Hey, there! Log in / Register
Bicyclist dies in collision with 18-wheeler in Cambridge
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
mislabeled photo?
The photo says "Truck was making a left onto Vassar St", but it's pretty clear it was making a right from Mass Ave, traveling towards Boston, onto Vassar Street, traveling towards the river.
This is odd, I can't imagine what that particular truck was doing making a right onto Vassar, given that trucks (legitimately; I know it does happen) travel on Memorial Drive, and there are very few (if any?) buildings that would require product from whatever that truck was hauling.
I look forward to hearing more.
opposite corner?
According to wickedlocal, the truck was coming from Boston, making a right toward Main St.
wicked local link
Here's the Wicked Local article on this:
http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/features/x1980202208/Pedestrian-dies-after-being-hit-by-truck-in-Cambridge
wicked what?
the wicked local headline still says "pedestrian", even though the text says cyclist.
I'll be looking for the full police report. The police did include the incident in the daily log, although I couldn't read the details. @*#%! Javascript.
Cambridge truck route
This is a City of Cambridge truck route. See this map. http://www.cambridgema.gov/CityOfCambridge_Content... or this description: http://www2.cambridgema.gov/traffic/trucks.cfm. My condolences to his family and friends.
crossing the double-yellow line is still illegal
If your truck can't stay within the lines and negotiate turns, then I guess your truck is TOO BIG FOR THE ROADS YOU'RE TRYING TO DRIVE IT ON.
This isn't the first cyclist to be killed by an 18 wheeler in Cambridge. There's just added irony that this time it was an oil company driver that killed a cyclist.
By the way, the company is Leone and Sons Trucking, in Tewksbury. Let's find out who uses them and boycott them.
For what? Following the
For what? Following the routes dictated by the city of Cambridge for trucks to drive on?
The driver of the truck may well be at fault for this accident, but the truck wasn't breaking the law by driving on that road.wh
Breaking the law
The driver of the truck wouldn't have been breaking the law if he contained his driving to the right-hand side of the road.
The truck cab came to rest on top of the bicycle squarely in the middle of the opposing lane. That's clearly breaking the law.
The truck driver should face manslaughter charges.
Good luck enforcing it
Trucks have to swing wide all the time to make a turn - they simply don't have any choice. Sure, they need to do it in a safe manner, and we really don't know exactly what happened. I don't know how you can simply say "manslaughter" without knowing any details.
Man, this is awful. Sympathies to the cyclist's family.
No choice?
If there is a road on which a truck has to violate the law and place others in bodily harm in order to drive, that is a road on which the truck does not belong. Choosing not to endanger people is a good choice. Choosing to break the law and take the chance you'll kill somebody thereby is a bad choice. This trucker took the bad choice here. He had another one. He is wholly to blame for the death of an innocent man through his negligence and bad choice.
What more details do you need? The truck is on the wrong side of the road. It is parked on top of the bicycle. The rider is dead. It really doesn't matter what the guy on that bike was doing when the driver killed him. In the course of the commission of a traffic offense, the driver killed a man. I don't believe he intended to do so, which is why I don't call it murder. But it is manslaughter as clear as day.
That the killer is not in custody is unreasonable. If he had killed the victim in any other fashion - by shooting a gun into the air, by setting off explosives, by swinging a sword around in public, by setting a trip wire at neck level across his back yard, by punching someone at a bar - he would be in custody and under indictment. The legal loophole for manslaughter by motor vehicle will probably enable him to walk free legally, but morally he will always be guilty.
Yes, no choice
The reality of the situation is that a truck has to do what he has to do to navigate thru the city, including making wide turns. To deny that reality is foolish, and expecting any cop to cite a truck driver for doing so is especially foolish. Never happen. You can live in your fantasyland where rules are rules and there are no exceptions, but that's not the real world. I'm curious how you felt about Occupy Boston camping out on Dewey Sq. I mean, that's illegal, right?
Ever drive a truck? I drove one in a prior life, and can say that a wide turn into the opposing lane is an every day occurance, and I was mostly in the burbs. Of course, you do it in a safe manner.
MBTA buses also have to make wide right turns on narrow streets
Not at this particular intersection, but at others where they have to temporarily swing across the centerline. The 94 and 96, turning right from the Davis Square busway onto College Ave. The 83, turning right from Beacon onto Park. The 85, turning right from Summer onto Central. These are all in Somerville.
I'm sure there are plenty more such examples in areas of greater Boston that I'm less familiar with.
