Is It O.K. to Kill Cyclists?

Jawgap

It seems the answer to that question - in America - is a modestly qualified 'yes'

Opinion piece from the New York Times - btw, it's editorial position is not in favour of mowing down cyclists!

SAN FRANCISCO — EVERYBODY who knows me knows that I love cycling and that I’m also completely freaked out by it. I got into the sport for middle-aged reasons: fat; creaky knees; the delusional vanity of tight shorts. Registering for a triathlon, I took my first ride in decades. Wind in my hair, smile on my face, I decided instantly that I would bike everywhere like all those beautiful hipster kids on fixies. Within minutes, however, I watched an S.U.V. hit another cyclist, and then I got my own front wheel stuck in a streetcar track, sending me to the pavement.

I made it home alive and bought a stationary bike trainer and workout DVDs with the ex-pro Robbie Ventura guiding virtual rides on Wisconsin farm roads, so that I could sweat safely in my California basement. Then I called my buddy Russ, one of 13,500 daily bike commuters in Washington, D.C. Russ swore cycling was harmless but confessed to awakening recently in a Level 4 trauma center, having been hit by a car he could not remember. Still, Russ insisted I could avoid harm by assuming that every driver was “a mouth-breathing drug addict with a murderous hatred for cyclists.”

Cookie_Monster

Russ insisted I could avoid harm by assuming that every driver was “a mouth-breathing drug addict with a murderous hatred for cyclists.”

replace the word cyclist with any other form of transport I'm using at the time, that how I always treat the roads :pac:

yop

He is just a crank, take no heed of that report.

Micilin Muc

yop wrote: »

He is just a crank, take no heed of that report.

A crank, peddling his own views.

rollingscone

Micilin Muc wrote: »

A crank, peddling his own views.

Are you suggesting that this is just spin?

Lumen

http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.ie/2013/11/shafted-again.html

"This op-ed reads like a homophobe defending gay marriage, but saying that homosexuals should "act less faggy" in order to earn the respect of straight people."

Lusk_Doyle

Lumen wrote: »

http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.ie/2013/11/shafted-again.html

"This op-ed reads like a homophobe defending gay marriage, but saying that homosexuals should "act less faggy" in order to earn the respect of straight people."

How did this thread jump from some bloke being petrified of cycling after three isolated incidents, one of which affected him directly and was of his own making, which therefore questions the purpose of the article, and end up on gay marriage?!?

yop

Micilin Muc wrote: »

A crank, peddling his own views.

A crank looking to shaft cyclists

AnotherView

5 cyclists dead in London in 9 days ......

Imagine if that was a gunman or a terrorist ....it would be headline news around the world

Lumen

AnotherView wrote: »

Imagine if that was a gunman or a terrorist ....it would be headline news around the world

Whereas if it happened somewhere else it probably wouldn't even get a mention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_July%E2%80%93December_2013

tomasrojo

Newspaper articles about cyclists in the English-speaking world are depressing similar.

I suppose it's a distraction from inflating property bubbles.

Jawgap

Just looking at a story about the London incidents - they're all cyclist -v- bus / HGV collisions.

Just an observation.

tomasrojo

Still on the subject of New York journalists and cyclists, I like this correction and clarification from a New York magazine (few posts after the bikesnobnyc post linked to above):

The sentence "Few motorists would dare blow through a red light, even if it appeared safe to do so" has been removed from the second paragraph. A 2000 report indicates that drivers in New York City run 1.23 million red lights each day, which is more than a few.

http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.ie/2013/11/my-wednesday-is-your-wednesday.html

Zillah

Jawgap wrote: »

Just looking at a story about the London incidents - they're all cyclist -v- bus / HGV collisions.

Just an observation.

I was going to start a thread about this. I find it very interesting that almost every one of these accidents is with large vehicles, which would imply that it is the driver's lack of visibility that is the main problem. Mental note to be super careful near any big vehicle.

I'd love to hear precise accounts of these accidents; who was at fault; did they indicate; were they in a blind spot? It would be very useful for planning to avoid similar circumstances.

Has anyone cycled in the areas mentioned in the BBC article? Are they especially dodgy?

Stollaire

tomasrojo wrote: »

Still on the subject of New York journalists and cyclists, I like this correction and clarification from a New York magazine (few posts after the bikesnobnyc post linked to above):


http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.ie/2013/11/my-wednesday-is-your-wednesday.html

That's an amazing statistic: 1.23 million red lights broken each day by cars etc!

