Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by David Barish on March 31, 2017 at 7:45am

I read and re read the Sun Times story. I have not looked elsewhere to get information on this crash.  The thread started with an understandable concern over the article mentioning that the rider was wearing dark and unreflective clothing. This can be seen as blaming the rider.  Our discussion has jumped to distracted driving.  I think both distracted driving and ninja riding are concerns that have elsewhere on this form been discussed and discussed with gusto. Here we have a tragedy and a thread that began not wanting to blame the rider now has a discussion that in a sense blames the driver. We do not know who is at fault, whether both are accountable or whether this is one of those tragedies that really doesn't have a good or bad guy.  We do not know if the rider was a ninja and we do not know if the driver was distracted.   I have a hard time throwing around speculation when real people are involved. Separate threads are a good place for us to state all we know and all we feel about these issues. In the context of this one I want to know how the rider is doing and if investigation (rather than speculation) has given anymore insight into why this happened.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Yoav Kashiv on March 31, 2017 at 10:14am

My comment was general, not regarding the crash reported above.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Irvin Steinert on April 1, 2017 at 5:47am

The thread was simply a news story. There were no directives to a particular discussion or questions asked.

• There was an implication that the victim was blamed wrongly. There was no mention of drunk driving or murderous intent so if one sticks with the theme of the OP, a fair assessment is distracted driving.
• The other issue discussed is the helmet use which is often used (incorrectly) as a measure of how concerned a cyclist is to his/her own safety and wielded (incorrectly) as evidence against cyclists by non cycling commentators.

I believe those points are relevant to post on this thread along with others including the relevance of posts as a discussion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David Barish on April 1, 2017 at 11:47am

Perhaps it is a personal quirk of mine. I bristle when I see blame inferred on either party in a crash when the facts offered are slim.  This is probably a hangover from  prior post crash discussions.  All of the issues are absolutely important and I completely agree that the discussion of a helmet is completely irrelevant to getting in a crash but perhaps germane to how one fares after getting in one. I had started to type out and eventually deleted something in that regard. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim Reho on April 2, 2017 at 5:10pm

John Greenfield, a generally perceptive commentator, needs to acknowledge that two wrongs don't make a right.  Just because drivers are often at fault for crashes doesn't excuse cyclists from acting irresponsibly.  If that kid had no lights (no indication in the story, but I'd be happy to bet with John that he didn't) and was wearing dark clothes, then he was being irresponsible whether or not that was the cause of this particular crash.  Just as when they report that motorcyclists didn't have helmets or that car drivers or passengers weren't wearing seat belts, the media is pointing out various factors that may have caused or affected the outcome of the events in question.  I will state straight up that if I was driving at night and hit a ninja for no other reason than that I couldn't see him, I'd be blaming that victim myself.  The wrongs of drivers, and they are many, do not excuse the wrongs of cyclists in not making themselves visible to drivers when it's dark.   

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Yasmeen on April 2, 2017 at 5:40pm

The wise words of David Barish, "I bristle when I see blame inferred on either party in a crash when the facts offered are slim."

It is not illegal to ride with dark, non-reflective clothing. If it is, I would get a lot of tickets. There's no mention of lights or no lights in the article. There's no mention of the driver. Last year there were a number of tragic cyclist deaths, when reported, left information out e.g. no turn signal, running a red, etc.  As John mentions, Vais received a light sentence and part of the reasoning is that Vais didn't see him because Hector Avalos wore dark clothing regardless of the blood alcohol level of Vais being far above the legal limit. Sadly, we seem to do the same thing - start going on a tangent about helmets, lights, dark clothing when the real topic is that poor, partial reporting does nothing more than cast blame on the victim. Cyclists seem to get the brunt of the blame just by riding our bikes and there's much bigger fish to fry.

Distracted motorists, be it because of a cell phone or alcohol or drugs, are consistently dangerous/deadly. Yesterday a distracted phone-using driver nearly hit me when she was weaving in and out of the bike lane because she was too busy with her phone to notice. 

Motorists that drive or park in the bike lane can also create dangerous situations for cyclists.

 

We all see both of these situations on a (nearly) daily basis. Maybe I am feeling a bit touchy about this topic but isn't the real issue regarding safety much bigger than things cyclists do e.g. ninja cyclists, no helmet, dark clothing? I do everything legally I am required to do plus ride with a bright-colored, reflective backpack yet I am still in danger if the driver runs a light, drives while drunk or can't stop using their phone. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Irvin Steinert on April 3, 2017 at 2:11am

+1

It is estimated that driving while looking at your phone is as bad or worse than drunk driving and it is done by more people. "Technology based distracted driving" is now a national health crisis!

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page