Hey, there! Log in / Register
Woman on bike plows into man in crosswalk
By adamg on Thu, 10/14/2010 - 8:01am
Wicked Local reports on a a bike-vs-pedestrian crash near BC in Newton the other day, adds:
Bicyclists lose a lot of credibility for their deserved gripes about cars not sharing the road when they are running people down in crosswalks.
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Can't argue with that
Yup, you're right. I'm assuming that there is no pedestrian light here.
Cyclists really need to be
Cyclists really need to be held to traffic regulations... not that the average Boston driver in a car would've stopped for a crosswalk either.
I stop for pedestrians
in crosswalks when driving my car and I'm not the only one.
Anybody know?
Because I've nearly plowed into people stepping off the curb into the street when they have a red hand and I have a green light (making sheep noises in their direction is surprisingly effective at getting them to pop up from their grazing) ... but I have also had to present a "goalie shoulder" when crossing with the light on foot to idiot/newbiecyclists who simply don't get "red light" to save their life.
While riding on streets with heavy pedestria traffic
do not ride so fast that you would not be able to stop in time if a child darted out into the street. While legally perhaps it would not be your fault if you hit a small child in a crosswalk even though they did not have the walk signal, you would still feel like crap... right?
Cars move faster than me
Cars are also less maneuverable at speed and have less room to maneuver than a bike. Cyclists also tend to get hurt in collisions with pedestrians, so there is an incentive to make a big display of a near miss with an oblivious jaywalker without a hit.
That said, people with small children shouldn't be teaching them to jaywalk or putting them in peril by jaywalking.
Really that simple.
are your kids perfect?
Children are not miniature adults. Their brains are not fully formed. Accidents happen despite good parenting. I wouldn't ride a bike recklessly just because I'm pissed off at cars and pedestrians. It's really that simple.
Strawchildren
Really. This is a straw child. If kids can't cross a street competently, they shouldn't be allowed out on their own until they rehearse and acquire that skill. Mine weren't. If they got hit by a cyclist while jaywalking, well, consequences are a form of learning.
Said kids will, of course, never be ABLE to learn if they get excused from all consequences because their dingbat parents think they are incapable of responsibility because of their ill-informed misinterpretations of popular science articles.
lighten up
I'm really not sure what you're talking about or how it relates to my comment. You're off on a crazy tangent and you clearly have issues with other peoples' children!
This is the way I choose to conduct myself on city streets -- watch out for others and assume someone may do something stupid -- intentionally or unintentionally so I'll be able to react in a way which is safest for all involved.
Probably not a light
If there was a bike lane involved and it was near BC, then it was probably on Beacon near the reservoir. There are a few crosswalks there but no light controls.
The problem is that bike
The problem is that bike lanes are so close to the parked cars, you frequently can't see bikes coming until you've stepped out between the cars.
As a bicyclist, I usually try to ride close to the left edge of the bike lane, or just take the regular lane, because of doors and pedestrians stepping out between cars. Trying to squeeze a bike lane into the door zone of parked cars just doesn't make much sense.
Location specific
The particular crossing I can think of over at Beacon and House Rd (that goes down to the sports buildings) doesn't have any street parking on Beacon. Also, crosswalks have a requirement for cars to be X feet (can't remember the law) away when parking to avoid this exact problem. That may mean that a car is illegally parked and both the driver and the pedestrian should be more aware in a situation where that occurs (Washington and Euston, near Comm Ave in Brighton, comes to mind from personal experience).
Just like kids shouldn't be running out into the street chasing a ball, other pedestrians shouldn't be accessing the road between parked cars. Use the crosswalk and if it's properly marked, then there shouldn't be any cars in the way of traffic seeing you.
Sight lines
I think the point that anon is making is that you can't always see until you step out a bit - even when using the crosswalk. I usually ride the left edge of a bike lane, and ride toward the lane if not in it for both this reason AND the door zone risks.
When on foot, I also make a big display of "I'm entering this crosswalk NOW!" and be sure that I get driver attention. I don't wander into the street against the light with a cellphone to my ear blocking my vision on the oncoming traffic side while gazing at my shoes. This is how you get to be an old cyclist/pedestrian.
The problem is that bike
But nobody should be stepping out between two parked cars. I'm convinced that 90% of these incidents can be traced to the fact that nobody in Massachusetts understands or cares to act upon basic safety principles.
"Not my job to avoid being hit, that's the car/bike/etc's. fault!"
get rid of crosswalks!
Where were you on my "get rid of crosswalks" semi-thread?
completely agree with
completely agree with this.
What I've noticed is pedestrians are less likely to step out in front of me when there's also cars coming down the road. So, if I'm riding through an area like BU, where my fellow students frequently step out in front of me, and there's no cars around me, I move to the regular lanes. I see pedestrians before they pop off the curb and have had far fewer near collisions.
I do the same, though most of
I do the same, though most of the roads I ride on are fairly busy when I'm on them. The key in my mind is awareness. As a cyclist and as a driver, I spend most of my effort on noticing other users of the road, sidewalk, or path, and thinking about possible interactions and how to avoid them. There are people who say that being doored is inevitable. But I disagree. I can see people getting in cars, I can see cars that have recently parked. I expect doors to open, and I shift my position accordingly. The same principle applies to everything else. I know when a car is in a position to execute a right hook and I slow down so that I'm not in a position to be hit as the car moves into the intersection. If everybody followed these principles, there would be very few "accidents." I use the quotes to indicate that I do not consider it an accident when people are careless.
There are numerous crosswalks
There are numerous crosswalks on that stretch of Beacon by BC. None are governed by lights and if you travel that stretch on any regular basis, you know that you have to look out. And hope that you don't get reared when you stop for a pedestrian. I like the crosswalks further down in Brookline as the have blinking yellow lights to signify that someone is crossing. Otherwise, mid-block crosswalks can be a recipe for getting rear-ended by an inattentive driver.
Yesterday I saw a cyclist nearly plow into a car that was entering Beacon from a driveway. The car was well into its turn before the cyclist arrived, but the cyclist just kept coming.
Something you should read
http://www.mass.gov/rmv/dmanual/driversmanual.pdf
Then see how well you do on this comprehensive test of road rules knowledge.
Your comment indicates that doing so would be constructive.
I disagree with some answers!
1. A pedestrian is crossing your lane but there is no crosswalk. You should:
A. Make sure the pedestrian sees you, but continue driving
B. Stop and let the pedestrian cross the street
C. Carefully drive around the pedestrian
They say B. is correct, and I would say it is if the pedestrian is already in your lane, since you obviously shouldn't hit them or play chicken or leave your lane, but I think A. is more accurate, since they're jaywalking.
8. You may pass on the right of another vehicle when:
A. When traveling on a multi-lane highway carrying two or more lanes of traffic in the same direction
B. The other vehicle is making or about to make a left turn, when a lane is provided to pass on the right
C. Both answers are correct
They say C. is correct, but passing on the right isn't a good idea on a multi-lane highway. Keep right except to pass.
I disagree with some assumptions!
It says that a pedestrian is crossing your lane but there is no crosswalk. It does not say the pedestrian is jaywalking, and I'm not certain why you assume that they are. I can think of plenty of locations where there are street corners (where pedestrians should presumably be crossing) that are not marked with crosswalks. Hell, if I couldn't ever cross the street without using a crosswalk, I wouldn't be able to leave the block that I live on.
Queen of Hearts
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less."
That's a fascinating lead. It implies that bicyclists in general and commonly run down pedestrians. While of course that is true much more of motor vehicle drivers. Yet, if you are anti-cyclist, pretending that we're much more at risk from a cyclist than a driver suits your purpose.
Let's see...
Number of times I've been hit by some jag riding a bike down the sidewalk: 2
Number of times I've been hit by a car anywhere at any time: 0
Huh. Imagine that.
While we're sharing anecdotes
In the 18 years I've lived in the greater Boston area I'm aware of a single pedestrain fatality caused by a bicyle (downtown, ca. 1995). Meanwhile, with my own eyes I've seen pedestrians hit and killed by cars three times.
Does anyone have any actual data? I'm willing to bet my anecdotes are a better reflection of reality than Stewart's.
And the plural of anecdotes
And the plural of anecdotes is...
Anyone?
Anyone?
Bueller?
Neat!
People are still making the Bueller joke in 2010. Way to stay current with your cultural references!
I'll remember to come back in 2017 for your "Whoomp! There It Is" japes. Can't wait!
yes, fascinating anecdote...
care to step back from the navel-gazing a bit and examine any stats about, say, how many people per year are injured or killed by bikes (on or off sidewalks) and how many are injured or killed by cars?
...getting back to the topic at hand
The original post is about a cyclist hitting a pedestrian in a crosswalk. Not sure how it has turned into cyclists being victims of cars AND the pedestrians they endanger!
Baahhh Mooo
Baahhhh mooo baaaahhhh! mmooo!
(translated: When I'm walking I don't have to follow any rules even though the laws apply to me to. You can't make me - everybody just has to watch out for my idiot wanderings and create new laws of physics because shut up!)
Now, since you obviously missed Eoin's awesome statement below, I'll copy it here:
Well, we're not talking about those filthy sidewalk riders
Real bicyclists don't ride on the sidewalk. People who lost their driver's licence after their fourth OUI ride their bikes on the sidewalk. Their shitty, squeaky WalMart hybrid bikes. Good heavens, they wear sneakers of all things.