Have we any stats for red light jumping by vehicles in Irish cities?

Anecdotally it appears to be at least one if not two at every junction, on every sequence, every day from my own observations.

RayCun

Jawgap wrote: »

Just looking at a story about the London incidents - they're all cyclist -v- bus / HGV collisions.

Just an observation.

Are they all on left turns, I wonder?
As well as educating drivers and cyclists about the dangers of collisions, maybe road design needs to be looked at, especially since some of those collisions are happening on 'cycling superhighways'.

eeeee

I think there could be more awareness from cyclists about blind spots in lorries. I grew up around them (my father drove a lorry) so am super careful around them but they really can't see quite a bit around themselves, yet I find after 11 years in Dublin I have become more blasé about their blindspots.

They had a lorry parked in O Connell st a good while ago and were inviting cyclists and pedestrians to sit in it to see for themselves how lucy you can/can't see-I think this is a brilliant idea, and there should be buses and coaches used too.

However I also think it should work both ways, bus/taxi drives could maybe have to do even a little cycling around town to get their licenses, to give them a better understanding of those road users. It'll never happen though!

rollingscone

Of course it's ok to kill cyclists.

They don't even pay an offset tax based on the damage and pollution caused by our vehicles...and we delay vital journeys to the shops b, it must be seconds!

DaithiMC

Stollaire wrote: »

That's an amazing statistic: 1.23 million red lights broken each day by cars etc!

Have we any stats for red light jumping by vehicles in Irish cities?

Anecdotally it appears to be at least one if not two at every junction, on every sequence, every day from my own observations.

That's irrelevant in my opinion, just because cars jump red lights doesn't make it ok for cyclists to. I think this argument of who jumps most red lights is a distraction from solving the issues of mixed road use. Of course its dangerous when a car breaks a red light and causes an accident but that is equally dangerous to other motorists, pedestrians, and cyclists.

From my own observations cycling in to work every day, far, far more cyclists break red lights than cars but the comparison is meaningless.

Stollaire

DaithiMC wrote: »

That's irrelevant in my opinion, just because cars jump red lights doesn't make it ok for cyclists to. I think this argument of who jumps most red lights is a distraction from solving the issues of mixed road use. Of course its dangerous when a car breaks a red light and causes an accident but that is equally dangerous to other motorists, pedestrians, and cyclists.

From my own observations cycling in to work every day, far, far more cyclists break red lights than cars but the comparison is meaningless.

Tóg é go réidh a Dháithí, did I say it was ok for anyone to jump red lights?

DaithiMC

Stollaire wrote: »

Tóg é go réidh a Dháithí, did I say it was ok for anyone to jump red lights?

Not intending to be confrontational at all and no, you didn't say it was ok for anyone to break lights but the mention of it I read as implication - suppose I just am sensitive to cyclists using it as a justification for their treatment of traffic lights as decorations! Apologies if you took offence.... Beidh mé ag cuimhneamh i anseo!

Valentine1

In the US using a bicycle as a mode of transport is seen as the preserve of those who either cannot afford a car or are mentally deficient in their decision not to use a car. In most circumstances you would have to be out of your mind to commute by bike as the roads are so unsuited to it (having been designed to accommodate cars exclusively and drivers so inconsiderate.

Recreational cycling is much more acceptable but only if it is off the Off Road/MTB variety. perhaps this is because these sports are "extreme" or something. If you admit to owning a road bike everyone thinks you are some sort of Lycra fetishist who shouldn't be allowed out in polite society:P.

On the Cyclists and HGV issue I think many cyclists have very poor awareness about how they should and shouldn't interact with these vehicles and buses on the road. I regularly see people go down the inside of buses and trucks in Dublin, often doing that one foot on the path shuffle because there is so little space.

Mint Sauce

RayCun wrote: »

Are they all on left turns, I wonder?
As well as educating drivers and cyclists about the dangers of collisions, maybe road design needs to be looked at, especially since some of those collisions are happening on 'cycling superhighways'.

At least one was on a straight peice of road, that was also shared with a tram route, not sure if the cyclist getting his wheels caught in the tracks was a factor or not. Have not seen any ofthe other pics to be honest.

