Should the 50+ forum discuss cyclist fatalities?

There have been 2 or 3 such postings in the past few weeks, and none of them have much to do with over 50 cyclists.

Cycling fatalities happen about twice a day in the US, and as tragic as they are, there's rarely anything to be learned from the knowledge or details of the accident. And, if we want to delve into that subject, that's what the Advocacy and Safety forum is there for.

The obvious response would be to simple say ignore such threads and move on, but the phrase "cyclist fatality" is pretty hard to overlook.

It's after-the-fact reporting, and in most cases, we can't do anything about it. For me, it really throws a damper on what is a much safer activity than it might seem at times.

What do you think?

I have visited the A&S forum once. I think if people here want to draw attention to these unfortunate incidents, the should post a link to the A&S forum, where I'm sure that the incident will have been discussed immediately after it has become public knowledge.

I don't mind being reminded that cycling can be a dangerous activity, to have the opportunity to acknowledge and contemplate a fellow-cyclist's tragic death, and to be grateful for being alive. Kind of our very own "reality bites." (My $.02)

I've jumped in on those threads from time to time quoting statistics, mostly to illustrate that many of these incidents are not that unusual. I usually wonder why a few each year are singled out of the much larger pack. I guess some have some unique aspects.

I usually quit reading them after a few posts. Not because they are depressing, but usually because there isn't much to say about them.

I don't like that they happen. Just as I don't like that thousands of people are killed by drunk drivers every year. That children are abused. That people are starving. That the judicial system is unfair. That lunatic men decide that their wives/girlfriends are not allowed to live without them. Etc.

I do wish the world were a kinder place.

As to the question about posting here, as usual I'm not going to purpose a rule be established. Sometimes people need to post things and there is usually someone else who connects to the thread. But they don't do anything for me - although if the victim were a BF 50+'er, then I would have an interest in knowing about it.

I really don't know how I feel about before-the-fact reporting, either

More seriously, it's a topic related to cycling. It strikes home with us, as cyclists. How should we exclude it? I don't choose to bring it up, but I can choose to read or not, as you point out. My thinking is to let it be. If people want to bring it up, let them. If others want to comment, let them. There is much that is less cycling-related.

-soma5

Censor 50+ posts?

Be careful what you wish for.

A very good point.

But, threads are already moved from 50+ to FOO now and then. It seems like A and S is the place for cycling fatalites to be reported and discussed. That's why that forum was created in the first place.

Discussing ideas of self-regulating is a good alternative to censorship.

I think we are 50+. We are not children.

As long as any subject has cycling and 50+ content, there is no reason to tiptoe around reality. Each one of us can determine if the particular message is worthy of further attention in the marketplace of ideas.

I almost never visit those threads, but that's just me. If people are interested, I reckon they will keep the thread going for awhile.

I personally seldom find those posts of any value, but they are really more on topic than a lot of what is posted here.

I think folks should post what they want and everyone should use their own judgement on whether to read or not. I have a problem with telling (or trying to tell) anyone otherwise. Obviously, some are a lot better than others at choosing an interesting subject and presenting it well to start an interesting thread. The dead cyclist threads are dead boring, because as Tom points out correctly, we all die one way or another. It would interesting if I knew the dear departed, but that's just me. Remember, I'm the one who still wants the Diego's to come back, en masse.

Have you ever participated in a "Ride of Silence"? Takes place each year and it's to honor those injuried or killed by automobile. If you haven't try to seek one out. Last year the one here in OC had like 2000 riders. No one talking, all riding in single line in order to raise driver awareness of cyclists.

I think we need to be aware. I hate to say, but like in my club, it is usually the older riders who go down and have accidents. As we get older we may not be able to do all the fast, crazy stuff we did when we were young. Our reflexes have slowed down. Plus we don't heal as well. If you need a reminder why, like a fatality story, then so be it.

I have this thing while out riding. If I see a cop car and fire truck, I just automatically think it's a cyclist. After having a very serious accident myself (actually several) I've learned to slow down and ride more cautiously.

It's never easy to hear of these things but it's necessary.

We are clearly nearer the end of life than most others. Hence I don't see any problem with acknowledging that our end could come at the hands of someone driving a motor vehicle. However, I must confess that I routinely ignore threads that say "cycling fatality"... simply because I am aware of the risk figures you describe. For me that's just a personal thing. My wife reads the obituaries every day, and I don't. When I ask why she does this her answer is always along the lines of enjoying learning about the lives of other people. Of course she reads biographies and autobiographies and I don't. Different peopl want to know different things, and it's often nice to be able to discuss those things with someone who has been around as long as you have.

