Maybe he passed out, stomped on the accelerator and swerved into the cyclists while out of it, woke up to find himself running over the cyclists and hitting the pole, tried to flee to avoid taking his medicine (whether that includes being beaten to death by an angry mob or going to jail for many many years is still up for debate), got caught, but would not give up, and got shot for his troubles. Possibilities are endless.
-
For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
Police shoot man who mowed down bicyclists
- Thread starter tch
- Start date
Rudi Riet
AKA songfta AKA randomduck - a USSS coach, as well
SkiTalk Tester
Contributor
SkiTalk Supporter
Quite true, and I won't jump to conclusions. That said, the guy's police record isn't exactly one of a law abiding Joe Public.
It never will. Hate/evil will always be around no matter what we do.
Still a lot of mystery about the event. I hadn't seen any updates for a while and while searching, sadly found that one of the injured cyclists has died.
https://www.velonews.com/news/road/...ver-during-arizonas-bike-the-bluff-race-dies/
https://www.velonews.com/news/road/...ver-during-arizonas-bike-the-bluff-race-dies/
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Posts
- 873
I have a friend who is an avid bicyclist in Tucson. Some years ago there was a man who had deliberately run into several cyclists in separate incidents. This man ran into my friend who managed to get a partial license plate number leading to an arrest the same day.
When arrested the man had his teenage son in the truck and was allegedly training him to run down cyclists.
What is wrong with some people!
When arrested the man had his teenage son in the truck and was allegedly training him to run down cyclists.
What is wrong with some people!
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2015
- Posts
- 1,195
A major part of the problem, the media refuses to acknowledge that riding a bicycle is a form of transportation. Take a look at this headline and guess what happened based only on the headline (this has nothing to do with the AZ 'accident')-
https://www.si.com/nfl/jets/news/ne...greg-knapp-passes-away-after-bicycle-accident
If a child was struck by a car chasing a soccer ball into a street do you think the headline would be "Child passes away after soccer accident." ??? Honest question. How people hear about these events shapes their opinion. It needs to change.
https://www.si.com/nfl/jets/news/ne...greg-knapp-passes-away-after-bicycle-accident
If a child was struck by a car chasing a soccer ball into a street do you think the headline would be "Child passes away after soccer accident." ??? Honest question. How people hear about these events shapes their opinion. It needs to change.
there has definitely been a shift. I know just growing up in rural WI, if someone hit a roaming dog people tried to find out who hit their dog to pay for burial or medical. FF to today, they try and find the owner of the dog to make them pay for damages to the car. Was always taught that nobody else is responsible for anything but me when i'm behind the wheel of a vehicle. It's not perfect, but I don't rely on stop signs to stop people to avoid an accident. I don't rely on people in slow lanes to not cut into my fast lane to keep me safe. I don't think deer, dogs, bikes, kids, balls, blowing garbage cans etc need to stay off my roads because I don't expect them there. I do actually expect them there so I don't stare at my phone thinking I have a clear road ahead like everyone else seems to. But attitudes towards driving and the responsibility that comes along with it sure has changed.
Well said Mike. Another thing that drives me crazy is when they always state whether or not the person was wearing a helmet. Someone gets cut in half by a cement truck crushing their pelvis and the last note in the story is they were wearing a helmet. If they were wearing a helmet people conclude that nothing else could be done. If they weren't then it was their fault. And it had zero effect on the outcome. There is a portion of the population that is too dumb or self-interested to figure that out. Just perpetuates the idea that people riding bikes have it coming.
Rudi Riet
AKA songfta AKA randomduck - a USSS coach, as well
SkiTalk Tester
Contributor
SkiTalk Supporter
As a person who is very deeply involved in the advocacy and planning sphere for bicycles and micromobility it's paramount that proper language be used.
It's a crash, not an accident. The only time "accident" should be used is if the rider crashed alone and unavoidably. Most crashes are preventable and are the result of poor decision making.
And it's not a car/truck/bus that crashed into the victim, but a person/man/woman who crashed their vehicle into the victim. Until self-driving cars are the norm it's still a person operating their car.
And forget the strawman arguments - e.g. "I didn't see them" or "they were wearing dark clothing" or "no helmet." In the end the blame is in the driver, fellow person on a bike, etc. Trying to deflect blame is a classic defense mechanism but isn't really valid.
There is an optics issue that's tough to avoid in some cases: that of loading bikes onto a rack, driving to trails or far away roads, and riding from there. When a bike is loaded onto a motor vehicle it enters the realm of "toys" to far too many people, rather than that of a tool or a legitimate vehicle for transportation. It's a really tough cultural battle to wage, and one that will take a lot of diligence to win. Building safer infrastructure for bicycles and micromobility is key to this: making using a bike to commute and run errands (i.e. the things people currently do with a car) more normal will help blunt the argument that bicycles are just expensive toys in the eyes and minds of others.
This is a key reason why I try to do more of my longer distance rides leaving from the urban core of the District of Columbia, showing that my bike is a valid form of transportation and recreation. I'll run errands to the home center, to the grocery store, and even to the warehouse club on my bicycle. Other than my ski coaching job (which is a long drive from DC, sadly) my commutes are almost always done on bicycle. And I try to influence my friends and neighbors to do the same - and many have started doing so when and where they can.
