like it isn't happening. I step in and stop the kids from _______between the moving subway cars. Should the kids have been crushed I would not be able to sleep at night, and to a certain level could be held mildly liable. This has happened countless number of times in my experience where someone who could have done something - did nothing. It is not as simple as Live and Let live so please - lay off the simplified explanation of what you deem correct.
Essex is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 05:49 PM
  #46  
wphamilton
Senior Member
 
wphamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280

Bikes: Nashbar Road

Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2932 Post(s)
Liked 333 Times in 223 Posts
Originally Posted by Essex View Post
I have a very different perspective on this. Given the context - I have liability associated with not being vigilant / direct about situations which may pose risk to individuals under the age of 18. I would rather be conservative and sleep at night knowing I did the right thing.

I give you an example - I see kids (middle school) playing between subway cars on the elevated line here in NYC. The rest of the passengers riding the subway car make like it isn't happening. I step in and stop the kids from _______between the moving subway cars. Should the kids have been crushed I would not be able to sleep at night, and to a certain level could be held mildly liable. This has happened countless number of times in my experience where someone who could have done something - did nothing. It is not as simple as Live and Let live so please - lay off the simplified explanation of what you deem correct.
It's a grown man with his own kid, not children playing somewhere dangerously. Most likely anyway. You have no liability in that situation, absent abuse or neglect. You could be right and it may be true that he's putting his kid in danger, but you could also be doing more harm than good.
wphamilton is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 06:01 PM
  #47  
Essex
Senior Member
 
Essex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Northeast United States
Posts: 1,147

Bikes: Tarmac, Focus Urban 8, Giant Hybrid

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by wphamilton View Post
It's a grown man with his own kid, not children playing somewhere dangerously. Most likely anyway. You have no liability in that situation, absent abuse or neglect. You could be right and it may be true that he's putting his kid in danger, but you could also be doing more harm than good.
Like I said - in certain situations I have liability. Your last premise borders on the same line of convoluted reasoning as all the dullards I see stand by and do nothing while kids try and kill each other, play between moving subway cars, observe teen perverts lift women's skirts with their umbrellas etc. By doing, or saying something I at least take an active role in correcting actions which endanger children, or other people.

And I sleep at night.
Essex is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 06:04 PM
  #48  
wphamilton
Senior Member
 
wphamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280

Bikes: Nashbar Road

Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2932 Post(s)
Liked 333 Times in 223 Posts
Originally Posted by Essex View Post
Like I said - in certain situations I have liability. Your last premise borders on the same line of convoluted reasoning as all the dullards I see stand by and do nothing while kids try and kill each other, play between moving subway cars, observe teen perverts lift women's skirts with their umbrellas etc. By doing, or saying something I at least take an active role in correcting actions which endanger children, or other people.

And I sleep at night.
You really don't see the difference? Well, keep a lawyer on retainer then ...
wphamilton is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 07:36 PM
  #49  
achoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,700
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Essex View Post
Possibly. However, in the US you are not allowed to:

Have your kid beg in the street for money
Put the child in peril (safety)
Not have a helmet for a kid under the age of 12

The objective facts are: it's a small kid, in a roadway where cars are moving swiftly. Maybe, if this individual is reported maybe it triggers the process of social services -that's if he is so destitute that he has to resort to this mode of transportation? Or maybe he's just like some of the dumb ____ I see from time to time in Central Park with their 5 year old kid on the handlebar, no helmet having a ride with their uber-cool dad, wearing Persol shades while taxi cabs whiz by?
REPORTED?

Reported for WHAT?

Riding a bicycle?

You know, there are dangerous truck drivers out there, too. Putting kids in a car puts them in danger of getting hit by an 18-wheeler driven by an inattentive truck driver!

OMG! THE WORLD IS DANGEROUS!!!!

HIDE!! HIDE!!! NEVER GET OUT OF BED!!!

AND REPORT PARENTS WHO PUT A KID ON A BICYCLE!!!!
achoo is offline  
Old 04-11-13, 07:41 PM
  #50  
achoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,700
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Essex View Post
Like I said - in certain situations I have liability. Your last premise borders on the same line of convoluted reasoning as all the dullards I see stand by and do nothing while kids try and kill each other, play between moving subway cars, observe teen perverts lift women's skirts with their umbrellas etc. By doing, or saying something I at least take an active role in correcting actions which endanger children, or other people.

And I sleep at night.
OMG!!!!

DID YOU SEE THAT YOUNG KID ON NATIONAL TV PLAYING BASKETBALL?!?!?!

DID YOU SEE WHAT HAPPENED TO HIS LEG!!!!

WHY DO WE LET OUR KIDS PLAY BASKETBALL!!!

IT'S DANGEROUS!!!

BAN BASKETBALL!!!!

Dullards?

What have you done to stop the evils of basketball?

I know - they could put 2' of foam on the floor, and then wrap the players in another layer of foam to protect them.

Wait? You don't think that's reasonable? IT'S FOR THE CHILDREN!!!!! What are you? Some sort of, err, dullard?
achoo is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.