There were several stories in the news over the last few years in the USA when people who helped were later sued by the victims. In particular, if you happen to be a doctor, people will sue you for anything because it's a money grab.

One example:

https://articles.latimes.com/2008/dec...od-samaritan19

So, unless you're qualified to provide emergency medical help, don't touch the victims, just call for help, you're better off leaving a person in a burning vehicle.

However, the OP made is sound like a fender-bender, in such case I would definitely NOT stop. If it was serious accident I might stop and call 911, but that's all. I don't want to be a witness, sorry, I've read way to many insanely ridiculous stories about our broken legal system to want to be involved in any way.

Adam

I understand where you're coming from, but without stopping, how do you know that it's just a fender bender and personal injury isn't involved? If it's a PI injury, and it could also be determined that you were in any way a contributory factor to the accident I'm sure you could have a lot more legal exposure by leaving the scene than if you stayed.

Or you could be the next YouTube sensation shown ignoring an accident because you didn't want to "get involved"

But notice how they somehow weasel their way out of medical bills, auto insurance claims, and all other assortment of things they "should" be responsible for. That's it everyone, put our trust in a money sucking, cheating, lying, makes more of a profit off of our dollar than casino's care to do, Corporation.

As for my response to the question. Depends on the driver, female of any sort was involved, I think I would stop to make sure she was ok and needed a witness.
If it is some stupid guy from my college in a huge lifted truck, I would point and laugh as I passed, and probably stop just to see him get a ticket if time allows.

Also people worried about this coming back to bite you in the ass if you don't stop, think about this. It is winter right now and the only thing you usually can see on me is my nose and eyes. Even then it would be hard to tell my ethnicity at a glance. How would most people decribe you if they saw you pass the accident by.

Officer there was a guy on a bicycle and he looked like a cold super hero. What color was his bike? umm... I think black mostly and a little white. I.e. like every other bicycle off the rack. what color clothes did he wear? bright safety yellow and had black tights on. I.e. Like every other semi-serious cyclist. The probability that they will be able to match a description to you and later charge you with anything is astronomically small. Even if they do think they have you just have someone say you were driving your car because it was to cold.

I'm extremely naive. I would have stopped, and acted as a witness if necessary. I would also trust in the good nature of human beings to take responsibility and not try and blame me. Did I mention I am extremely naive?

I'm tired of this "us" against "them" attitude. We are all users of the road and should try and work to get along. Maybe some day my naivety will end me up in a lawsuit and I'll become cynical. Then I'll definitely report back to the forums so all of you can say, "I told you so."

...

Without details, this isn't anything I can comment on. (I'm not suggesting that a "free for all" would be allowed).

Yes, people should generally behave in standard ways. Of course, one should yield if not yielding would cause an accident (eg, stopping on a green to avoid somebody running a red light).

Actually, according to our Red Cross training, in most states people are protected by good samaritan laws. As long as you do not claim to have training you don't and render aid when someone more qualified is at hand, you're OK.

In fact, doctors and other medical professionals are the only ones who CAN be (reasonably) sued in those cases - they can be sued for malpractice. Non-professionals are protected. So in fact it may be doctors that should keep their hands in their pockets. Trying to render aid at the roadside and getting sued could raise or cancel their insurance.

In fact, you can be charged with failure to render aid if you pass an injury accident without helping. Some of you may be anonymous, but I'm not. I'm the ONLY regular commuter within miles, there's no way that if I were seen at an accident and they wanted to ID me that they wouldn't be able to.

Years ago, there was woman running down the street raving and screaming "Help me" among other things. Everyone ignored her. At one point she stared me straight in the eye. I did nothing figuring she was just a nut case. But I've been haunted by it ever since. What if her life or the life of someone else was in jeopardy? I'll never know.

I vowed to never again to ignore anyone who appeared to be in genuine distress and was asking for help. It's led me to do some things that were maybe a little risky given I had no idea who these people were. I've never regretted it.

Now, I know this is a different situation but the fact that so many people don't want to get involved is one reason why criminals can get away with crap in broad daylight with all kinds of people around, - including bike theft.

This thread grieves me.

thanks for the thorough explanation.

Where I live, the one who hits the other is 100% at fault. It doesn't matter what he is looking at or what he is doing. I have to no business intervening as I was not of the accident at hand. I would not stop, and would not consider going back.

