Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mike Keating on October 3, 2016 at 6:24am

For the investigators to conclude that the bicyclist was partially at fault because of entering the roadway even though the crossing signals - illuminated next to a cross walk - were lit is incomprehensible. That is no different than concluding that any bicyclist who enters the roadway even though cross traffic has a stop sign, yield sign, or red light could be partially to blame. In essence, the investigators conclude that motorists - even those disregarding traffic control devices - always have the right of way. 

This is why Dennis's Law is so important. It absolutely clarifies that bicyclists are entitled to the right of way and are just as much as "vehicle" as a motor vehicle. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike Keating on October 3, 2016 at 9:13am

No. The new law reinforces that our rights include "right of way" laws. So anytime a bicyclist has a claim to right of way under the law, there is a clarification of that issue. Pursuant to Section 11-1512(c) of the Illinois Vehicle Code, when a bicyclist is using a crosswalk to cross a roadway, the rider is treated as a "pedestrian" under the law. And Illinois law is clear on the responsibility of an Illinois motorist to yield the right-of-way to pedestrians in a crosswalk at an intersection. Section 11-1002 of the Illinois Vehicle Code states that “the driver of a vehicle shall stop and yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a crosswalk.” This responsibility is made even more clear when the pedestrian is both in a crosswalk and with walk signals. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tom A.K. on October 12, 2016 at 7:29am

http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-91679380/

10-10-16 "Mt. Prospect crosswalk death prompts update in 2017 state driver's manual."

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Maurice on October 14, 2016 at 4:41pm

Trib reports that the driver got a $150 fine and supervision.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/arlington-heights/news/ct-ahp...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tom A.K. on October 29, 2016 at 2:50pm

http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-91797549/

Joni Beaudry's ghost bike in Mount Prospect is set to be removed. Village officials want to remove it due to safely concerns. "It has been cited as a distraction in at least one vehicle crash."

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by mike w. on October 30, 2016 at 5:08am

Okay, if a ghost bike is a driver distraction (actually  that sounds like a lame excuse someone gave to the reporting officer,) what about -oh, let's say- roadside signs such as election posters and bus stop  adverts?

How about better driver training and licensing requirements? Oh, no, that would be an infringement of drivers' rights...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul Lazzaro on October 30, 2016 at 1:19pm

What about ENFORCING the law against texting while driving?  This has been the cause of most of my recent close calls, including a woman who nearly ran me over while walking in a crosswalk.  I pounded on the hood of her car, and she stopped, thank God.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by mike w. on October 31, 2016 at 4:42am

THIS

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Montanaro 0mi on October 31, 2016 at 5:43am

What can we do as a community to raise awareness of all sorts of distracted driving? The distractions (mostly involving cell phones in one way or another) are ubiquitous, which would mean hammering on every police and sheriff to enforce existing laws.

Perhaps a more directed political approach would help. Under certain specific circumstances (which ones?), notify a specific set of politicians? By that, I mean mayors (not just Mayor Rahm), city council members/aldermen, sheriffs (Dart is elected, right?), and that whole steaming mess in Springfield. Maybe a set of journalists?

I think we could identify the target list pretty easily, but what events should trigger a notice? The easiest is deaths or serious injuries which make the paper, but (thankfully) that happens rarely enough that the mean notification interval would be too large. Ideally, every time we see some sort of infraction we'd snap a picture of the offending driver and post it. In my experience, it would be dangerous to whip out my cell phone and snap that picture. I don't have a GoPro-type camera, and I question how good that would be at seeing cell phone craziness unless it was helmet-mounted.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tom A.K. on October 31, 2016 at 6:55am

Even with all the reminders, it seems to be an overwhelming challenge for many of today's drivers.

"Drive Focused. Stay Safe. Avoid Distracted Driving."

Safe driving practices require that you constantly search the roadway ahead for situations that could require you to take quick action.Recognize that driving requires your full attention.Did you know that even the most routine activities are potentially distracting while driving?

A national survey revealed the activities that distract today's drivers.

NETS DISTRACTED DRIVING SURVEY

Activities Drivers Engage in While Driving

96%Talking to passengers
89%Adjusting vehicle climate/radio controls
74%Eating a meal/snack
51%Using a cell phone
41%Tending to children
34%Reading a map/publication
19%Grooming
11%Preparing for work

Participation in Distracting Activities While Driving for Work or for Personal Purposes
57%Personal purposes
25%Work purposes
14%Both equally
2%Don't drive for work
3%Don't know.
From Network of Employers for Traffic Safety.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on October 31, 2016 at 5:44am

An emphatic YES! to both Mike's and Paul's comments above.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Paul Lazzaro on October 30, 2016 at 1:17pm

What a load of BS.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page