I hope both are okay
If the pedestrian had the right of way, the police really should have cited the bicyclist. If the pedestrian was crossing against the light, he should have been cited for jaywalking,
Me, I'm recovering from three fractured ribs after a jaywalker on Mass Ave in Cambridge stepped out from between two parked cars and knocked me off my bike. It really, really, really hurts. The jaywalker, who was 77 years old, was unhurt, and was not cited by the police.
I think Andy Metzger, who wrote the Wicked Local report, commits a fallacy by assuming that "bicyclists" are some sort of monolithic group. It's not bikes versus peds (versus cars versus scooters, etc.) It's people who follow the rules of the road versus people who don't.
*Ahem* Say that again?
Amen! All this tit-for-tat arguing misses this crutial point. Just obey the rules, folks, and no one needs to get hurt.
(And I hope you recover quickly!)
Thanks
Thanks, Lecil, for the kind wishes. I wouldn't wish broken ribs upon anyone (except maybe the guy who broke my ribs).
It's also worth noting – as Swirly pointed out up above – that a lot of people don't actually know what the rules of the road are. Cars turning right is a problematic area.
Here's another one: When I return to cycling (hopefully in two weeks or so). I don't plan on using the bike lanes on Mass Ave in Cambridge. I learned the hard way they are not safe. The Cambridge police re-iterated this point to me as I was waiting for the ambulance by telling me that they were not going to issue a citation. "No crime was committed," the officer said.
So instead I'm going to ride down the middle of the lane, as is my right. And when I do so, I'm fully expecting drivers to indignantly assert that I'm the one breaking the law.
In Cambridge, it's not
In Cambridge, it's not unusual for bikes to keep going on red after even the cars have stopped, blasting through a crosswalk where people are crossing on white.
Bicyclists lose a lot of
How about:
"Pedestrians lose a lot of credibility for their deserved gripes against bikes when they are shooting people in the street."
See, look what I did here, I put everyone on foot in one group, as if theyre a community of like-minded individuals.
Entitled Pedestrianness
First off: in NYC, they've kept track of this sort of thing, and the number of pedestrians hit by bicyclists a drop in the bucket compared to the number of pedestrians hit by drivers of motor vehicles.
Second: As Swirrlygirl pointed out, cyclists usually end up "losing" as much or moreso than pedestrians in a ped-on-bike collision, especially if it's just a grazing, and pedestrians are far less likely to be injured in a collision with a bicyclist than a car.
If my handlebar hooks on you, you're going to get a nasty bruise and maybe knocked off your feet, but I'm going face-first into the back of the car next to you at 10-15mph. Or if I manage to swerve but still glance off you, I'm probably going to get redirected out into the road while falling off the bike, and get crushed by a car or bus that was behind me. You get a broken rib, I get a funeral. All because you couldn't slow down for one goddamn second and turn your head before running out into the road, or felt you had a moral right to leap out and mystical forces would subvert the laws of physics and keep you from harm.
I nearly flattened an idiot on Harvard Ave who, walking on the edge of the sidewalk, suddenly turned and walked into the crosswalk without looking for oncoming traffic.
It was a downhill section so I was doing about 17-18mph, and didn't have the distance to stop. She saw me only when I yelled "HEADS!". I swerved around her, and she screamed "YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO STOP!"
Right. I'd actually just completed a complete overhaul of my brakes, but sweetie, I can't violate the laws of physics and instantly stop my bike from 17mph, nor am I going to put us both in the hospital because you couldn't turn your head and LOOK before you jumped out into the road.
I've lost track of how many times I've had to scream "HEADS UP" or "LOOK OUT" to idiots darting into the road. People think that because they don't hear a car or truck, it must be safe. Well, newsflash. And guess what? With electric and hybrid cars getting all the more popular, you can't rely on hearing any more.
ROW
As much as the law says the pedestrian has the right of way, physics as you point out, trumps the laws of man.
I like to think of it as "Right of Weight".
Yep.
I learned firsthand that, at least in my case, the cyclist can get the short end of the stick. I don't know how common this is though: the personal injury lawyer I consulted, who represents lots and lots of cyclists, told me that I was the first one ever to come to him who was injured by a pedestrian, and not the other way around.
Also, I don't think that it's "the pedestrians" – as a class – who are the problem. The problem is people who fail to to exercise reasonable care when using public ways, regardless of their mode of conveyance.
When I'm on my bike I don't at all mind stopping for peds who behaving lawfully. It lets me catch my breath. I'd like to see more pedestrian-friendly crosswalks and other traffic-calming measures on my commute.
The spot where I was knocked off my bike by a jaywalker didn't have a crosswalk for a block or so in either direction. Even though I believe that the idiot who knocked me off my bike was 100 percent at fault, I also think that having more crosswalks gives people less incentive to break the law.
Nope
Nope. Pedestrian has right of way *and* is jaywalking. Thank goodness you don't drive a real vehicle.
For the record
In the face of all of the speculation and going-off-on-tangents, here's some further detail from the reporter of the Wicked Local story: