Path: ...!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: House arrest after killing cyclist in hit and run.
Date: 1 Mar 2025 17:10:13 GMT
Lines: 96
Message-ID: <m2gtblFahsrU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <vpt415$3qdu0$1@dont-email.me>
 <vpt5ma$3qk9t$2@dont-email.me>
 <vpt7tf$3muis$4@dont-email.me>
 <vpthhp$3snkj$1@dont-email.me>
 <vptmng$3tid9$1@dont-email.me>
 <vpttij$3ue1j$2@dont-email.me>
 <m2gdhiF88amU1@mid.individual.net>
 <m326sj93mvhd0n3499vj77lth7h3d3tjmm@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net RHoxTWrnofQ57+dcwCfcfwBu/2whc1oqtoo00oHAArWT7Luffn
Cancel-Lock: sha1:DwKOdXiPkpVe005Pw78jJVbEBvQ= sha1:t3UVPDvxVr6cPOd8roSYlJaKh+M= sha256:sgUbj4mzOhIauA1iLfv4mWq/gMdQsdmme/mf0lEDeXI=
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
Bytes: 5520

John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1 Mar 2025 12:40:18 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:
> 
>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>> On 2/28/2025 8:09 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 2/28/2025 5:40 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/28/2025 3:18 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> In my view, a person who kills someone with their car should never, 
>>>>>>> ever be allowed to drive again.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> First, let's acknowledge that rule will never be implemented in the 
>>>>> U.S. But if it were, driver caution would increase many times over.
>>>>> 
>>>>> After the first few "dumbshit walks in front of car" episodes actually 
>>>>> resulted in "no more driving" and were publicized, motorists might 
>>>>> begin slowing to non-fatal speeds when pedestrians (or bicyclists) are 
>>>>> within walk-in- front range.
>>>>> 
>>>>> As I've said here before, if an overhead crane operator killed someone 
>>>>> in a factory, I think they'd never be allowed to operate the crane 
>>>>> again, no matter what their excuse.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Humans have given up far more than we should have to motordom. Streets 
>>>>> and roads were once the domain of pedestrians, of kids playing, of 
>>>>> people interacting. Turning them entirely over to motorists was a 
>>>>> deliberate campaign goal of the car manufacturers.
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://marker.medium.com/the-invention-of-jaywalking- afd48f994c05
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I (naively?) assumed you meant 'by negligence or malice' and I was happy 
>>>> to agree with that.
>>>> 
>>>> But I can't agree with you here.  Extend that argument and we'll charge 
>>>> train operators with murder when jerkoffs drive around the gate.  Or 
>>>> auto drivers who hit red light running cyclists for that matter.
>>> 
>>> Given the legal system of the United States, I'd assume that if such a 
>>> law were implemented, there would be gaggles of lawyers rushing to any 
>>> accused motorist to defend his right to run down anyone who impeded his 
>>> speed.
>>> 
>>> So think of my position as an initial step in negotiations. Let it apply 
>>> in, say, residential areas, where kids should be able to play in 
>>> streets. Or in pedestrian heavy business districts.
>>> 
>>> But as we all know, the present situation is closest to "I didn't see 
>>> him!" or "He came out of nowhere!" followed by at most a slap on the 
>>> wrist. And any imperfection in the pedestrian's behavior is a coupon for 
>>> no motorist penalty at all.
>>> 
>>> Locally, about six months ago we had a young, well loved, well respected 
>>> music teacher, church organist killed by a car when walking across a 
>>> street. About a week ago, another young man was killed crossing the 
>>> plaza-infested five lane at 6 AM. Details on the first are sketchy to me 
>>> - it sounds like he was in a legal crosswalk - but cops said the latter 
>>> was "not crossing in a designated crosswalk" so the motorist is off 
>>> completely free. And in a different city, a young woman I know well was 
>>> knocked to the ground and injured while crossing in a crosswalk with a 
>>> green "walk" signal.
>>> 
>>> (BTW, Ohio law has a virtual crosswalk at any intersection, whether it's 
>>> marked or not. Still, expecting pedestrians to walk an extra half mile 
>>> to avoid being called a "jaywalker" seems unfair to me.)
>>> 
>>> I'd like a law that makes motorists think "Holy shit, there's a 
>>> pedestrian. I'd better be _really_ careful."
>>> 
>> 
>> Presumed liability with the hierarchy of users, ie the idea that larger
>> vehicles bring the risk associated with travel, which seems fair enough,
>> and thus they have to prove it wasn’t their fault.
>> 
>> Seems to work, though I’ve not looked at it with details..
>> 
>> Roger Merriman
> 
> Here, and I suspect in most countries, heavy trucks are the "safest"
> thing on the highway. Or at least they have the least "accidents". By
> the same token small motorcycles - 100 - 125 cc have the most.
> 

Safest for who? Such vehicles are apparently safe to use, but
disproportionately cause injuries/deaths hence European regulations
particularly around cities, safe they are not!

Or rather due to their size they struggle to be safe particularly mixing
with pedestrians/bikes and so on.

Thailand seems to have horrific road safety issues even compared to
neighbouring countries, so I’d suggest that they certainly need to change
something.

Roger Merriman