To add my 2 c to this: I'm over 60, have been riding bicycles since I was 13, 
cars since I was 16 and motorcycles since I was 21 so I've had lots of 
experience with at least these 3 forms of transport. I've been lucky in having 
had no significant crashes with any of these modes. As a bicyclist I have never 
had a problem with cars though I'm very careful and won't ride on a road that 
is too narrow for a car to pass easily. As a motorcyclist, I ride defensively 
with the assumption that cars won't see me. I never assume a car will stop just 
because there's a stop sign.
 
That said, my point in posting is to express that there are often many factors 
that go into a crash, including road conditions, attentiveness of the driver, 
how visible the bicyclist is, design of the road system, factors in human 
perception, etc. These are all important. 
 
1. One of the most interesting courses I took in college was Experimental 
Psychology where we mostly experimented on ourselves in perception and 
learning. Perception is not as clear cut as most of us assume. We assume we see 
what's there and don't see what isn't there - often not so. 
 
2. As a bicyclist it is a source of constant frustration on how bad road design 
is with regard to bicycles (even in Madison). As a culture we just don't get it 
that the bike can be a significant form of transportation and not just a 
recreational toy. Thus riding a bicycle is an inherently dangerous activity.
 
3. As a bicyclist, I hope I am permitted to say that my fellow cyclists often 
don't do their part to keep themselves safe. Many seem to think all the rules 
of the road do not apply to them and that they should be able to ride at night 
with no lights or reflectors and dark clothing. Yes, the driver shouldn't hit 
you anyway, but what good is your righteous indignation when you're dead or 
injured. Given the bicycling climate in this country (bad) it just makes sense 
to tip the odds in your favor as much as possible by riding smart.
 
4. As a driver, I am aware that it is absolutely impossible to be 100% 
attentive and never make a perceptual error. I have been most fortunate in 
having few enough of these lapses to never have hit anything (excepting a poor 
fawn that darted out of the darkness just as I and another car were passing on 
a country road).
 
My first hope would be for the road systems to be gradually redesigned to 
accommodate bicycles. Unfortunately, I don't see this happening in my lifetime. 
I have noticed that WI is incredibly lenient when it comes to drunk driving. 
Changes to this attitude and set of laws is more likely to happen but will be a 
slow process. So for us bicyclists, it comes down to doing whatever we can to 
decrease the probability of getting hit - and you know what those steps are. 
Also, one thing that will not help is to take an antagonistic attitude toward 
cars and drivers. Every expletive, hand signal, etc. you do alienates another 
driver and makes it less likely bicyclists will be taken seriously.
 
Robin Alexander

________________________________

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Darryl Jordan
Sent: Wed 2/21/2007 6:02 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Bikies] Re: fatality update



This is not to exonerate the driver...

However, just because it's night and headlights are on
doesn't make a stealth cyclist or pedestrian visible.
*Just last night, I saw a boy across the intersection
chasing a loose ball. He was wearing dark clothes. The
only way I could see him was the motion across my
field of vision. If the cyclist were in the same lane,
the relative motion would have been less noticible.
Motion and brightness are instinctive attention
grabbers. If something isn't moving or bright it's
going to get lost in the background.
*Glare will obstruct vision. If there are lights in
the direct field of view, especially headlights, store
front lights, street lights and any or all reflecting
in ice or a wet surface will obscure darker objects by
causing the pupils to conscrit and reduce night
vision. It's like an automatic camera changing
exposures for light value.
*Dirty, fogged or frosted windows will obsure objects
*The door pillar on the auto will obscure an area of
vision.

I agree, that the diabetic spin is questionable. The
driver was probably distracted with something or
didn't handle a turn or lane change. Or the driver was
scared to death.

But I also believe that cyclists can be invisible to
most drivers under some circumstances.
Last fall, I was biking after dark along the bike path
behind Olbrecht Park and a cyclist with no lights,
dark bike, and dark clothes appeared out of the dark
area between the street lights. Kind of spooky to see
this stealth cyclist approach.
My opinion is that some (but not all) of these
cyclists are not out for recreation or out for the
communal good but are using old and cheap bikes to
save money or because they can't drive.  Like
pedestrians who wear dark clothing, they can see the
road ahead but doen't perceive themselves as being
invisible to others.

Just my two two cents to play a devil's advocate.

Regards, DJ


--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>
> > ... the cyclist who was killed recently on Femrite
> Rd.
> 
> It was pitch dark out, he didn't have any lights or
> even a reflector. 
> They think the driver may have had a diabetic
> reaction tho alcohol is a
> possibility. They are awaiting lab reports before
> deciding what to do
> next.
> >
>
> The "diabetic reaction" sounds like a made up excuse
> to me. This
> bicyclist was hit from behind, remember?  It is not
> pitch dark if the car
> had its headlights on!  Granted, the bicyclist
> should have had lights and
> a reflector.  But that still doesn't take away from
> the fact that the
> driver of the motor vehicle was at fault for hitting
> him. 
>
> The DOT Motorist Handbook says your headlights will
> let you see about 400
> feet ahead and that you should drive at a speed that
> allows you to stop
> within 400 feet (Page 41 of:
>
http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/drivers/docs/e-handbook.pdf
> ).  Therefore,
> there is no excuse for hitting a bicyclist from
> behind, even if the
> bicyclist doesn't have any lights or even a
> reflector on the bicycle.
> The driver of the motor vehicle in the case should
> have been issued a
> citation regardless of whether the bicyclist had
> lights and reflectors or
> not.
>
> Mike Neuman
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bikies mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
>

_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies


_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies

Reply via email to