I look in on those threads but there they are rather sharp edged.

As far as bicycle safety goes, M Wilson, a local bike coordinator here in C. FL, did a study on all of the cycling fatalities in FL in, I think, 1999. He found out of something like 114 fatalities, only 4 of the riders was not breaking some traffic law when they were killed. It is not that all of them were at fault but the vast majority of them contributed to it. Nearly half of the bike fatalities occur at night and the vast majority of those are people without lights or reflectors!

It is a little bit like saying RR crossings are dangerous and then finding out that the vast majority of the people who get hit are going around the barriers whilst the train is approaching. How do you spell R O A D K I L L ?

Clearly, there is a risk to cycling. But it is far less than it appears from the statistics because sane cyclists don't do those things (and I assume everyone here is sane). Even with the lunatics thrown in, cycling is about half as dangerous as driving per hour. I know it does not FEEL that way but then again in my car I an insulated from reality and a near miss on a bike scares me in a way that it does not in a car.

I want to read about cycling fatalities and other mishaps, in the hope that all of us can learn how to protect ourselves and how to expend our advocacy energies. I get into verbal spats with my friend, Serge (Helmet Head), when I accuse him of being in denial regarding the risks of cycling in traffic. As a 20-year dues-paying member of MADD, I am very keen on effectively assertive advocacy, and I am currently struggling with how we best deal with the very real problem of inattentive and distracted motorists.

I do not object to being reminded periodically of the danger we all face on the road (and even offroad). I have worked around electricity all of my life, and I do many of my own automobile repairs. I do my own home maintenance and home improvement projects, usually with power tools. One key to safety is to remain fully conscious of the dangers inherent in almost any activity.

At the same time, I take joy in reading the results of a recent British twin study, which demonstrated that those of us who exercise aerobically 3 hours or more per week are biologically almost a decade younger than our couch potato counterparts. We have to weigh risk versus reward, and I think bicycling still comes out quite positive on balance.

Are you worried about your own mortality?

Every time I ride, I'm reminded how fragile I am. I'm sure it's the same for you. So no, there's nothing threatening to me about cyclist fatality stories. I get enough of a reality check everytime I hit the road.

But, every story of a cycling death becomes a rehash of the same basic factors. Poor road design for bikes, arrogant or inattentive or drunk drivers, and erratic cycling...all followed by an inadequate law enforcement reponse. And the details of each story are so thin, it's hard to draw any kind of constructive conclusion. We never really know what happened, or who's at fault.

Again, a thread titled "Cycling Fatality" is impossible to ignore on an emotional level, for me at least. It's hard to skim past it without being effected. But it doesn't make me any smarter or any safer out on the road. The futility of it all just bums me out.

To put it a better way, it's a hell of lot easier to ignore a thread titled, "What kind of Bike Should I Buy," than a thread titled, "Another Cyclist Killed."

If anyone wants to delve into safety matters, there's an A & S forum for that purpose. I think we should take advantage of it on a voluntary basis.

Seem to me that cyclist fatalities are an important cycling related issue. The O.P. is correct, they are after the fact, nothing we can do about it issues. But depending on the report, we can learn and share with other "less informed" cyclists that we may ride with. Plus, as a public forum, the members can and should feel free to post whatever is of importance to him/her, and if the other members feel so inclined, then they can respond, or not.

Dude: Two comments and then I am out of this discussion.

1. Far from being reminded how fragile I am when I ride, I am reminded how great it is to be the center of the universe and how nice all those things around me look, sound and smell, and how cool it is they are all there for my personal enjoyment. Oh and how pretty my bike is and how great I look in lycra and that kind of stuff too. I'd take the bet that's pretty much how you REALLY feel when you get on the bike too.

2. I think you should take a solemn oath to never read another thread that has the words dead, death, crashed, injured, killed, morte or any of their synonyms in the title! You'll feel better!

I try never to look at the disamal side of life. Can't always do it- but I think that the posting of another Death in a part of the country miles from where I am are not something that would interest me. As such- I might look at the posting but don't let it register.

I see no reason to not post about cycling related deaths. If no one wants to read or comment on them they will pass silently and quickly into the archives.

For relevance, I'd recommend that if one is posted, it's someone you know, is relatively local to you, or is 50+; and if it's not relevant to the 50+ list, then maybe it should go elsewhere. But when has anyone here let relevance stop them?

Rules in a knife fight?

I rarely even open them much less participate but we don't need no stinking rules.

It's not how I feel when I get on the bike, it's how I feel when I get off the bike.

My comments were in repsonse to the question posed to me: