login
Who Gets the Blame for a Crash (Page 3)
-
No new posts
|
 2013-04-12 3:49 PM in reply to: #4698146 |
Regular  309  Euless, Texas |  Subject: RE: Who Gets the Blame for a CrashTricycle - 2013-04-12 1:41 PM All I know is that after cycling along Philly's Schuykill River Trail on Monday evening, it was a reminder of just how clueless people are on (and off) a MUP - runners who decide they're done and suddenly stop and turn left to cross the street; a couple who get ready to start their ride and just push their bikes right onto the path (without looking left/back); people walking and looking down texting/messing with their smartphones while drifting left; walking/running several abreast, and then look at you like you should move over for them. Unbelievable! I actually felt safer riding home on the road, at rush hour, out of a major city.
x2 i feel much more comfortable with cars whizzing by at 50mph |
| 2013-04-12 3:58 PM in reply to: #4698251 |
Pro 5755   | Subject: RE: Who Gets the Blame for a Crash trinnas - 2013-04-12 3:46 PM BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-04-12 2:59 PM trinnas - 2013-04-12 11:59 AM Maybe, maybe not. But without being able to hear, the odds became 100%. BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-04-12 11:27 AM Ha, I've been in both of these situation, both knocking someone over and being knocked over from behind on the MUP. It's shared blame, 99% on the cyclist and 1% on the runner. You should always be alert, but a bike moves faster and is heaver. car>>bike>>runner>>pedestrian. I learned the hard way about finishing a run and stepping off the path so you don't get hit by a bike who doesn't know you're going to suddenly stop. I've also knocked over a runner who decided he was going to turn around right in front of me. He should have looked, but I should have been going slower and given him more space. eta headphones: I hate them, but if you use them having the music loud enough to prevent hearing what's going on around you is just plain stupid. Two years ago we had a women killed by a falling branch on the trails here. They identified her by her iPhone, music was turn to full volume. And how exactly might that have been prevented if her music wasn't turned up?? I mean you really think even without music she would have heard and identified any sound that would have indicated a branch above her was about to fall?
Had she not been on that path the odds would have been 0% everybody makes choices. The likelyhood that the music was any real factor is negligible at best. I disagree, but we've seriously digressed from the OP's question. As was pointed out, degrading any of your senses will affect reaction time. Suppose it had been a mugger or worse? Situational awareness is important. "The tree branch fell the equivalent of about five stories. The impact of the falling branch appears to have broken Ladany's neck. She also suffered a severe head wound and a compound fracture of the leg. Investigators say she most likely didn't see or hear the limb coming. "She was wearing an iPod and when police arrived to the scene the iPod was still playing music," Chief Small said."
|
| 2013-04-12 3:59 PM in reply to: #4697720 |
Champion 8766  Evergreen, Colorado | Subject: RE: Who Gets the Blame for a Crash TobiasAK89 - 2013-04-12 9:41 AM IMO, it'll always be the person aproaching from behind, who bears the blame. Same rules apply to skiing, driving etc. x2. |
| 2013-04-12 5:25 PM in reply to: #4698362 |
Champion 18680 Lost in the Luminiferous Aether | Subject: RE: Who Gets the Blame for a Crash BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-04-12 4:58 PM trinnas - 2013-04-12 3:46 PM BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-04-12 2:59 PM trinnas - 2013-04-12 11:59 AM Maybe, maybe not. But without being able to hear, the odds became 100%. BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-04-12 11:27 AM Ha, I've been in both of these situation, both knocking someone over and being knocked over from behind on the MUP. It's shared blame, 99% on the cyclist and 1% on the runner. You should always be alert, but a bike moves faster and is heaver. car>>bike>>runner>>pedestrian. I learned the hard way about finishing a run and stepping off the path so you don't get hit by a bike who doesn't know you're going to suddenly stop. I've also knocked over a runner who decided he was going to turn around right in front of me. He should have looked, but I should have been going slower and given him more space. eta headphones: I hate them, but if you use them having the music loud enough to prevent hearing what's going on around you is just plain stupid. Two years ago we had a women killed by a falling branch on the trails here. They identified her by her iPhone, music was turn to full volume. And how exactly might that have been prevented if her music wasn't turned up?? I mean you really think even without music she would have heard and identified any sound that would have indicated a branch above her was about to fall?
Had she not been on that path the odds would have been 0% everybody makes choices. The likelyhood that the music was any real factor is negligible at best. I disagree, but we've seriously digressed from the OP's question. As was pointed out, degrading any of your senses will affect reaction time. Suppose it had been a mugger or worse? Situational awareness is important. "The tree branch fell the equivalent of about five stories. The impact of the falling branch appears to have broken Ladany's neck. She also suffered a severe head wound and a compound fracture of the leg. Investigators say she most likely didn't see or hear the limb coming. "She was wearing an iPod and when police arrived to the scene the iPod was still playing music," Chief Small said."
