Sometimes, it really is the cyclist's fault. By saying that the car "just drifted into him," it looks like the cyclist was either cruising just to the car's right or passing on the right. Either way, that's dangerous and stupid, and the cyclist was at least partially, if not entirely, at fault.

If Transportation Alternatives really takes up this idiot's case, it will be an embarrassment to all cyclists. Colin Beavan needs to learn how to ride in traffic correctly before he starts lecturing others.

so, if i am holding a constant speed, on the right side of the lane near the parked cars, and someone hits me with their car it will be partly my fault and an embarrassment to all cyclists if a group trying to improve the urban biking experience decides my accident was enough to get them to do something more?

i am not totally sure that i follow you there.

in fact i quite definitely don't follow your logic on that one.

From the article, it sounded like he was on the far left side of a one-way road, and driver didn't look over his shoulder like they teach you to do in driver's ed.

His post is unclear as to which side he was on:

He makes a really weak case by not explaining who was passing whom. If he was passing the driver, it was his fault.

Plus there's no rule that drivers need to check blind spots before moving from one part of a lane to another.

it seems pretty clear to me the bike rider was on left side of a one way street. An appropriate place to be IMO on such a road.

If the driver were moving left, either to turn or to negotiate some upcoming obstacle it would be more than prudent but almost essential to not only check his mirrors but look back over his shoulder especially when driving in Manhattan.

It also seems the major complaint of the cyclist, which seems to me to be a legitimate one, is the driver's response to being told he almost crushed someone with his car. One might think that the appropriate response might be "Sorry, but I really didn't see you." NOT "Get your f***** hands off my car!"

I'm pretty sure that when you take the driving exam in NY you lose points for not checking blind spots. Plus, it's in the driver's manual that they give to people who plan on getting their license.

Are you serious? When you're driving, and want to switch lanes, what do you do? I personally check my rear view for a split second, then my side mirror then a quick head check for blind spot.

EVERYONE who drives should do this. I see morons on the road who just check their side mirrors and cut over, not realizing that there's another car right next to them, in their blind spots. That's how accidents happen.

I'm just curious, other drivers out there, do you check your blind spots?

I said I wouldn't usually check when moving from one part of a lane to another part of the same lane, not when switching lanes entirely. And actually, it might have been more dangerous for the motorist to take his eyes off the road in front of him (even for a second or two) just to check a blind spot in a lane he was already occupying.

I concede that this would be the motorist's fault if he had just passed the cyclist. But a cyclist that is trying to squeeze by a slower moving car in the same lane as that slower moving car is riding dangerously.

The more I read about this, the more I think that, at best for the cyclist, this is a case of an accident almost caused by two stupid, oblivious, pigheaded people. Neither the motorist nor the cyclist has the right to be indignant. They should have both apologized and moved on, being embarrassed by what their own stupidity could have caused.

There's always mutual negligence. The only question is: Who is more responsible?

I have my mirrors set to eliminate my blind spots, when a car driving next to me leaves my rear view mirror it appears in my side mirror, when it passes my side mirror I can see it without really turning my head. Unless I'm in my wife's car where for some reason she has her mirrors set that she can see the same car in her rear view mirror and side mirror. Thinking about it I'm not positive whether I could see a bicycle passing from behind me for the entire length of the pass.

:thumb: spot on...

They both look bad--the Senator, for his boorish response(if true), and the biker, for his rambling letter. If the cyclist had a valid point, it could have been made concisely, skillfully, with less emotion for greater impact. I don't want either of these guys representing me, as a Senator or a cycling advocate.

It's pretty clear he was on the driver's left, cruising along just behind the senator's head, on the left side of a one-way street. Highly dangerous and likely illegal. The senator wasn't "changing lanes", he was driving close to the cars parked on his left, squeezing the cyclist who was riding near his left rear passenger door.

Agree. The letter was unintelligible.

I get a sense that this isn't the first time these two have had a few words with each other. It's just now, that it's being carried out on the streets. So instead of them both apologizing, they should get a motel room.

Well this goes to show that even here in BF an analysis can be made that is not positive for the cyclist. Good show. An honest evaluation if I ever saw one.

Now regarding the driver... if those were his words, he needs a serious head check.

As for the cyclist, he needs to learn how to take a lane.

As for the whole issue... sadly it does point to the problem of cycling in America... the road hog / vehicle obsessed motorist, and the timid cyclist "trying to stay out of the way" due to societal pressure to not take a lane.

All this is evidence of a much larger problem... something that does have to be worked out. Cyclists have to be seen as part of the over all transportation picture, not as some second class leech borrowing limited space on motorists' roads. This is not going to happen until cycling is acknowledged at the highest levels as a legitimate form of transit. The Transportation Secretary for instance cannot berate "park riding cyclists" for the lack of funds for maintaining infrastructure that all vehicles need.

