After seeing the video taken of the incident, I don't quite get what we are talking about here.
If the cyclist had jumped the gun on the light, or failed to yield to a car running a light that was changing or had just changed to red, I would agree with what Harry is asserting. It doesn't make sense to bike out in front of moving traffic simply because the law says you can. Of course it is better to be safe than be right (as in correct). But if you are biking across an intersection well after the light has turned red for cross traffic, there is no way to anticipate a driver so egregiously running the red light. If as cyclists we were to do this, we wouldn't ever get anywhere- as we would be trying to anticipate any car at any point crossing through an intersection no matter what the traffic signal indicated. The cyclist in question was hit by a distracted driver who not only broke the rule (running a red light), but did so in a very unpredictable way (long after the light had turned red), and this had harmful consequences. If the cyclist had chosen to sit at the ro adside instead of proceeding toward his destination it is true that he wouldn't have gotten hit. But I think that is like saying that if you don't ride a bike you can't get hit on a bike. This wasn't a case of a cyclist asserting their rights; it was a case of a cyclist biking across an intersection in order to get to the other side. Riding defensively makes sense. Waiting an interminable amount of time at a green light to see if a car might come blowing through a stop light is utter nonsense. Obviously this is my opinion and not fact. -india *********************** India Viola UW-Madison Stretton Lab 115 Zoology Research Bldg. 1117 W. Johnson St. Madison, WI 53706 608.262.3336 *********************** "How can we learn from our mistakes if we don't first acknowledge them?" -Anonymous "We exist in the bacterial world, not bacteria in ours" -Stuart Levy ----- Original Message ----- From: HARRY W READ <[email protected]> Date: Saturday, September 26, 2009 1:28 pm Subject: Re: [Bikies] Comment on the biker hit by legislator who ran the red light incident To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] > Matt, all I was trying to point out is that the cyclist should have > been aware of his situation. It's true, I don't know if the biker was > thinking "I'm going to assert my rights", but the discussion up to > this point has focused solely on the driver's behavior. My statement, > "it's not worth being right if it costs you serious injury" is to > provide a counterpoint to the tendency of this forum to focus on > cyclists' rights. That statement applies to defensive driving as well > and there have been ad campaigns that made that very point ("...he was > in the right; dead right."). > > I think one purpose of Bikies to improve biker safety; I'm all for > bikers asserting their rights, but I think we should do so judiciously. > > Harry > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Matt Logan <[email protected]> > Date: Saturday, September 26, 2009 9:42 am > Subject: Re: [Bikies] Comment on the biker hit by legislator who ran > the red light incident > To: Harry Read <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > > > > The "it's not worth being right" argument is a prime example of how > > car-culture orthodoxy distorts discussions about transportation. Unless > > there is hard evidence that the bicyclist abandoned all defensive > > bicycling in an effort to assert his rights it is inappropriate to make > > such a suggestion. > > > > We don't suggest that motorists are asserting their rights to > > unencumbered travel when they are involved in a speeding-related crash. > > We don't suggest that motorists are asserting their right to drive drunk > > in a DUI-related crash. Why should we assume a bicyclist who makes > a > > mistake is asserting their rights? > > > > We should just call it like it is in situations like this and point > out > > that everyone needs to be aware that large vehicles block > sight-lines > > at > > intersections, and to operate their vehicles accordingly. > > > > On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 10:52 -0500, Harry Read wrote: > > > Watching the bus video of the biker hit by the legislator, my wife > > > > commented that the biker was hidden from the driver's view by the > > > bus - > > > the driver may have calculated that the bus would not be fast off > > > the > > > mark. This is not to excuse the driver in any way, I just want to > > > offer > > > it as a defensive biking tip. I'm sure this occurred to many of > > you, > > > but I thought worth saying. It's not worth being in the right if > it > > > > > costs you serious injury, or worse. > > > > > > - Harry > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Bikies mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