To the OPs question, you hit a stationary object from behind and yeah it's your fault unless said stationry object is stooped just over the crest of a hill or around a sharp bend. If said stationary object is clearly visible then it is your responsibility to not hit it. Ther are too any variables in a freak accident to point to one and say "if that had not been then the accident would not have occurred". Most people who survive freak accidents do so by shear dumb luck. As for the mugger or worse it is unlikely on a bike you would hear such an attacker approach. That becomes much more relevant when running or walking however most people rely on their sight a great deal more than they do on their hearing particularly when running/walking in a heavily used area. Situational awareness is always important but hyper vigilance in all but a few cases tends to lead to complacency. |
| 2013-04-12 7:40 PM in reply to: #4697708 |
Pro 5892 , New Hampshire | Subject: RE: Who Gets the Blame for a Crash Equal degrees of stupidity. Both lose their riding rights |
| 2013-04-12 8:02 PM in reply to: #4698452 |
| Veteran 206 Canton, GA | Subject: RE: Who Gets the Blame for a Crash trinnas - 2013-04-12 6:25 PM BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-04-12 4:58 PM trinnas - 2013-04-12 3:46 PM BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-04-12 2:59 PM trinnas - 2013-04-12 11:59 AM Maybe, maybe not. But without being able to hear, the odds became 100%. BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-04-12 11:27 AM Ha, I've been in both of these situation, both knocking someone over and being knocked over from behind on the MUP. It's shared blame, 99% on the cyclist and 1% on the runner. You should always be alert, but a bike moves faster and is heaver. car>>bike>>runner>>pedestrian. I learned the hard way about finishing a run and stepping off the path so you don't get hit by a bike who doesn't know you're going to suddenly stop. I've also knocked over a runner who decided he was going to turn around right in front of me. He should have looked, but I should have been going slower and given him more space. eta headphones: I hate them, but if you use them having the music loud enough to prevent hearing what's going on around you is just plain stupid. Two years ago we had a women killed by a falling branch on the trails here. They identified her by her iPhone, music was turn to full volume. And how exactly might that have been prevented if her music wasn't turned up?? I mean you really think even without music she would have heard and identified any sound that would have indicated a branch above her was about to fall?
Had she not been on that path the odds would have been 0% everybody makes choices. The likelyhood that the music was any real factor is negligible at best. I disagree, but we've seriously digressed from the OP's question. As was pointed out, degrading any of your senses will affect reaction time. Suppose it had been a mugger or worse? Situational awareness is important. "The tree branch fell the equivalent of about five stories. The impact of the falling branch appears to have broken Ladany's neck. She also suffered a severe head wound and a compound fracture of the leg. Investigators say she most likely didn't see or hear the limb coming. "She was wearing an iPod and when police arrived to the scene the iPod was still playing music," Chief Small said."
To the OPs question, you hit a stationary object from behind and yeah it's your fault unless said stationry object is stooped just over the crest of a hill or around a sharp bend. If said stationary object is clearly visible then it is your responsibility to not hit it. Ther are too any variables in a freak accident to point to one and say "if that had not been then the accident would not have occurred". Most people who survive freak accidents do so by shear dumb luck. As for the mugger or worse it is unlikely on a bike you would hear such an attacker approach. That becomes much more relevant when running or walking however most people rely on their sight a great deal more than they do on their hearing particularly when running/walking in a heavily used area. Situational awareness is always important but hyper vigilance in all but a few cases tends to lead to complacency. Besides -- if a tree falls in the woods, does it make a sound?!?!?! |
| 2013-04-12 10:24 PM in reply to: #4698577 |
Champion 18680 Lost in the Luminiferous Aether | Subject: RE: Who Gets the Blame for a Crash Gunky - 2013-04-12 9:02 PM trinnas - 2013-04-12 6:25 PM BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-04-12 4:58 PM trinnas - 2013-04-12 3:46 PM BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-04-12 2:59 PM trinnas - 2013-04-12 11:59 AM Maybe, maybe not. But without being able to hear, the odds became 100%. BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-04-12 11:27 AM Ha, I've been in both of these situation, both knocking someone over and being knocked over from behind on the MUP. It's shared blame, 99% on the cyclist and 1% on the runner. You should always be alert, but a bike moves faster and is heaver. car>>bike>>runner>>pedestrian. I learned the hard way about finishing a run and stepping off the path so you don't get hit by a bike who doesn't know you're going to suddenly stop. I've also knocked over a runner who decided he was going to turn around right in front of me. He should have looked, but I should have been going slower and given him more space. eta headphones: I hate them, but if you use them having the music loud enough to prevent hearing what's going on around you is just plain stupid. Two years ago we had a women killed by a falling branch on the trails here. They identified her by her iPhone, music was turn to full volume. And how exactly might that have been prevented if her music wasn't turned up?? I mean you really think even without music she would have heard and identified any sound that would have indicated a branch above her was about to fall?