Here's another thing, anon:
Many large trucks have to make wide right turns because of the size of their trucks, and have to go on certain streets and roads in order to make certain deliveries.
My thoughts are with the friends and loved ones of the cyclist who died, and his death was unfortunate.
I don't know how it happened, and it sounds rather confusing and the truck driver may or may not have been at fault for the cyclist's death, but I do know that studies have proven that in the event of fatalities resulting from collisions between cyclists and automobile drivers, the cyclist (I'm sorry to say) has almost always been at fault.
As a bicycllst myself, I know that there are many cyclists who ride perfectly legally, and use safe behavior on the roads and streets, but I've also seen many of them who ride on the wrong side of the road, run red lights with impunity, and go the wrong way down one-way streets, and also weave in and out of traffic. Many of them do also go too fast, which is not good either. Such tactics on the part of the cyclists (and there are plenty of lousy automobile drivers out there who'd just as soon run cyclists over as look at them, as I also know from experience), however, put cyclists at great risk, because a bicyclist, too, is subject to the rules of the road and puts him or herself at great risk by not obeying them.
Having said all of the above, I believe that there are plenty of cyclists, as well as automobile drivers who either don't understand, or are willfully ignorant of the laws of the road, and with more understanding on the part of both automobile drivers and cyclists, more lives would be saved.
I also agree that the rules of the road aren't enforced enough here in the Bay State, which is part of why such accidents like the young guy's death occurred. However, it's also important to exercise extra caution, especially while riding at night, and to dress in light-colored clothing, or wear a bright-colored reflective vest so that one can be seen at night, and to have lights on their bicycle. A flashing red light on the bike helps also.
I'm a bit more conservative here, so, if I'm bicycling in the city during rush hour, and I see that drivers are getting really nervous and upset, I will pull over, stop, and wait for a break in the traffic and then resume riding. Better safe than sorry, imo, and, if there's lots of traffic, I make the left turn sort of like a pedestrian, but that's all just me.
perpetuating the myth cyclists are responsible for most deaths
Stop apologizing for others, fueling cyclist self-hatred, and agreeing with the myth that if only the entire cycling population kept its noses clean as white virgin snow, the injuries and deaths would stop because that's the cause of injuries.
IT IS NOT TRUE. MOST INJURIES AND DEATHS HAPPEN TO LAW ABIDING, LEGALLY OPERATING CYCLISTS.
Toronto study which found drivers 90% responsible: http://www.freakonomics.com/2009/08/28/who-causes-...
Want to take a big fucking guess what the top causes of cyclist deaths were?
-Driver running a stop sign or traffic light HEY HOW THE FUCK ABOUT THAT HUH?
-Driver turning into a cyclist’s path
-Driver or passenger opening a door on a biker
Here's a nice challenge to the 90's NYPD claims that "three quarters" of cyclist deaths were the fault of the cyclist:
http://www.rightofway.org/research/cyclists.pdf
Funny how a lot of those deaths involved unlicensed or drunk drivers, which ruled out a majority of cyclist-fault deaths alone.
Analysis of almost 30 cyclist deaths in Southern CA:
https://bikinginla.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/the-sa...
"Despite common accusations against cyclists, none died as a result of running stop signs or red lights."
But hey Menino, hey Honored Czarina Bike Princess Nicole the Third....keep on telling Boston Police to write up cyclists for running red lights, keep telling the press that we'd stop being injured and killed if only we started following the law.
Oh Jesus, calm down. Why are
Oh Jesus, calm down. Why are you so vociferous about bicycle riding anyway? It's just a way to get around. It's not a LIFESTYLE. Ugh. Rabid people like you cause all the problems in the world. You really do. You polarize things that have no business being polarized.
It's hard to tell what was
It's hard to tell what was going on there, but it looks like the truck, which has to make a wide right turn, ended up in the opposite lane of traffic and collided with an oncoming bicyclist? Tragic.
It was making a right. I
It was making a right. I drove past it last night. There were 6 state troopers and the street was taped off. It was taking a right off Mass Ave.
the amount of victim-blaming is staggering
The cyclist must not have been following traffic laws (ignoring the picture of the tractor-trailer over the double-yellow line, the wrong way relative to a lane arrow).
The cyclist couldn't stop in time because it was raining.
The cyclist lost control of their bike.
The cyclist must not have had lights.
The cyclist must have been dressed in all black.
Hey, here's a newsflash: a cyclist should be able to bike down the road without being dressed like a goddamn psychedelic, blinking, reflective, day-glo traffic cone, without getting run over by a fucking semi-truck going the wrong way down a street.
Also, to all the traffic-law-high-ground folks who come out of the woodwork complaining about cyclists who run red lights and whatnot- why no outrage for the truck going over the double-yellow line? Try this on for size: if your truck is too big for city streets, it's too big for city streets!
defensive much?
There's no anti-cyclist/pro-truck commentary in this thread on universalhub.
Without having any idea about
Without having any idea about the circumstances of this particular awful accident, I can talk about my drive home from MIT this evening, which took me down Vassar Street through this intersection. I almost hit two separate bicyclists, and if there had been an accident, it would not have been my fault.
Unlike the truck in the accident, I was in my car driving on Vassar, heading away from Kendall towards Mass Ave. and on towards Mem. Drive. As I entered the Mass. Ave. intersection on green, a bicyclist travelling west on Mass. Ave. ran his red light on Mass. Ave. and scooted right in front of my moving car. I braked and avoided an accident. Then, as I entered the intersection, a second bicyclist on the sidewalk across the street to my right suddenly did a diagonal to the opposite sidewalk and also cut across my path. This sort of bicycle mayhem is par for the course in Cambridge, and especially this intersection.
Perhaps in this accident, the truck was at fault. But regardless, there is something terribly wrong with the riding habits of Boston-area bicyclists and the strange culture of entitlement that grips them. When is the last time you saw a cyclist truly stop for a red light (as opposed to sort of waiting for the traffic to clear and then scooting through it), or - god forbid - a pedestrian in a crosswalk?
FUCK. YOU.
I don't care if you see a couple dozen cyclists run red lights while flipping you the finger and screaming obscenities.
It has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DEATH OF ****THIS**** CYCLIST. It doesn't explain it, doesn't justify it, doesn't excuse it, doesn't lessen it.
When is the last time you saw a cyclist truly stop for a red light (as opposed to sort of waiting for the traffic to clear and then scooting through it), or - god forbid - a pedestrian in a crosswalk?
Every single fucking day, every single fucking red light, every single fucking pedestrian I see, because it's ME doing it. No matter that in several states it's perfectly legal to do what you describe. No matter how hard it's raining, no matter how late I am, no matter how cold I am, no matter how long I have to wait for the fucking signal because it doesn't detect my bike, or the crosswalk signal for the bike path has a 2 minute long delay but the magnetic pickup for the sidestreet has a delay of barely 10 seconds.
I do it despite getting a green light in my direction, starting to enter the intersection, and nearly getting clipped by some dumb asshole looking down at her smartphone texting, while flying through the light that changed several seconds prior.
I do it despite having an expensive, bright headlightm, reflective sidewall tires, reflective stripes on my (bright primary-color) jacket, gloves, helmet, and shoes - being told by a driver who nearly hits me head-on that "I didn't see you, you should wear something more visible."
I do it despite drivers who zoom past me and then slam on their brakes and make a right turn nearly putting me into the side of their car.
I do it despite drivers who illegally try to pass a stopped car, cutting into the bike lane and nearly sending me over the handlebars or pinching me between their car and a parked car.
I do it despite pedaling through an intersection and having a cab drive come flying straight at me trying to cut over for a left turn...who then screams obscenities at me.
I do it despite crashing trying to avoid someone who pulled out of a side street without looking, cutting me off.
I do it despite having been struck by someone illegally going straight from a left-turn only lane.
I do it despite the drivers who fling open their doors without a second's glance in their mirror, which has put me in the hospital, with no ticket written despite an unambiguous state law making such an action punishable by a $100 fine.
I do it despite the fact that half of you in cars probably want me to run the red light so you won't get held up behind me when the light changes.
I do it despite the Longwood shuttle drivers, one of whom struck and killed a cyclist recently, who will look in their mirror, see you, pull out anyway, and force you left into oncoming traffic - then scream at you to "get out of the fucking road."
I do it despite the MBTA drivers, who despite their supposed training, will play "leapfrog" with you repeatedly zooming past and cutting you off.
I do it despite people screaming "faggot!" out the window of their car when I dare to put on some spandex on a long ride so I don't end up with infected sores in my groin.
I do it despite people honking at me to "let me know they're there", or to move over - despite the road being wide enough for them to pass me without them even having to cross the line.
I do it despite the people that pass me so closely I could reach a hand out and touch their car; in one case my handlebars clipped by a passenger-side mirror, which nearly sent me head-first into a jersey barrier, had I not somehow managed to keep myself upright and regain control of the bike.
I do it despite riding behind a car and seeing the driver look in their rear view mirror, smile, and slam on their brakes despite noting in front of them for hundreds of feet.
I do it despite the pedestrians who think it's cute to step right out into the crosswalk in my path no matter how close I am to them, because my bike uses magical fairy-dust brake pads that can bend the laws of physics - and then smugly and cutely say to their friend, "wow, one of them actually stopped."
I do it despite crashing and injuring my hand while trying to avoid a dumb teenager who ran out into the road after his jaywalking parents, barely 30 feet from a crosswalk.
I do it despite being run off a bike path by a "traffic enforcement" cruiser while coming home from Boston's premier bike event, "Hub On Wheels" - and getting screamed at by the entitled cop behind the wheel because I didn't get out of his way fast enough.
I do it despite Boston and Cambridge governments thinking that if ONLY we'd stop running red lights and if ONLY we'd wear our helmets, we'd be A-OK and not getting run over by MBTA busses, hit by cars while riding nowhere near intersections, and run over by eighteen wheeler trucks that illegally crossed over the double yellow line.
I do it despite the fact that no matter how much negligence a driver displays in operating a two ton piece of metal, police and the DA barely bother to investigate and never file charges against drivers; hey...accidents happen.
Despite that long list of drivers being careless, negligent, and illegally operating their vehicles (how do you like MY anecdotal experiences?), why do I still take the high road? Because BIGOTED ASSHOLES LIKE YOU use "cyclists run red lights" anecdotes to tell yourselves, and anyone who will listen, that somehow the fact that you saw someone on a bike run a red light is related to, explains, excuses, lessens, or is in ANY WAY RELEVANT to, a 23 year old man being struck head-on by a tractor-trailer that was in the oncoming lane.
I do it despite knowing that if I'm ever seriously injured or killed riding my bike in Boston, BIGOTED ASSHOLES LIKE YOU will post victim-blaming, marginalizing bullshit like this, while Nicole Freeman and Mayor Menino will wag their fingers and say "tsk tsk, wear your helmet, follow the traffic laws" and the press interview people who talk about what a menace 'those cyclists' are.
Language?
A humble suggestion - dropping the F-Bomb isn't always the best way to win people to your point.
I understand that you've been injured, but the post to which you responded was offered up honestly and speaks to a commonly brought up point that some cyclists ride in a manner that is erratic and unpredictable which causes anxiety in drivers. This anxiety is based on a fear of actually hitting a cyclist.
The real value of a forum such as U-Hub is that readers can learn from each other. This of course requires a willingness to listen to the experiences of others.
Stay safe out there!
Did you even read his post?
He's trying to!
I think the F-bomb was appropriate. Say hi to Lois and Stewie for me.
STOP BLAMING VICTIMS
I understand that you've been injured, but the post to which you responded was offered up honestly and speaks to a commonly brought up point that some cyclists ride in a manner that is erratic and unpredictable which causes anxiety in drivers. This anxiety is based on a fear of actually hitting a cyclist.
The other day a woman was raped in my neighborhood, but you know, I see so many short skirts these days and that neighborhood is dangerous, she should have known better than to walk there. There was a black guy shot last week 6 blocks from where I live, but I see so many black druggies and muggers... Remember that kid that was shot in a park last summer? Was he wearing a bulletproof vest? No? Why, that's irresponsible.
What? What's that? Horribly sexist, bigoted, thoughtless, offensive comments that also blame the victim, you say? But...I offered up "honestly"...why are you so angry?
Yet somehow all you feel perfectly justified if not insightful or proud to say bullshit like "Well, that's a dangerous intersection, they shouldn't have been trying to bike it" or "They knew biking in Boston is dangerous, it's their risk", or "That guy got flattened by a truck, but I see so many bikers breaking the traffic laws", or "That guy was crushed by a bus, but he wasn't wearing a helmet!" or "That cyclist was struck by a driver, was he wearing day-glo reflective clothing? Did he have lights?"
And while you won't give the cyclist the slightest benefit of the doubt, you're happy to engage every braincell to come to the rescue of the driver. Their vehicle is just so big, that's why they had to illegally enter the other lane. It was rainy, they must not have seen the biker. Swamp gas refracted off a weather balloon caused glare on the windshield. And, the all-time favorite, most popular excuse, used by a driver in Texas who ran down two parents, orphaning their daughter: "changing the radio". You don't like that Britney Spears song, and I die.
By the way, my favorite comment in these threads is always the jackass who says "I see so many bikers without lights and in dark clothing, they need to be visible!" Well, if they're invisible, how did you see them? Oh, thank you, I'm here all week.
I and my fellow cyclists, who are classified as "vulnerable road users" in an increasing number of states and all of Europe, should feel guilty or responsible for the anxiety we cause drivers? STOP BLAMING VICTIMS. How about we talk about the anxiety drivers cause me? Oh, sorry, my psychologist keeps telling me I act "entitled."
My language? I guess I should be a polite little marginalized victim? FUCK OFF; I'm ANGRY and I have REASON, and that's because every goddamn day my life I'm threatened, harassed, and endangered while simply trying to get from point A to point B, and considered "entitled" for wanting to accomplish that journey in peace and safety. We don't consider a woman "entitled" if she wants to walk down the street in form-fitting clothing and high heels without having people make comments, cat call her, or sexually molest her. Yet I'm "entitled" for wanting to get somewhere on my bike without being screamed at, threatened, endangered? For wanting to put on some spandex and not have people scream homophobic slurs out their window?
You paint a picture of the drivers of Boston and Cambridge being so very concerned about the safety of the cyclists around them. I'll paint you a more accurate picture:
A few percent of Boston drivers freak out when they see a bicycle and become a danger to everyone and themselves because they're so nervous. They're the most likely to slooooooooooowly pass you and...OHMYGOD, SQUIRREL!... swerve, and crush you against a parked car.
A chunk of Boston drivers are attentive, reasonably patient, and simply treat cyclists like other road users with no fuss, muss, or drama.
A chunk of Boston drivers want us to (I quote your fellow Bostonians, so blame them for your precious mind being dirtied by language): "get the fuck out of their way", "get the fuck out of the road", "fuck off", "buy a fucking car", etc. We're nothing but a moving speed bump, a hassle, an inconvenience..."selfish" for getting in their way and costing them an extra 5 seconds in their 15 minute drive - an increase of half a percent.
Another chunk of Boston drivers consider driving from point A to B to be a hassle, chore, inconvenience - and thus try to make better use of the time by consuming beverages, eating food, managing their playlist, texting people, yakking on the phone, and applying cosmetics instead of DRIVING THEIR CAR.
Ah,
can you please let me know when and where you ride in the city so I can avoid you? Thank you!
STOP EXPLOITING RAPE VICTIMS
STOP EXPLOITING RAPE VICTIMS to serve your lame bicycle riding point, asshole. You disgust me.
Thank You
+1000 for Beaned
Okay, Sonny.
Thanks for playing. You've made your point, now you can climb up on your little two-wheeler and go home.
And btw, you've also made the original poster's argument, much better than your own.
Patronize This
Heaven forbid one should appear mad in a post about a cyclist being killed by a truck when some one drive by posts about cyclists running red lights.
Oh we cyclists are so fucking entitled acting.
Yes. You are. Seriously, the
Yes. You are.
Seriously, the truck driver seems to be at fault here, but that doesn't change the fact that cyclists tend to be entitled, here and online. There have been people on here arguing that because the bruises they inflict mean you don't have to go to the hospital, it's OK to go whipping down the sidewalk at 50 mph.
How in God's name can you read Beaned little rant up there and not see how entitled it is? You do understand he comes off like he thinks he's this massive oppressed minority because he's run into a few bad drivers?
Cyclists have real challenges, yes, but the problem is that, especially online, they succeed in coming off like selfish and entitled children. I don't buy for a minute that Beaned actually respects the pedestrian, or that any of what he or she is insisting happened to him or her actually has, because of the "BOO HOO I AM SUCH A VICTIM FOR RIDING A BICYCLE!" act. It makes me want to take Beaned's bike, sell it, and give the money to a soup kitchen, not see what I can do to make the roadways safe for everybody.
let's look at the score:
Linear feet Beaned has ridden on a sidewalk: zero. Oh shit, there goes your stereotype.
Pedestrians Beaned has hit: 1. A teenager who ran out from in front of a parked SUV in a busy city center, smack in front of me, while looking straight across the street. I hit my brakes, glanced off him, and crashed, busting up my hand on the pavement, but immediately jumped up and asked him if he was OK. He was stunned but otherwise fine.
Trips Beaned has had to the ER for injuries sustained by being hit by cars: 2
Police reports where Beaned is listed as "uninjured" despite leaving the scene in an ambulance, bleeding and dazed: 2
Citations issued to drivers after hitting Beaned: 1 ($25, "failure to yield to traffic device.")
Congratulations, Mr. Bean.
Congratulations, Mr. Bean. You must be the one law-abiding cyclist in Boston. If I could give you a medal, I would.
Meanwhile, though you won't mind strict traffic law enforcement for cyclists, will you? Clearly it won't crimp your calm, law-abiding style at all.
it won't crimp my style
but it's about as intelligent as dressing kids in high-crime neighborhoods in bulletproof vests, and responding to rape attacks by instituting curfews and dress codes for women....instead of patrols, enforcement, investigation, and prosecution against people committing the crimes.
Actually, no, I take that back - red light enforcement is about as intelligent as responding to rape crimes by ticketing women for littering; not only are you prosecuting the victims, but you're prosecuting them for behavior which has nothing to do with the actual problem. Study after study proves in the majority of injuries and deaths, the cyclist was operating their bicycle legally and the motorist was inattentive or operating their vehicle illegally. Ticketing for running red lights doesn't do anything to solve the problem of right-hooks, left-hooks, doorings, sideswipes, etc.
But yes, absolutely, run the numbers of injured motorists versus injured/killed cyclists, injured/killed cyclists versus injured/killed pedestrians, and assign enforcement priorities based on that. Far as I know there isn't a single case of a pedestrian killed by a cyclist in Boston in the last twenty years.
Here's some real "evidence" for you:
In New York City, four pedestrians were killed in bike-pedestrian accidents from 2001-2005. From 2006-2010, while cycling in the city doubled, three pedestrians were killed in such accidents. Wolfson, H., 2011
Memorandum on Bike Lanes, City of New York, Office of the Mayor, 21 March 2011
http://www.nyc.gov/html/om/pdf/bike_lanes_memo.pdf
(Sidenote: in the same period four pedestrians were killed by bicyclists, rouhgly one thousand pedestrians were killed by cars. That means that motor vehicles were responsible for 99.6% of pedestrian fatalities. FUCKING BIKERS! http://www.transalt.org/files/resources/images/nyc... )
Despite the near doubling of cyclists in London between 2001 and 2005, there has been no increase in the number of pedestrians injured in collisions with cyclists. CTC, 2006
"Livingstone's 'Share the Road' campaign is based on myths not facts, says CTC"
http://www.ctc.org.uk/resources/Press_Archive/Shar...
Yes indeed, enforcing the red
Yes indeed, enforcing the red light rule for bicyclists won't stop auto drivers from breaking their own traffic rules, it won't stop bicyclists getting shot by escaping bank robbers, it won't cure cancer, and it won't end world hunger. And sadly, I have no idea whether it would have helped prevent Tuesday's accident. Maybe not.
But enforcing the red light rule for bicyclists will make navigating the roads more predictable and therefore safer for everyone: pedestrians, drivers and cyclists alike, for the same reason enforcement of this rule for cars already does. This isn't "blaming the victim", it's decreasing the number of victims.
Your "rape victim" analogy is misguided and offensive. It's probably true that forbidding women from walking on certain streets at certain times of day would diminish the number of rapes and other crimes against them. Society doesn't make that kind of rule because it would violate basic human rights that we consider important.
Now what are you telling us? Is the freedom to blitz through a red light on your bicycle one of your basic human rights?
You may be missing the point
I don't believe that anyone in this thread has defended blowing, or even running lights, so your argument is disingenuous.
The thing that gets cyclists upset, especially law abiding cyclists like myself, is a culture which looks for excuses for the truck driver, and simultaneously casts aspersions on a man who we can only hope died instantly instead of dying slowly under the crushing weight by casting him as a member of a lawless class, and implying that he was therefore lawless, and "deserved what he got".
I'm sorry if that anger looks like entitlement to you, but I do feel entitled not to be killed while lawfully waiting for a light, as it looks like this poor man may have been. And when told that I, or anyone else, don't deserve that right because some biker broke a law somewhere, I'm afraid I'll start dropping F bombs in frustration as well.
I've repeatedly called in many threads for more enforcement of all traffic laws on all road users. Won't cramp my style as I obey the laws better than many of the cars I see every day. Let's start with speed enforcement, shall we, as speed is one of the most important factors in the severity of crashes?
I don't believe that anyone
Actually, Beaned repeatedly compared enforcement of the law against running red lights in the name of accident-prevention to violating women's rights in the name of rape-prevention. So yes, actually, your cyclist comrade in this thread was defending his right to run red lights.
Glad to see you disagree.
He's not the only one
I am, as were the other two bikers who queued up with me at every light between Longfellow and Government center this morning.
And yes, I do feel "entitled" to be able to travel safely and legally from point A to point B on the roads my taxes help pay for.
My sympathies to the family and friends of the man who lost his life.
Actual methods of verifying
Actual methods of verifying any of these statements: none.
You could be telling the truth, you could not be. I have no way of proving or disproving any of your statements. I simply choose not to believe you based on your tone and overall attitude.
Shooting the messenger
How ironically droll since he also rides a bike. You should deal with the substance and not with the tone or attitude. You might choose to ignore him because of his tone, attitude, or writing style. You don't have to care about anything any one has to say; there are plenty of people in this world today who are even proud of their willful ignorance.
But choosing not to believe that he's telling the truth is more insulting to the discussion than any language he's chosen to use. There are valid reasons not to respond to what he's said but characterizing him as a liar due to his tone and attitude is hardly valid or fair.
Go Stand at Harvard Square
Count the vehicles that CONTINUE to move through the CROSSWALKS on a RED LIGHT while the WALK SIGNAL is ACTIVE.
What was that about entitled again?
Actually go out, look, and count.
I did this once - car infractions 243, cycle infractions 15 in an eight mile commute with a video camera. Most common: entering an intersection and blocking it. Running lights. Failure to signal. Failure to yield on left turns. Failure to yield turning out of parking lots. Failure to stop for crosswalks.
All of these are dangerous infractions, and many are infractions that motorists deny exist.
Your absolute failure to see, recognize, and acknowledge the simple fact that most drivers don't even understand the laws, let alone follow them is part and parcel of YOUR entitlement and victim complex.
Go on honey. There is a way to verify - get your arse out there and do it. Go out and make a video and then count the driver, pedestrian, and cyclist infractions.
Although that might mean that you might get wet, cold, etc. and we can't have that!
Yes, SwirlyGrrl, cars do bad
Yes, SwirlyGrrl, cars do bad things too. But it's pretty seldom that I see a car doing the most dangerous thing of all: running through a red light as if it wasn't there. Yes, it happens, but rarely. Boston-area bicyclists, on the other hand. hardly do anything else.
Just drove Mass Ave from MIT
Just drove Mass Ave from MIT into Arlington. Light traffic evening, because of the holidays. Number of cars I saw. running a red light: zero. Number of bikes: 19.
Try it at rush hour, honey
Cars running lights, blocking intersections, asserting "left of way", failing to yield leaving spaces and parking lots, etc.
Ride a bike with a helmet cam from Davis Square to Downtown on a bike and you will see PLENTY of vehicular stupidity, the majority of it motorized.
You don't see this sitting on your arse in a car because you can't see shit in a car by comparison - that, and you only see the car in front of you, and, like nearly half of MA residents, you may not even know what is and isn't legal in the first place.
(In the GMAC tests the mean score for MA drivers is typically very near the "passing grade" in states that actually bother to test for road rules - meaning about half of MA drivers would fail a rules test in most states - http://www.gmacinsurance.com/SafeDriving/)
As someone who works in the area
and is quite familiar with that particular very busy intersection, as well as the car and bike traffic on Mass. Ave., I can safely say in the past 15 months or so that I have been working in the area, I have nearly been smacked (numbers? Oh, maybe at least 10 times, I stopped counting. Cars, um, zero smacks) by bike riders who are either running a red light (many as I am proceeding through a cross walk to boot) and/or refuse to use the nice bike lanes and prefer riding fast on the sidewalks. A co-worker of mine has nearly been knocked over by bike riders, in the same general area, proceeding through red lights while she had the right of way - one even had the charm to call her a "fat cow". Nice, huh.
I understand that many car drivers infract but please stop placing bike riders on your holy pedestal, honey, there are rotten eggs in both camps.
I also work in the
Vassar-Mass. Ave neighborhood. I drive through that intersection twice a day (making a very hair raising left turn!) and completely agree with Whyaduck. I haven't been hit by cars but have had several near misses with bikes, both there and at the MIT pedestrian light further down Mass. Ave. Sometimes, there are cars that are in the intersection at a green light trying to turn and they can't clear the intersection til the light changes but they are not speeding or hitting anyone.
