Thank you India for a clear and accurate statement of reality. There isn't much beyond your statements that makes any sense at all on this topic.
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 3:30 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Send Bikies mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Bikies digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Comment on the biker hit by legislator who ran the red > light incident (tim wong) > 2. Re: Comment on the biker hit by legislator who ran the red > light incident (Michael Rewey) > 3. Re: Comment on the biker hit by legislator who ran the red > light incident (robert paolino) > 4. Re: Comment on the biker hit by legislator who ran the red > light incident (Matt Logan) > 5. Re: Comment on the biker hit by legislator who ran the red > light incident (Michael Rewey) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 17:08:48 -0500 > From: tim wong <[email protected]> > To: India Rose Viola <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Bikies] Comment on the biker hit by legislator who ran > the red light incident > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > 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 > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.danenet.org/private.cgi/bikies-danenet.org/attachments/20090926/cd8cf126/attachment.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 20:02:22 -0500 > From: Michael Rewey <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Bikies] Comment on the biker hit by legislator who ran > the red light incident > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > Good grief! Don't start alibiing the car driver's bad behavior. The bus > was already moving > forward off the GREEN light. The bicyclist was not a young stud. He was > 57! Plus there is > an ALL RED phase before the light turns green. > > *********************** > > > > Well, my take on the video was that the biker started out very quickly - > granted, after the light turned green - and didn't check to his left. If I > were that biker, I would (I like to think, anyway) have recognized that I > was hidden by the bus; and looked to the left as I emerged from behind the > bus--even though I **should** have been able to assume it was safe. That's > my point, and my opinion. > > > > I ride pretty much every day, in all kinds of weather and have been > riding bikes in urban settings (including 6 years in NY City) for 40 years. > As an old > fart, I feel a lot more vulnerable than I used to, and I try to ride > defensively. > > > > Harry > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: India Rose Viola <[email protected]> > > Date: Saturday, September 26, 2009 1:54 pm > > Subject: Re: [Bikies] Comment on the biker hit by legislator who ran the > red light incident > > To: [email protected] > > Cc: [email protected] > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 21:27:02 -0500 > From: robert paolino <[email protected]> > To: Michael Rewey <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Bikies] Comment on the biker hit by legislator who ran > the red light incident > Message-ID: <1254018422.7297.5.ca...@tux> > Content-Type: text/plain > > > On Sat, 2009-09-26 at 20:02 -0500, Michael Rewey wrote: > > Good grief! Don't start alibiing the car driver's bad behavior. The bus > was already moving > > forward off the GREEN light. The bicyclist was not a young stud. He was > 57! Plus there is > > an ALL RED phase before the light turns green. > > I don't think Harry was excusing the MV driver's violation in any way. > The way I read it, he was simply saying that we (whether as bicyclist, > as pedestrian, or as MV driver) need to be alert/aware/careful and not > assume anything about the behaviour of other users of the road. > > (I'm also not clear on why the bicyclist's age should be relevant to > this discussion, whether 57 or 17.) > > > -- > Now go have a beer, > > Bob Paolino > > "Are Canadians just Americans who carry hockey > sticks instead of guns, > or is there more to it than that?" > --"This Canadian Existence" > Wisconsin Public Radio > > ( ) ASCII ribbon campaign > X against HTML e-mail: > / \ Friends don't send friends HTML-bloated messages! > > A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. > Q: Why is top-posting frowned upon? > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 08:26:05 -0500 > From: Matt Logan <[email protected]> > To: HARRY W READ <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Bikies] Comment on the biker hit by legislator who ran > the red light incident > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain > > On Sat, 2009-09-26 at 15:04 -0500, HARRY W READ wrote: > > Well, my take on the video was that the biker started out very quickly - > > Actually, I believe the intersection in question is at the bottom of a > big hill. Based on the topology, I believe the biker was already moving > quickly, probably just bottoming out of the hill when he saw the light > change from red to green. If the bicyclist was just starting, I would > have expected to see the cyclist stopped first near the stop line. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 13:37:37 -0500 > From: Michael Rewey <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Bikies] Comment on the biker hit by legislator who ran > the red light incident > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > I timed it this morning. The all-red phase is 3 seconds. Plus at least a > 3 second yellow > phase. > > On 26 Sep 2009 at 21:27, robert paolino wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 2009-09-26 at 20:02 -0500, Michael Rewey wrote: > > > Good grief! Don't start alibiing the car driver's bad behavior. The > bus was already moving > > > forward off the GREEN light. The bicyclist was not a young stud. He > was 57! Plus there is > > > an ALL RED phase before the light turns green. > > > > I don't think Harry was excusing the MV driver's violation in any way. > > The way I read it, he was simply saying that we (whether as bicyclist, > > as pedestrian, or as MV driver) need to be alert/aware/careful and not > > assume anything about the behaviour of other users of the road. > > > > (I'm also not clear on why the bicyclist's age should be relevant to > > this discussion, whether 57 or 17.) > > > > > > -- > > Now go have a beer, > > > > Bob Paolino > > > > "Are Canadians just Americans who carry hockey > > sticks instead of guns, > > or is there more to it than that?" > > --"This Canadian Existence" > > Wisconsin Public Radio > > > > ( ) ASCII ribbon campaign > > X against HTML e-mail: > > / \ Friends don't send friends HTML-bloated messages! > > > > A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. > > Q: Why is top-posting frowned upon? > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org > > > End of Bikies Digest, Vol 11, Issue 30 > ************************************** > -- Jim [email protected] http://janesflowers.topcities.com/ http://webpages.charter.net/jhenkel/
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