Had she not been on that path the odds would have been 0% everybody makes choices. The likelyhood that the music was any real factor is negligible at best. I disagree, but we've seriously digressed from the OP's question. As was pointed out, degrading any of your senses will affect reaction time. Suppose it had been a mugger or worse? Situational awareness is important. "The tree branch fell the equivalent of about five stories. The impact of the falling branch appears to have broken Ladany's neck. She also suffered a severe head wound and a compound fracture of the leg. Investigators say she most likely didn't see or hear the limb coming. "She was wearing an iPod and when police arrived to the scene the iPod was still playing music," Chief Small said."
To the OPs question, you hit a stationary object from behind and yeah it's your fault unless said stationry object is stooped just over the crest of a hill or around a sharp bend. If said stationary object is clearly visible then it is your responsibility to not hit it. Ther are too any variables in a freak accident to point to one and say "if that had not been then the accident would not have occurred". Most people who survive freak accidents do so by shear dumb luck. As for the mugger or worse it is unlikely on a bike you would hear such an attacker approach. That becomes much more relevant when running or walking however most people rely on their sight a great deal more than they do on their hearing particularly when running/walking in a heavily used area. Situational awareness is always important but hyper vigilance in all but a few cases tends to lead to complacency. Besides -- if a tree falls in the woods, does it make a sound?!?!?! That depends. Are there bears in the woods? |
| 2013-04-13 3:05 AM in reply to: #4697708 |
Extreme Veteran 929 , Kobenhavns Kommune | Subject: RE: Who Gets the Blame for a Crash AFAIK by default, unless you can prove otherwise, you're responsible for your own front and the rear of whoever is in front of you. This goes when driving and I see no reason why not also when riding. The casual cyclist should watch traffic and be able to avoid fixed obstacles such as a standing person or stopped bike - if he rode into a tree would we blame the tree? Even if the triathlete was riding and suddenly slowed down, the casual cyclist coming from behind remains responsible, if a crash was inevitable, then he did not maintain proper distance or did not ride according to the circumstances. It doesn't change anything that the triathlete listened to music even if that is a bad idea, or did not notice whatever was coming from behind for any other reason - whether riding or stopped. If stopped, sure, he should have pulled over, but failing to do that still does not make him liable. |
| 2013-04-13 5:53 AM in reply to: #4698649 |
Pro 5755 | Subject: RE: Who Gets the Blame for a Crash trinnas - 2013-04-12 11:24 PM Gunky - 2013-04-12 9:02 PM trinnas - 2013-04-12 6:25 PM BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-04-12 4:58 PM trinnas - 2013-04-12 3:46 PM BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-04-12 2:59 PM trinnas - 2013-04-12 11:59 AM Maybe, maybe not. But without being able to hear, the odds became 100%. BrianRunsPhilly - 2013-04-12 11:27 AM Ha, I've been in both of these situation, both knocking someone over and being knocked over from behind on the MUP. It's shared blame, 99% on the cyclist and 1% on the runner. You should always be alert, but a bike moves faster and is heaver. car>>bike>>runner>>pedestrian. I learned the hard way about finishing a run and stepping off the path so you don't get hit by a bike who doesn't know you're going to suddenly stop. I've also knocked over a runner who decided he was going to turn around right in front of me. He should have looked, but I should have been going slower and given him more space. eta headphones: I hate them, but if you use them having the music loud enough to prevent hearing what's going on around you is just plain stupid. Two years ago we had a women killed by a falling branch on the trails here. They identified her by her iPhone, music was turn to full volume. And how exactly might that have been prevented if her music wasn't turned up?? I mean you really think even without music she would have heard and identified any sound that would have indicated a branch above her was about to fall?
Had she not been on that path the odds would have been 0% everybody makes choices. The likelyhood that the music was any real factor is negligible at best. I disagree, but we've seriously digressed from the OP's question. As was pointed out, degrading any of your senses will affect reaction time. Suppose it had been a mugger or worse? Situational awareness is important. "The tree branch fell the equivalent of about five stories. The impact of the falling branch appears to have broken Ladany's neck. She also suffered a severe head wound and a compound fracture of the leg. Investigators say she most likely didn't see or hear the limb coming. "She was wearing an iPod and when police arrived to the scene the iPod was still playing music," Chief Small said."
To the OPs question, you hit a stationary object from behind and yeah it's your fault unless said stationry object is stooped just over the crest of a hill or around a sharp bend. If said stationary object is clearly visible then it is your responsibility to not hit it. Ther are too any variables in a freak accident to point to one and say "if that had not been then the accident would not have occurred". Most people who survive freak accidents do so by shear dumb luck. As for the mugger or worse it is unlikely on a bike you would hear such an attacker approach. That becomes much more relevant when running or walking however most people rely on their sight a great deal more than they do on their hearing particularly when running/walking in a heavily used area. Situational awareness is always important but hyper vigilance in all but a few cases tends to lead to complacency. Besides -- if a tree falls in the woods, does it make a sound?!?!?! That depends. Are there bears in the woods? Bear left! |
| 2013-04-13 7:06 AM in reply to: #4697708 |
Master 2177 | Subject: RE: Who Gets the Blame for a Crash Sounds like both will be learning from an accident. |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK