So What?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Scott en Aztlán - 29 Jul 2007 06:07 GMT

Someone tell me WTF difference it would make if the pedalcyclist was
riding "in or near a crosswalk." A bicycle is a VEHICLE, not a
pedestrian, and a) shouldn't be in a crosswalk in the first place, and
b) even if it is, cars have no obligation to yield to a pedalcyclist
riding in a crosswalk any more than they have to yield to an
automobile driving in a crosswalk.

Either Cindy Carcamo is a tad bit unclear on the law or I am.

http://www.ocregister.com/news/police-anaheim-orange-1790166-struck-brookhurst

Bicyclist in critical condition after crash
It's unclear whether the 73-year-old cyclist or driver is at fault.
BY CINDY CARCAMO
THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER

ANAHEIM A 73-year-old man is in critical condition after a car struck
him this morning while he bicycled near Brookhurst Street and Orange
Avenue, Anaheim police reported.

At about 7 a.m., a 22-year-old Anaheim man driving a Ford Thunderbird
was making a left-hand turn north onto Brookhurst from Orange when he
struck the man, police said. It's unclear whether the bicyclist was
riding in or near the cross walk. The unidentified man was taken to
UCI Medical Center for serious and possible life-threatening injuries,
officers said.

The investigation is continuing, police said. The driver was not cited
or arrest

Signature

MFFYCam Videos Galore:
http://www.geocities.com/mffycam/
http://slothkills.blip.tv/

Reply to this Message

Brent P - 29 Jul 2007 06:55 GMT

> Someone tell me WTF difference it would make if the pedalcyclist was
> riding "in or near a crosswalk." A bicycle is a VEHICLE, not a
> pedestrian, and a) shouldn't be in a crosswalk in the first place, and
> b) even if it is, cars have no obligation to yield to a pedalcyclist
> riding in a crosswalk any more than they have to yield to an
> automobile driving in a crosswalk.

Well with people making bicycle lanes and expecting bicycle riders to use
cross walks to make left turns....

Ride outs are the most dangerous part of bicycling, not hit from behind.
Attempts to solve a fear of hit from behind by replacing it with ride
outs and other traffic conflicts is just pure idiotcy.

Reply to this Message

necromancer - 29 Jul 2007 12:33 GMT

Scott en Aztlán:

My big question would be who had the right of way in this incident?

> Either Cindy Carcamo is a tad bit unclear on the law or I am.

The article really doesn't give enough information on the accident to
know one way or the other who is to blame. But AFAIK, cyclists are not
supposed to be in the crosswalk/sidewalks (not that that stops me from
using them when it suits me while I am pedalcycling....)

> http://www.ocregister.com/news/police-anaheim-orange-1790166-struck-brookhurst
>
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> The investigation is continuing, police said. The driver was not cited
> or arrest

Signature

necromancer

Deadly Psychopath. And Proud of it, Man!!

Reply to this Message

Scott en Aztlán - 29 Jul 2007 16:48 GMT

necromancer <55_sux@worldofnecromancer_nospam_noway.org> said in
rec.autos.driving:

>> Someone tell me WTF difference it would make if the pedalcyclist was
>> riding "in or near a crosswalk." A bicycle is a VEHICLE, not a
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
>My big question would be who had the right of way in this incident?

Naturally the media doesn't give you enough infomration to make that
determination. Just as they try desperately to avoid the appearance of
assigning blame themselves, they also want to prevent you, the reader,
from being able to assign blame.

>> Either Cindy Carcamo is a tad bit unclear on the law or I am.
>
>The article really doesn't give enough information on the accident to
>know one way or the other who is to blame. But AFAIK, cyclists are not
>supposed to be in the crosswalk/sidewalks

That's what I thought, too, but clearly miss Carcamo believes that
vehicles ought to yield to pedalcyclists in a crosswalk. Now THERE is
someone who needs to be called back in to the DMV for a retest.

>(not that that stops me from
>using them when it suits me while I am pedalcycling....)

That's fine, as long as you DISMOUNT and WALK your bike through.

Signature

MFFYCam Videos Galore:
http://www.geocities.com/mffycam/
http://slothkills.blip.tv/

Reply to this Message

Steven Mayes - 30 Jul 2007 06:40 GMT

> That's fine, as long as you DISMOUNT and WALK your bike through.

Amen to that.

Sad thing is, when I finally got a bike again a little over a year or so
ago, I was one of those sidewalk riders. I wasn't up on my biking rules.
Thankfully the girlfriend corrected me in short order.

Sidewalk/crosswalk riders are practically asking to get nailed.

-Steven

Signature

Your annoyance tastes sweet to me, like candy.

Reply to this Message

The Real Bev - 31 Jul 2007 05:16 GMT

>> That's fine, as long as you DISMOUNT and WALK your bike through.
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> ago, I was one of those sidewalk riders. I wasn't up on my biking rules.
> Thankfully the girlfriend corrected me in short order.

It's a local option. In Pasadena it's legal to ride on the sidewalk in
residential districts, but not commercial. There is generally no conflict.
At certain hairy intersections with a bike lane, the rider is directed up
onto the sidewalk before the intersection and thence into the crosswalk.

> Sidewalk/crosswalk riders are practically asking to get nailed.

Signature

Cheers, Bev
------------------------------------------------------------------
"If you were trying to be offensive, you would have succeeded if I
hadn't realized you have no idea what you are talking about."
-- FernandoP

Reply to this Message