Tough and Lucky Cyclist

[Neal]

Hello All,

This cyclist is tough ...  and lucky ...

https://www.facebook.com/Gregorybgoodman/videos/10212159811003882/

Cheers,

Neal

+1 mph Faster

[Neal]

http://wkrn.com/2017/07/08/cyclist-hit-by-car-in-williamson-county/

[Bruce Kulik]

For what it's worth, Neal's post was the first I heard about the crash. I was glad to see his follow up post that the perpetrator had been arrested. The dean's excuse that he didn't see him is bullshit. After all it's clear that he moved over for at least one of the cyclists.

I agree with Serge that Neal should provide more context and description of relevance to the list. Most of his posts are antagonistic rather than enlightening.

[MaggieO]

The NBC nightly news reported on this tonight.  Unbelievably, they stated that the cyclist was lawfully operating and did not ascribe any fault to the cyclist!  Small victory!

Maggie

[Serge Issakov]

My guess: thank social media. 

This story broke on Facebook. The original thread was replete with debate about the cyclist's  positioning with the usual expected anti-cyclist ignorance but also many informed comments citing applicable TN law, the placement of BMUFL and sharrows along  this route and specific verbiage from the park authority stating cyclists' right to use of the full lane.  I imagine a reporter picked up on the verifiable claims, found a cop who confirmed and that was all included in the original story. 

While Facebook has echo chambers like this list dominated by people who get it preaching to the choir, there are also general cycling groups where the safety and comfort benefits of full lane use are presented and seem to be gaining acceptance.  

If you're not active on Facebook you're missing being part of an incredible revolution that could really benefit from the contribution of most on this list.  

Serge

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 9:19 PM MaggieO <iris...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

The NBC nightly news reported on this tonight.  Unbelievably, they stated that the cyclist was lawfully operating and did not ascribe any fault to the cyclist!  Small victory!

Maggie

--
--
To post: bicycle...@googlegroups.com
Only rule: no personal commentary (please comment about content, not people)
 
To unsubscribe: bicycledrivin...@googlegroups.com
 
Group website: http://groups.google.com/group/bicycledriving
Discussion archives: http://groups.google.com/group/bicycledriving/topics?hl=en
Glossary: http://groups.google.com/group/bicycledriving/web/glossary
Links: http://groups.google.com/group/bicycledriving/web/links

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BicycleDriving" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bicycledrivin...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Serge Issakov]

Here is one of the posts I made:

BOTTOM LINE: Regardless of where the cyclist in TN was positioned in the lane, passing motorists had to use at least some of the oncoming lane to pass.  

Even if the 2 foot wide cyclist was only one foot from the road edge a small 7 foot wide car (including mirrors) passing the cyclist with three feet of clearance would be several feet across the center stripe.  If a motorist can safely use some of the oncoming lane he or she can easily use all of it.  

Further, if a cyclist is riding at the edge it can look deceptive to approaching motorists.  They might easily think there is sufficient space to pass safely fully within the lane.  Can you blame them? After all the edge cyclist is practically inviting them to share the lane, isn't he?  Then only as they get closer do they realize they must cross the line after all.  Usually it's okay but if there happens to be oncoming  traffic then they might be forced to choose between risking slamming on the brakes, risking a head-on collision or risking sideswiping the cyclist.  Guess which risk they're most likely to take?

Even if this psycho targeted this particular cyclist specifically to punish him for his "rude" positioning that just make this a tragic anomaly. There are cases where seat belts are a safety hindrance, like when a car flips into a ditch full of water and the motorist can't get out because of the seatbelt. Anomalies like this should not govern what safe practices are.  You should wear a seatbelt because the possibility that it will hinder your safety is dwarfed by the possibility that it will enhance it.  Similarly, a bicyclist should use a conspicuous lane position because the possibility that it will hinder his or her safety is dwarfed by the possibility that it will enhance it.

So why does it matter to so many here that THE VICTIM was riding conspicuously positioned in the lane exactly as the law and good safety practices say he should? 

Please explain.

[MaggieO]

I'm a member of the Cyclists are Drivers Facebook group but I only look at posts when I get an email alerting me to a post from a member of the group.  I'm almost ashamed to admit I have a great deal of trouble using Facebook but after all I'm a civil engineer, not an electrical engineer.  I probably would not be able to find the thread without help.  I usually don't invest a lot of time in using social media that entails a big learning curve.  I'm  not afraid to tackle difficult things, but only if I see payback.

Maggie

---

From: Serge Issakov <serge....@gmail.com>
To: Bruce Kulik <bruce...@verizon.net>; MaggieO <iris...@sbcglobal.net>; "bicycle...@googlegroups.com" <bicycle...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 9:41 PM
Subject: Re: [BicycleDriving] Re: Tough and Lucky Cyclist