The anger shown by some drivers toward people who deign it OK to go from place to place in something other than a car/truck/SUV/van is reprehensible. It's based completely in an inability (or unwillingness) to understand that roads are for people to get from place to place, regardless of the method of motion. And given the culture (especially here in the U.S.) has given motor cars high societal value and has made any other way to get places more fringe and less socially acceptable it's tough to overcome.
It's a crash, not an accident. The only time "accident" should be used is if the rider crashed alone and unavoidably. Most crashes are preventable and are the result of poor decision making.
And it's not a car/truck/bus that crashed into the victim, but a person/man/woman who crashed their vehicle into the victim. Until self-driving cars are the norm it's still a person operating their car.
And forget the strawman arguments - e.g. "I didn't see them" or "they were wearing dark clothing" or "no helmet." In the end the blame is in the driver, fellow person on a bike, etc. Trying to deflect blame is a classic defense mechanism but isn't really valid.
There is an optics issue that's tough to avoid in some cases: that of loading bikes onto a rack, driving to trails or far away roads, and riding from there. When a bike is loaded onto a motor vehicle it enters the realm of "toys" to far too many people, rather than that of a tool or a legitimate vehicle for transportation. It's a really tough cultural battle to wage, and one that will take a lot of diligence to win. Building safer infrastructure for bicycles and micromobility is key to this: making using a bike to commute and run errands (i.e. the things people currently do with a car) more normal will help blunt the argument that bicycles are just expensive toys in the eyes and minds of others.
This is a key reason why I try to do more of my longer distance rides leaving from the urban core of the District of Columbia, showing that my bike is a valid form of transportation and recreation. I'll run errands to the home center, to the grocery store, and even to the warehouse club on my bicycle. Other than my ski coaching job (which is a long drive from DC, sadly) my commutes are almost always done on bicycle. And I try to influence my friends and neighbors to do the same - and many have started doing so when and where they can.
The anger shown by some drivers toward people who deign it OK to go from place to place in something other than a car/truck/SUV/van is reprehensible. It's based completely in an inability (or unwillingness) to understand that roads are for people to get from place to place, regardless of the method of motion. And given the culture (especially here in the U.S.) has given motor cars high societal value and has made any other way to get places more fringe and less socially acceptable it's tough to overcome.
Last edited:
I think the very existence of "no fault" vehicle insurance is working against us here.
Mind you, if you hit a large dog with a 1969 Ford, Chrysler, Chevy, Pontiac or any other US car, there would be no damage to the car, maybe just a stain on the bumper.
Also notice there are no details of the actual event. Improper left turn? Running red light? Dodged a pothole? Driver drifted onto the shoulder? Driver not allowing sufficient space to pass? What ? Inquiring minds want to know?
It's not just the insurance. We have become a no fault society.
Thread Starter
TS
A data point: I got hit last November by a guy in a pickup truck. I was riding well onto the shoulder (witness interviews confirmed), broad daylight, on a flat, straight section of road. Luckily no really bad long-term damages other than a separated AC shoulder joint, but I spent three days in the hospital as they monitored and treated internal bleeding from hematomas and dealt with my road rash. BIke/helmet/clothing damaged or trashed.
Driver had had 6 accidents/crashes in last 10 years and several citations for moving violations (verified by DMV). FIeld sobriety test at my crash was negative. He was charged and went to criminal court. I wrote a victim's statement stressing the need to keep people safe from someone who was so obviously an incompetent or uncaring driver.
I just got the notice of resolution last week: 60 day loss of license and $150 fine. Period.
So now he's out there driving and I'm wondering who will meet him again.
Driver had had 6 accidents/crashes in last 10 years and several citations for moving violations (verified by DMV). FIeld sobriety test at my crash was negative. He was charged and went to criminal court. I wrote a victim's statement stressing the need to keep people safe from someone who was so obviously an incompetent or uncaring driver.
I just got the notice of resolution last week: 60 day loss of license and $150 fine. Period.
So now he's out there driving and I'm wondering who will meet him again.
Recognizing the US is different..I often wonder if someone would continue to be allowed to possess firearms if they'd winged 6 people by "accident"....
Andy Mink
Everyone loves spring skiing but not in January
Moderator
SkiTalk Tester
SkiTalk Supporter
People like that probably don't have insurance.
Sponsor
Members online
- Chip
- mmascolino
- BeiJiHu
- COSkier87
- mdf
- butleri
- ELDoane
- Cheizz
- xiskiguy
- Jersey Skier
- BLiP
- Marker
- LouieAMOPE
- istin
- aveski
- MOMENTinTime
- jngsnk
- MissySki
- zircon
- Crank
- AllGoodDays
- Matt Merritt
- nnowak
- jwilli
- Wade
- Jeronimo
- SkiMcP
- hespeler
- Bruno Schull
- GregK
- blackke17
- Kite Pilot
- Bad Bob
- graham418
- jdwalk
- salvatore
- dbostedo
- jetwolverine
- Andy Mink
- KevinF
- LBK454
- dan ross
- Philpug
- Larry
- eric100
- Markblockjazz
- Dadskier
- skibum4ever
- mikes781
- smv