Seaneh

Valentine1 wrote: »

In the US using a bicycle as a mode of transport is seen as the preserve of those who either cannot afford a car or are mentally deficient in their decision not to use a car. In most circumstances you would have to be out of your mind to commute by bike as the roads are so unsuited to it (having been designed to accommodate cars exclusively and drivers so inconsiderate.

This isn't true of everywhere.

Cycle commuting is extremely common in some cities, Portland Oregon being a great example, where the buses and tram (The MAX) even have a bike holder on the front to encourage more people to bike and use public transport in connection with each other. So even if you live 20km from work you can bike to a bus stop, put your bike on the front of the bus and then cycle from a stop closer to work for the last leg of your commute.

Valentine1

Seaneh wrote: »

This true of everywhere.

Cycle is extremely common in some cities, Portland Oregon being a great example, where the buses and tram (The MAX) even have a bike holder on the front to encourage more people to bike and use public transport in connection with each other. So even if you live 20km from work you can bike to a bus stop, put your bike on the front of the bus and then cycle from a stop closer to work for the last leg of your commute.

It is of course common in some cities but these are very much the exception.

NeedMoreGears

London cycle deaths

2010: 10 deaths, four involving HGVs

2011: 16 deaths, 12 involving HGVs

2012: 14 deaths, five involving HGVs

2013 so far: 13 deaths, eight involving HGVs

Source: TfL


It would appear the coroner in one of these cases has had enough and has issued instructions to TFL re cyclist education

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/coroner-orders-tfl-to-teach-cyclists-about-danger-of-hgvs-8885729.html

Some other initiatives include

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/dft-and-mayor-announce-plans-to-tackle-hgv-safety-and-support-londons-cycling-revolution

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/microsites/freight/hgvs_and_road_safety.aspx

Hopefully some of these will be successful.

tomasrojo

Some restrictions on HGVs might be in order too.

tomasrojo

Valentine1 wrote: »

It is of course common in some cities but these are very much the exception.

I remember reading somewhere that the older parts of LA are quite nice to cycle around. I'm pretty sure the writer was serious.

eeeee

tomasrojo wrote: »

Some restrictions on HGVs might be in order too.

Hmm I don't know if they can be restricted anymore, they are already not allowed in town during peak hours. I do think cyclists are genuinely unaware of just how little you can see out of a lorry in town, bikes literally disappear underneath your filed of vision and out again-it's scary for both parties. Plus there would be nothing delivered!

*memories of being with the father backing into Chadwicks on Thomas Street with a 45ft arctic spring to mind. There's no room to turn an arctic in there. Hairy! *

monument

Valentine1 wrote: »

It is of course common in some cities but these are very much the exception.

Err... Bike racks on buses? They are in most major US cities and many smaller ones.

Valentine1 wrote: »

In most circumstances you would have to be out of your mind to commute by bike as the roads are so unsuited to it (having been designed to accommodate cars exclusively and drivers so inconsiderate.

I've cycled in LA and SF and have to call bs on that one.

And a growing amount of US cities have bike paths and lanes.

dave2pvd

Valentine1 wrote: »

It is of course common in some cities but these are very much the exception.

I don't agree. Even in traditionally non-cycling friendly cities like where I live, the buses have bike racks. Times are changing. Oh, and you can never generalize about the US. It's not even remotely homogenous.

AnotherView

I think the problem is actually the super highways in London

Cyclists are flying along them thinking they are safe, while HGVs and buses are crossing left and don't see the cyclist til its too late

I saw a cyclist knocked down and I think seriously injured on a superhighway some months ago as a bus turned left in front of him......He was going so fast the driver didn't see him come up on his blind spot...

The highways aren't separate at junctions

donkey balls

Here is a link to a video that the RSA produced regarding the visibility a truck driver has ,Calling for truck bans within city/town centers would not work after all how would shops/pubs restaurants get deliveries.
The majority of drivers including myself when I drove on the road ,Do not go out trying to mow down cyclists/pedestrians there are loads of blind spots on trucks,Especially if an artic truck is turning left.
Also a cyclist should never ever go up the inside of any truck or bus that is turning left,Below is a video from the RSA about HGV cyclist interaction about blind spots etc.


http://rsa.ie/RSA/Road-Safety/Education/Road-safety-tips/HGV-drivers-and-cyclists1/

Valentine1

monument wrote: »

Err... Bike racks on buses? They are in most major US cities and many smaller ones.




I've cycled in LA and SF and have to call bs on that one.