And it is high time that Cycling Paths become the domain of the Department of Transportation vice The Parks Department.

New York State law:

Section 1234. Riding on roadways, shoulders, bicycle lanes and bicycle paths.
(a) Upon all roadways, any bicycle shall be driven either on a usable bicycle lane or, if a usable bicycle lane has not been provided, near the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway or upon a usable right- hand shoulder in such a manner as to prevent undue interference with the flow of traffic except when preparing for a left turn

Ahhhhhh, I'm sorry. I mis-read what you wrote. I thought you said switching lanes. To be honest, I'm 50/50 on this when I drive. I live in Brooklyn, it's mostly residential and traffic isn't nearly as bad as Manhattan. When I want to pull over (double park) on a multiple lane, one way street, I normally just check my rear view to make sure I don't stop short and make the guy behind me have to go around me (most people wouldn't even do that, they'll just stop right in front of you and get out of their car and run into a store!).

But in the city, I would normally do a head check if I want to pull closer to the left of my own lane (to take an empty parking spot for example) because I've had close calls with cyclists, moped riders, razor scooter riders, electrical moped riders, etc.)....especially when I'm driving under 20mph when all these things can be right next to me.

I tried doing that, but it's just so hard to get used to!!! I know it's ********, but I like to see a very very tiny portion of the side of my car in the side mirrors. Your way is the "elite" way of doing it, but I just can't get used to it. I don't know if anyone else does this for blind spots...older folks may not want to twist their heads back in a swift motion. You can easily look at your side mirrors, and then LEAN FORWARD a foot or two and you'll see your blind spot that way. But that takes longer than a head check.

I have my car's mirrors set up so that I have no blind spots -- that is, there is no gap in coverage that's so big that a CAR can hide without being seen either through a mirror or by direct line-of-sight. BUT... that doesn't mean that a cyclist can't ride "in formation" next to my rear fender and still be seen.

Given a busy street with limited options for maneuvering, I'm more concerned with what I'm about to hit in front of me, and basically hoping that I'm not going to get hit from behind as well. The immediate priority, really, is dangers to the front.

+1, + spot on, etc. :thumb: I posted a comment saying much the same on his blog entry, but in a lighter tone ("I hope that lessons were learned by both sides").

Well, I googled Senator Klein and found that on 9/19/2008, he had agreed to meet with Colin Beavan, No Impact Man:

http://noimpactman.typepad.com/blog/...en-letter.html

When I took Driver's Ed, I learned the acronym SMOG for changing lanes...Signal, Mirror, Over-the-shoulder, Go. Not many people S, M, or O...but they always GO! (One of my pet peeves!)

It's not "elite", it really is best. You don't need to see the rear/side of your car at all times -- as I've heard in a course, "If the rear of your car is no longer following you, then you've got much bigger problems to worry about." ;) Turning your head too far can make you swerve (just like cyclists often do when we turn to look back); leaning forward and turning to look is even worse since you're tugging on the steering wheel, which is the primary control device for the car.

When you need to look along the side of your car via the side mirror, tilt your head towards the window.

Go here:
http://www.police.york.on.ca/erase/Video.htm

Watch the two videos for mirrors. Heck, watch them all, and spread the link -- this stuff is better than anything I remember from my own driver's testing.

I wouldn't call this cyclist timid -- more like self-absorbed and completely unaware of the limitations of drivers, then belligerently combative when his own misjudgment nearly gets himself hurt.

To me, they're both more indicative of an even bigger societal problem I'd scientifically describe as, "It's not my fault."

Nice website! I actually learned most of what's in the videos from a 2 day Skip Barber racing class that I took. I do understand the logic of the mirror set up. But I don't know why....I just don't feel comfortable using it. Also, my vehicles are used by others. They set the mirrors the "normal" way. It'll just be too much of a pain. Maybe one day... But for now, my headchecks work fine for me.

Whenever I drive someone else's car, I change the mirrors as shown in the vids. When they protest, I go, "But I don't need to see the end of the car." :lol:

Just do it. I think it would be easy to get used to while on the freeway with moderate to light traffic -- potential hazards are a lot less frequent than in the city.

I set my mirrors up for no blind spot too. You don't need to see the side of the car. It's just what you're used to. Most people have been taught the wrong way to do it and have been doing it that way their whole lives. In a passenger car, there's no need for a blind spot, but most people set their mirrors wrong.

He sits in the MB's blind spot and just waits for something to happen. I think he was trying to setup Jeff Klein.