On a similar note; I was driving [my car] and made an illegal U-turn. The guy behind me slowed down and the guy behind him rear-ended him. I did make an illegal U-turn, but, where I live, in the eyes of the low, the person who did the rear ending is 100% at fault. If the guy behind me was able to slow down, why wasn't the guy behind him? I was foolish enough to think it was my fault. I surrendered my info. When I spoke with my insurance company and the police they both told me although I did something foolish, I should have kept driving as I was not part of the accident.

Case in point: Don't Stop.

The general perception that the right thing to do is what is best for yourself is the problem.

the 208 rule of aquisition states: sometimes the only thing more dangerous than a question is an answer.
the 285 rule of aquisition states: no good deed goes unpunished.

that being said, i might stay.

This is definitely the case in NYS.

The worst part is that if the situation were flipped and it was a cyclist that ran into something/someone while watching a motorist, and the motorist didn't stop, the people here who say they wouldn't stop would be talking about how terrible the motorist is. Never mind that the motorist can justify not stopping in exactly the same way they are.

The thread itself is enough explanation. Very sad, I agree. I'm glad that I don't live in an area that breeds some of the types of attitudes I'm seeing here.

No one said that it is the "right" thing to do, they seem to be saying it is the smart thing to do. Maybe some might think it is right if they have a family and can't afford a lawsuit.

It is the expected behavior when the government does not enforce the law equally. That creates perverse incentives for people to either break laws or do things that they would never do otherwise. If the laws were simpler, if the news didn't promote and sensationalize every "miscarriage of justice", then people would not be afraid to do the right thing.

The thing is, we are talking about Common Law countries here mostly with pretty predicatable legal systems. In many other societies where people cannot trust their government to be fair at all imagine how much worse it is, and how much more "selfishly" people act out of fear.

I guess its true that you learn something new everyday. Today I learned that the "right thing to do" and the "smart thing to do" are different things. I also learned that rationalization works (but I already knew that)!

I think that is different. over and over we are told to not move the person unless the car is on fire, precisely because you can paralyze them. I would never move them in that situation. I have no training, just what I remember from high school. I don't think that's too much to ask. Of course the opinion would have to be very narrowly written for it not to have the chilling effect you describe.

No, the problem is when drivers and police are all to willing to believe a cyclist caused a crash even when they in fact did nothing wrong.

You don't have to look very hard to see that most motorists, police and even some judges are often biased in favor of the driver. Heck, most don't even understand the actual laws regarding cyclists. Some think that a cyclist is breaking the law if he/she is ever "in the way".

The fact that someone may choose to avoid this injustice in a situaton where it seems likely it would happen doesn't necessarily make them a bad person.

I can relate.. Once a motorist stopped in the adjacent road as I could have walked my bike across a cross walk.. The car was making a right turn after the pedestarian
cross walk light had changed from Green to white. I waved for the stopped car to make their right turn.. They continued to wait as a kind gesture to me, so that I guess, I could still cross the street.. While stopped to make their right turn , an on-coming car hit them in their rear.. I felt badly about the event, so I displayed a sad face; but choose to not stay..

I have no problem giving help in some blood curdling accident,but I'm not going to stop for some dingbat that races around me in a parking lot and rearends somebody at 10-15 MPH.They can hash it out themselves.

Please don't presume to learn anything from this thread.
Those in the "run and hide from the accident" camp seem to come from two thoughts:
1, It's a cagers' accident, therefore of no consequence to me. Who cares....and
2. I can somehow be blamed for the accident because "I was there and being looked at."
I'm sorry, both premise are equally erroneous and sad .

I have often wondered this myself. on most occasions I think I would stay, and stop where I was to show the police where I was and that I wasn't breaking the law. but then if anyone needed emergency help I would have to dismount and administer 1st aid

this reminds me of one of my 1st long distance rail trail rides. I was all decked out in my hi vis commuting outfit complete with flashing strobes. I was moving at a pretty good clip when I came across a family with a very young new rider. he was just learning and was pretty shaky. he probably wasn't ready for a rail trail. anyway he was concentrating on the paved trail in front of him but then he looked up and saw me coming toward him and then looked down and proceeded to lose control and fall (at like .5 mph). I felty like if I wasn't there he wouldn't have fell. I considered stopping but both his parents were right there and that kid was due to fall again. just par for the course when you're learning. I taight my kids on dirt fields and made them wear knee & elbow pads, and gloves

My parents taught me on the asphalt alley behind our house.

That's a sad face event? My kids and I learned on loose gravel. Just try to learn to ride on loose gravel. It sucks. And it hurts when you fall on it and grind body parts into the gravel.