And a growing amount of US cities have bike paths and lanes.

If you have ever been out of the major cities you would know how cycle unfriendly other places are. Cycling around the suburbs where most people live would be very very unusual and most people would think you are some kind of lunatic.

monument

donkey balls wrote: »

Here is a link to a video that the RSA produced regarding the visibility a truck driver has ,Calling for truck bans within city/town centers would not work after all how would shops/pubs restaurants get deliveries.

HGVs deliver to larger depots and smaller vehicles do the last mile -- that's how it works in other places.

A large percentage of shops etc don't depend on HGV deliveries to their doors anyway.

Valentine1 wrote: »

If you have ever been out of the major cities you would know how cycle unfriendly other places are. Cycling around the suburbs where most people live would be very very unusual and most people would think you are some kind of lunatic.

Nobody would deny that there are some highly cycling unfriendly places in the US, but your first statement on this was much broader and, in any case, there are cycle friendly cities outside of the major cities and there are cycle friendly suburbs, even if they are not the norm.

donkey balls

By having smaller vehicles deliver to the customer door would mean more vehicles more congestion,Plus not all goods will fit in to smaller vehicles.
I actually work in the transport industry and have yet to see smaller vehicles used by the major distribution centers except in circumstances that an artic truck cannot get to a delivery point.

krissovo

Valentine1 wrote: »

It is of course common in some cities but these are very much the exception.

Sorry dude I have to disagree.

Cycling in the US is becoming huge, many cities have great resources for cyclists. I live half the year in Boulder and Colorado is very cycle friendly, everywhere has well marked out cycle lanes and "trails" that bypass major roads. You can add lots more cities that list, Austin, Minneapolis, Phoenix, Seattle of which I have experienced that have cycle lanes, buses with bike racks and trails bypassing major roads.

Cycling is very much becoming the short commute option as gas prices are rising. America is 1000% more cycle friendly than Ireland.

Zillah

donkey balls wrote: »

By having smaller vehicles deliver to the customer door would mean more vehicles more congestion,Plus not all goods will fit in to smaller vehicles.
I actually work in the transport industry and have yet to see smaller vehicles used by the major distribution centers except in circumstances that an artic truck cannot get to a delivery point.

More congestion but possibly safer.

donkey balls

More congestion possibly plus added transport costs which could mean higher price for goods,As someone who cycles I think an educational video like the one I posted or even getting trucks to schools to educate kids about the dangers of cycling/walking around bus and trucks.

eeeee

Zillah wrote: »

More congestion but possibly safer.

I actually think the onus is on the cyclist to take into account the blind spots and difficulties HGV's have in town. They have every right to be there, just as much as cyclists. Education as Donkey Balls says may be key to this end.

Smaller vehicles are not as economically viable as HGV's are for most goods, you would have to pay 2 drivers to deliver the one product for a start never mind logistics, insurance, diesel, maintenance etc. Prices would have to rise in towns to take this into account, which is not practicable.

Both parties spending time in each other's respective machines would go a long way I think, from school age up. Awareness would solve a lot IMO.

donkey balls

Actually I would go one further a normal size van/light truck can hold about 3/4 pallets,A 45 ft trailer from memory holds 26 pallets so you could be looking at an additional 6/7 small vehicles for one trailer load.
As I said in an earlier post education is the key for both stake holders the video I posted the link for from memory has never been shown on TV,Which is a surprise considering the amount of adverts the RSA play both on radio and TV.

monument

donkey balls wrote: »

By having smaller vehicles deliver to the customer door would mean more vehicles more congestion,Plus not all goods will fit in to smaller vehicles.
I actually work in the transport industry and have yet to see smaller vehicles used by the major distribution centers except in circumstances that an artic truck cannot get to a delivery point.

What goods regularly delivered to an Irish city centre retail unit would not fit in smaller vehicles?

I've actually have lived in a city centre and I've regularly seen large HGVs making trips to supermarkets where the drivers had little or no choice but to mount a kerb to make a turn or do things like park in clearways etc. There's loads of places where HGVs and sometimes smaller trucks are already oversized for their routes.

