was that video posted here? I've seen references to it, but didn't find it when I looked for it.
On 9/26/09, India Rose Viola <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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 >
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
