Bikema

[XLFD]

Like Karma, only at slower speed

 

I read earlier on Friday the 25th that a young lady of 14 years old was riding a bicycle down the road in Van Buren County when she was hit from behind by the driver of a SUV.  Only according to the cops, the driver and the reporter: the bicyclist turned in front of the vehicle causing the accident. 

Sure, police say she collided with the SUV even when they were both going the same way and the SUV was going much faster.  Sure, they mention the rider was not wearing a helmet and that the driver of the SUV suffered no damages.  Sure, police say the driver slowed down to well below the speed limit and proceeded to pass with caution.

Sure, the teen "inexplicably drifted out into the middle of the eastbound lane at which time the driver moved even further into the oncoming lane of travel," police said. As the driver continued to pass, the bicyclist never looked and turned left directly into the path of the vehicle.  Sure, the usual commenters felt sorry for the driver, and chided the girl rider.  But I didn't buy it, I commented:

 

"When will motorists quit blaming kid bicyclists for totally legal bike riding? State law MCL 257.636 says when you pass another vehicle (this includes bicycles, which have the same rights as vehicles) you "shall pass at a safe distance to the left of that vehicle". The SUV driver was still in the lane the bicycle rider was passed in, hence they did not pass safely. The driver further violated R28.1716: "every driver of a vehicle shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian on any roadway, shall give warning by sounding the horn when necessary, and shall exercise proper precaution upon observing any child or any confused or incapacitated person on a roadway."

By not slowing down more and giving the 14 y.o. more room, you may have just ruined someone's life, Ms. SUV driver. The police may give you a pass, the press may erroneously say the bicyclist "turned in front of you" without getting out of the lane of traffic they were driving in, and even the bicyclist might not hold you responsible, but from what I see here, you should be held accountable. Sorry, but I hope you're adult enough to not blame this on a kid riding a bike on a beat-up lane of the road."

http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/local/sw_mich/suv-and-bicyclist-acci...

 

And I figure a large amount of you out there will go and say there goes that loopy bicycle driver defending crazy actions by his own kind again.  But consider this, when you take a look at the girl's bicycle, there is nothing majorly wrong with her front wheel.  If she "all of a sudden" turned in front of this driver, that front wheel would have a much different shape.  The rider may have been wobbly, but there was no sudden veer in front of this SUV.  The careless driving of this older lady should have left enough gap, and she should have been fully in the other lane.  I would dare even say the closeness of the SUV to the bicycle when it passed may have made it actually draw the bike closer to the vehicle.  That's why we need these safe passing distance rules of at least 3 feet, and make it prima facie evidence that someone hasn't passed safely if we have a dead or injured cyclist on the road.

 

No Good Defense Goes Unpunished

 

With the defense of this young lady well behind me, I went out for a ride this evening with my usual weekend biking companion.  We went all around the Hamlin area, and finished up with a ride out to the Ludington State Park.  Let me tell you the most seriously dangerous place to ride your bike is through one of the state park's campsites on a Friday summer night, but we wind up doing it anyway.  We go through Beechwood and Cedar campgrounds without incident and head into Pines. 

We're going modestly between 8-12 mph down this one-way path, when we come around a curve and notice this, let's call her 14 y.o. girl, riding her bike the wrong way on the wrong side of the path and we both notice each other, our bikes are pointed at each other.  I still think I'm good as I move over to pass her on the left, she mirrors my move, having got off her bike in the process, also moving toward the center. 

Both of us panicking, I start to brake and move back to my side, she does too and puts the bike sideways, blocking my whole side of the path, and giving me no option.  I skid into her as she braces her bike, and I flip over my handlebars at impact, land on my back and get the wind knocked out of me and abrasions on my knee, thumb, and buttocks.

As I'm rolling gasping for air there are some good samaritans interested in helping.  My companion, who'd normally be laughing at me is heaping some bicycling advice on this young lady for riding the wrong way down a one-way street, being on the wrong side of the road, and not being predictable.  Some old codger, no relation to the girl, so we think it might have been some out of his mind pedophile puts his mitts on her, and says she wasn't doing anything wrong, we were for going so fast. 

By the time my diagnostic check realizes I just had a shot to my diaphragm and was fairly OK except for a couple of cosmetic things, the argument had ceased, and I windedly, told the codger who was still within earshot that he was a silly old fool. 

 

You see, if you're a young 14 y.o. bicyclist, you don't ride against traffic on the left side of the road going against one-way traffic, pull up and block every avenue of avoidance, and figure you're in the right when someone who is following the rules is coming down the road.  What if I had been in a car?  If I had been less athletic, I could have seriously gotten hurt here, and it was all because this young lady didn't realize even campground paths have rules to be followed for everyone's safety.

 

Does this change my answer I made earlier?  No, because the girl there was riding down the road in the lane legally, and the driver did not exercise enough caution.  At the park, if I stopped almost immediately, a collision would have been avoided, but the girl's erratic, mirroring moves doomed me to a wheezing trip to the asphalt mat.  FYI, she and her bike weren't hurt at all.

[Sweater Cows!]

My 11 yr old thinks she is old enough to ride her bike around town alone, but, I wont let her. We were going down S main  heading south and she was right in front of me, and 'cut' left across the road to a  driveway (a bit past the cross street when coming up the hill after the railroad tracks heading south). I gave her hell as I watched as she did not look over her left shoulder and check for traffic coming up the hill in our lane, even tho we had just turned off the cross street onto s.main(in my town, not lud.) and there was no traffic coming all the way back for a couple blocks she justified it with saying she would have heard a car. I have to say that in your first scenario above I watched my kid do the exact thing the 14 yr old is said to have done and unless the car was in the northbound lane completely she would have got hit, 3' would have got her injured if a car had been there.

[XLFD]

Your daughter does need to learn that using hearing is a good thing when you bicycle, but it is not infallible, as you wisely counsel.  About the dumbest thing a bicyclist can do is listen to tunes while riding, as taking that sense out of the mix might get you killed.

In my mind, there is generally no good reason not to pass a bicycle on the road just like you pass a car.  That is, to go fully in the left lane and pass.  How hard is that to do?  I always do it myself, even though its not the law. 

I was back on the road again this afternoon out in your neck of the woods doing a cool 40 miles.  Two things:  for the second time this year, noticed Wiley's Store was closed, which is too bad because it was a good place to water down in the past.  And secondly, we were passed by a car given less than two foot clearance when we were on Chauvez Road coming back.  This car had crowded over half of our lane as it passed as we traveled within a foot of the road's edge, there was no other traffic around.  The car was a Mason County Sheriff's Office patrol car. 

Thanks for keeping our roads safe guys-- BTW, didn't one of your people run over a pedestrian earlier this year and kill him.  Oh, I forgot, it wasn't your person's fault. 

[Willy]

X

Using your past and present logic I would have to say you were in the wrong while riding at the park. You should have anticipated the young girls action and should have checked her ID to see how old she was before you started your ride. You should have realized that she would have blocked your path long before you sighted her and you should have got off your bike and walked it from the time you entered the park until you left the park. There is no excuse for your actions because you did not anticipate everything that could happen that day. As a matter of fact you should have known before you woke up that morning that you would  be having this accident and you should have stayed home and sat in a corner. Better yet, you should have know at least a month in advance that she would be there, so it was your fault for not looking into the future, anticipating the accident and taking mature measures to avoid a 14 year olds mistake. By the way I completely disagree with your assessment of the Van bicycle accident. I'm sure your not surprised.

[XLFD]

I will say I could have avoided this accident if I braked immediately on my bicycle, but I hadn't anticipated her weird reactions.  I probably should have expected as much when she was riding on the wrong side, the wrong way on a one-way street and not really paying attention.  You're just being facetious otherwise about the whole affair, because I have defended young pedestrians and bicyclists before, instead of believing the dissembling of motorists not exercising due care.

I'm a little surprised about your assessment of my assessment of the SUV-Bicycle accident.  In the comments on the WOOD article in the middle of the thread head, I argued my point a little more with another commenter.  If you look at the damage to the bicycle and to the SUV, the driver's story becomes hard to believe.  Forensics and physics.   BTW, my view would change if the bicyclist was hit in the left lane, but she wasn't, so the motorist should be at fault.

[Willy]

Of course I was being facetious and I was joking with you because you always take the side of the pedestrian or cyclist. As far as the assessment of your assessment, the pictures prove the girl actually fell into the vehicle. The reason I say that is because if the driver had hit the bike it would be damage and bent so the girl must have done what the drive says which cause the driver to hit the girl and the girls body pushed the bike away causing little of no damage to the bike. In essence the girl was the cushion between the motor vehicle and the bike.

[XLFD]

The driver never said the girl fell into the vehicle.  The driver said the bicyclist turned left in front of her.  But the front of the bike is undamaged, and the damage to the vehicle is high up on the front-side. 

In the best scenario for the driver, given the evidence, this could be consistent with a sudden swerve by the cyclist right at the point where the vehicle was passing, but that would still mean the vehicle was less than a couple of feet away when it was passing.  That is an unsafe distance when you're passing a youth on a bicycle, particularly when the left lane was available.

[Willy]

If there is damage to the rider and not the bike then the only conclusion is that the van hit the cyclist and not the bike. If the van had impacted the bike there would have been a lot more damage to it but if the cyclist made an abrupt turn and was leaning as in falling to the left then she would become to main recipient of the the collision just as the picture reveal. From what I can see the bike is hardly scratched so obviously it did not come on contact with the van.

[XLFD]

We agree that the van hit the bicyclist not the bicycle, due to the evidence.  If the cyclist had turned left dramatically, the front of the bicycle would have been mangled and there would be some bike paint/damage on the van's bumper.  There's not.  The body being impacted could happen if the bicyclist was pointed straight ahead, but the dent may signify otherwise, but probably no more than about 45 degrees to the left.  Any more, would lead to the bike being impacted before the bicyclist. 

With such a small angle of turning, the motorist should have been veering off to the other side of the road.  But as the impact happened in the right lane, the motorist is at fault for not allowing enough room.  I am incapable of seeing it otherwise, but I am biased against unsafe, offensive driving.

[Fran Cisco]

I must agree with your assessment.  I actually had a family die riding a bike legally.  Driver dozed off and drifted into him.  DOA.  Bicyclist on the road scare me for that reason.  I always stay back, get in the left lane to pass.  Not that I'm a perfect driver, but this topic I have interest in. 

We all get distracted driving down the road from time to time.  Admit it.  It's builds character and encourages ourselves and others to do better. 

(on a side note, XLFD - I bet that really chapped your @$$ at the park.  hope you're ok.)

[XLFD]

I actually had some good bicycle shorts on that night that withstood the fall, and minimized the damage to a small red rash on my one bum, and now well behind me (pun intended). 

And I agree, Fran, no one can be the perfect motorist all the time; I just hope more would admit it does happen in accidents like these, instead of saying the same old defenses blaming the bike rider, when it's not warranted.