Loading is a massive mess in Dublin generally.

donkey balls

I know the feeling of getting in and out of tight spots in a truck especially around our cities and towns,While most goods could possibly fit into a smaller vehicle for delivery it is not viable as I explained in the post above.
Just say a company has a distribution center in Dublin and needs to shift 26 pallets to say Limerick that could mean 6/7 smaller vehicles heading down the M7,Or the company could set up a cross dock facility in Limerick were by the goods are off loaded and reloaded on to smaller vehicles,This would have more cost implications for the company regarding extra warehouse rent which means the cost going on to the product.

RayCun

Mandatory side guards on HGVs in the city, with high fines for non-compliance

galwaycyclist

donkey balls wrote: »

By having smaller vehicles deliver to the customer door would mean more vehicles more congestion,Plus not all goods will fit in to smaller vehicles.
I actually work in the transport industry and have yet to see smaller vehicles used by the major distribution centers except in circumstances that an artic truck cannot get to a delivery point.

This is why we need to actively prohibit HGVs from our town and city centres. We need to force the transport providers into more sustainable practices.

We also need to penalise industrial practices that encourage excessive delivery trips such as "just in time" inventory management systems.

Clearly better education of all road users is needed but it does not change the fact that HGVs are wholly unsuitable vehicles to be generally permitted on town or city centre streets.

donkey balls

RayCun wrote: »

Mandatory side guards on HGVs in the city, with high fines for non-compliance

Side under run bars are mandatory on all HGV and trailers except if the trailer is a low loader,These are checked once a year when either a vehicle or trailer has to have a doe test.

galwaycyclist

donkey balls wrote: »

Actually I would go one further a normal size van/light truck can hold about 3/4 pallets,A 45 ft trailer from memory holds 26 pallets so you could be looking at an additional 6/7 small vehicles for one trailer load.

How many HGVs are actually carrying full loads on every trip? Are the type of pallets in general use actually suitable for smaller vehicles or do they impose inefficient use of space in smaller trucks?

Jawgap

gadetra wrote: »

I actually think the onus is on the cyclist to take into account the blind spots and difficulties HGV's have in town. They have every right to be there, just as much as cyclists. Education as Donkey Balls says may be key to this end.

Smaller vehicles are not as economically viable as HGV's are for most goods, you would have to pay 2 drivers to deliver the one product for a start never mind logistics, insurance, diesel, maintenance etc. Prices would have to rise in towns to take this into account, which is not practicable.

Both parties spending time in each other's respective machines would go a long way I think, from school age up. Awareness would solve a lot IMO.

I would have to disagree with this opening part of your otherwise reasonable post.

The onus is on the driver to drive safely. If he has a blindspot his driving should take account of it and he should assume there is something there unless he is absolutely confident that there isn't.

HGVs - as things stand - have a right to be in certain parts of our towns and cities, but the drivers are under an obligation to drive safely, taking account of other road users, road conditions and the route.

Saying that, cyclists who go down the inside of a HGV deserve to be stopped by the Guards - at which point they should be separated from their bikes which the Guard should then throw under the HGV to show them (a) how stupid they've been and (b) that their stupidity has temporarily cost them the right to cycle ......

.....or the Guard could just classify it as dangerous overtaking and give out a Fixed Penalty Notice, when that legislation comes in.

Lumen

Jawgap wrote: »

cyclists who go down the inside of a HGV deserve to be stopped by the Guards - at which point they should be separated from their bikes which the Guard should then throw under the HGV to show them (a) how stupid they've been and (b) that their stupidity has temporarily cost them the right to cycle ......

I pass on the inside of HGVs all the time. It's only dangerous in very limited circumstances.

Jawgap

Lumen wrote: »

I pass on the inside of HGVs all the time. It's only dangerous in very limited circumstances.

Passing a stationery HGV might be fine, but what I was referring to when used the phrase "go down the inside of a HGV" are the people who either undertake a slow moving HGV or who slip down the inside of a stationery one without pulling into an advanced position to ensure the driver can see them.

A disproportionate number of the ones I've witnessed recently have been wearing RSA high viz vests - I'm not sure if they they think that renders them immediately visible to all drivers all the time.

Lumen

Jawgap wrote: »

Passing a stationery HGV might be fine, but what I was referring to when used the phrase "go down the inside of a HGV" are the people who either undertake a slow moving HGV or who slip down the inside of a stationary one without pulling into an advanced position to ensure the driver can see them.

That's what I mean. I pass on the inside of moving HGVs (slow, fast, whatever) regularly. It is only dangerous (for me) when the vehicle is turning, but opportunities for HGVs to turn are limited to junctions.