Two Spoke Forums banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
123 Posts
"...charged with failure to yield while making a left turn."
How about a charge of vehicular manslaughter? Think that would get the publics attention?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,223 Posts
Doesn't matter. Nothing you do will bring the person back. You will not regulate away the human condition and the failures that come with that. Accidents happen. It is a part of life. We all should understand that as a possible outcome as a result of our choice to cycle and be willing to accept that risk. It is a tragic situation all the way around.

Now if there were other circumstances, then that would be different. If the driver was drunk, didn't have a drivers license or was an illegal, that is a different kettle of fish.

Depending on the time of day, angle of the sun, backgrounds ect, we all know bikes can be hard to see. Certainly isn't for us to judge what is just based on a newspaper article that may or may not have all the facts correct. High emotion almost always leads to bad policy. Getting the public's attention will not change the human imperfection any more than a new rule making it against the rules to make a mistake.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
870 Posts
"he remained without medical care with two collapsed lungs for as long as 30 minutes."

I know the story does not state either way. But were there no witnesses who could have called for help and did the driver of the truck NOT call for help right away which left the guy without it for the 30 min. helping to cause Falwell's death? I doubt Falwell could have called for help with 2 collapsed lungs. I imagine it would be very difficult to talk.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
870 Posts
The lack of laws holding motorists accountable are exactly why there is a letter in a sealed envelope in the safe box at my bank. My wife knows of the letter but does not know what it says yet. It contains instructions of exactly what she is supposed to do if I am ever killed while riding bike by a motorist.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
717 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
I understand that sometimes accidents are just that, accidents. If it was a car that the truck cut off there would have not been a loss of life and two young children would still have their father. Mike was on a bike in a bike lane and was killed because of an illegal act by the driver, the penalty should be higher because of the outcome.

But in the end, nothing changes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,223 Posts
Yes turning left in front of him was illegal, but so is most of everything else that causes a crash. Bike lanes are really nothing more than paint. We all know that. Being without care for 30 minutes is what I read, but it didn't say why. IF this is a situation of someone not trying to get help when they knew someone was injured, then that certainly is different. The way I read that is that it took 30 minutes for care to get to him. And 30 minutes in many places is very common if not a quick response. The fact that he had children should not enter in the decision at all.

I know what you feel. I have a nephew growing up with a step father and not his father. His father was a motorcycle cop. On the way to work one morning a car pulled out in front of the car he was following. He had left enough room to stop before hitting the car in front of him. The truck behind him couldn't and hit him. Pronounce dead at the hospital. Pulling out front of a car is illegal, but its human. Almost everyone that drives has done it for one reason or another. Most of the time we can look out for each other. So is riding too close to the car in front of you, but again for really bad things to happen its seldom just one thing that causes it. The stars kind of have to line up.

Yet the little boy he left behind is going to be just fine. For you see when kids under go special difficulties, special gifts follow. The sheriff filed no charges in the accident at all. There could have been, and in this case it would have been easy to want to throw the book at them. He realized this was the classic accident, and held no grudge. Considering it was the Sheriff's son that was killed, had this involved alcohol, or anything other than one car didn't see or miss judged the speed of another and another car miss judged the following distance, I have no doubt things would have been different.

Actually I am not sure nothing change bmohan. No we can't bring back the man, but sometimes the legacy he leaves behind changes generations and the world. A part of him still lives in his children, and his friends will be there to help them along the way. Even the worst things in life can work together for good.
 

·
Paved Trail Enthusiast
Joined
·
228 Posts
AM radio host on 9-15-11 was telling his listeners that when bicyclists ride on the roads with cars, bad things usually will happen. He said most riders would rather ride in traffic instead of the bike lanes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
870 Posts
I understand that sometimes accidents are just that, accidents. If it was a car that the truck cut off there would have not been a loss of life and two young children would still have their father. Mike was on a bike in a bike lane and was killed because of an illegal act by the driver, the penalty should be higher because of the outcome.

But in the end, nothing changes.
In situations like this there are no such things as an accident. An accident is something that is 100% unavoidable no matter the variables involved. Regardless what is done to change the outcome it is always the same.

This was a collision between a motorist in his vehicle and a cyclist on his bike.

Some collisions between motorists and cyclists are unintentional, but are still collisions, not accidents. Some collisions are intentional because the motorist has the intention of hitting the cyclist.

What makes a difference between an unintentional collision between a cyclist and a motorist and an accident? You change one variable and it changes the outcome and often the collision is avoided. In this situation had the driver not committed the illegal act he did, he would not have hit the cyclist and a family would not have had to bury a loved one and 2 young children would still have their father with them.

Was this collision intentional or unintentional? No one knows, yet. Everyone else, except the driver, may never know. The drivers illegal act does cast suspicion, in my mind at least, that it may have been intentional, but it is just a theory with no proof to back it up.

Why does law enforcement and insurance companies, et al call collisions accidents, instead of what they really are, unintentional or intentional collisions? I don't honestly know.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
717 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
At least one good thing has came of this so far. In the online discussion following the article an older gentleman admitted that he too would have hit the cyclist as he had no idea that the cyclist would have had the right of way. He now knows and a future accident (collision) may have been avoided.

Photosbymark - I've thought about your post since I read it last Friday, Thank you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
123 Posts
Doesn't matter. Nothing you do will bring the person back. You will not regulate away the human condition and the failures that come with that. Accidents happen. It is a part of life. We all should understand that as a possible outcome as a result of our choice to cycle and be willing to accept that risk. It is a tragic situation all the way around.
Well, yes it does matter. By your own reasoning sending people to prison for murder or rape or robbery would not be justifiable. The purpose of law IS to regulate and control human behavior. Yes, accidents do happen but sometimes accidents are avoidable. Hate to say it Mark, and I'm not trying to argue here just state my opinion, your reasoning gives an excuse to every motorist that runs down, harasses or bullies a bicyclist. IMHO.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top