Some cyclists, on the other hand, blow right through the red lights (and not the lights that just turned red, lights that have been red) while pedestrians try to make their way across Mass. Ave. or Vassar Street. As a pedestrian, I have had to jump out of the way of cyclists running the lights or making turns without stopping and yielding. What amazes me is that no one yells at them. I am now on a campaign to scream at the cyclists when they run the lights. There are clear bike lanes on both streets and it's time for the scofflaw cyclists to use them and obey the laws.
Car infractions 243, cycle infractions 15
16 car infractions for each bike infraction.
Impressive.
But wait, there are many more than 16 times as many cars on the road as bikes.
A simple calculation tells me that cyclists are therefore bigger scofflaws than drivers. MASS drivers.
That's pretty shitty.
Two wrongs don't make a right and I would say every person using every mode of transport could improve their behavior, but I'm not buying car drivers committing more offenses, proportionally, than cyclists.
Anecdotally, I'd have to say, in totality, I've seen far more bicyclists run red lights than cars. considering the proportions mentioned above that's pretty shocking.
I'm all for more bikes on the road but they need to follow the rules at least as well as drivers.
Your own stats show this isn't the case.
(Sincere sympathies to the accident victim's family. this post is not meant to question or comment on his riding habits, of which I have no knowledge.)
dan, i want you to ride a
dan, i want you to ride a bike in boston for six months. i do. i will give you a bike to accomplish this. i bet you will feel different. we just don't want to be hit and killed, and when we bring up that we get hit a lot, and sworn at, we're made out to be the problem because some cyclists at some times are turdballs, and it gets to the breaking point where people don't even think you're a goddamn human anymore and everything you do is your fault and missives like the one you just wrote come out. i swear to you, if you ride in this city, or any city, for six months, you will understand what beaned is saying. you can have my peugeot.
You're missing the point.
You're missing the point. The Beaneds of this world don't just want to avoid getting "hit and killed". They also want the freedom to run red lights, race through intersections diagonally, ride on the sidewalks when it suits them (and in the streets when that suits them better), and so on and so on.
And it's not that "some cyclists at some times are turdballs". From what I can see, some of the people posting here are indeed turdballs, but most people on bikes are probably fine people who are just riding the way everyone else is riding.
The problem is the culture of bike riding in which they are immersed. EVERYONE is running red lights on their bikes. Literally everyone -- I really don't believe the folks here who claim they stop for red lights. I've never ever seen it happen (except when there's a car visibly bearing down on them -- and sometimes not even then).
Now if your main desire is safety, then advocate for:
(1) licensing of bicycle drivers
(2) license plates for bikes that use the public streets,
(3) serious enforcement of red light rules (with meaningful penalties),
(4) serious enforcement of visibility rules for cyclists
If we achieve these goals, guess what? You'll not only be safer, you'll also get less hostility.
Do we have a deal?
(1) licensing of bicycle
Stupid, doesn't accomplish anything. 99.9% of the cyclists already have a driver's license.
Again stupid, doesn't accomplish anything, and where are you going to put it?
Absolutely, along with any other rules of the road - Absolutely
WTF is this? If it's lighting at night - absolutely.
Licensing
The vast majority of cyclists have driver's licenses.
The problem is that most of those got them in one of the eastern seaboard states where you don't have to know anything to get one - like MA, NY, NJ and DC. I looked at the RMV materials and exam for getting a permit - very few actual questions about road rules, and not a comprehensive exam by any means. A joke, really.
In other words, many cyclists come from the same pool of ignorant and entitled drivers that drive cars in these parts. I find it amusing that cyclists get labeled as such when I have been told by motorists that they don't have to look for or yield to cyclists on turns. Or that they have a right to drive through a crosswalk on a red light because people shouldn't walk in front of their cars. Right.
You can't single out cyclists for enforcement - enforce the road rules on motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians alike. I'm fine with handing out tickets to light runners and people who don't get that black is the new dead when the days get short ... just nail the drivers with broken head lights, the ones who don't get no turn on red signs, the ones who blast across a bike lane without properly yielding, the taxicabs parked in bike lanes, etc. too.
Pedestrian sense of entitlement is the worst.
"Or that they have a right to drive through a crosswalk on a red light because people shouldn't walk in front of their cars. Right."
Cars do have the right to go right on red where not prohibited. And pedestrians should stay out of the crosswalk until they have a walk sign.
The insanity I see pedestrians do on a daily basis boggles my mind.
You would think the mere self-interest would keep them from doing some of the things they do but that isn't the case.
I've been pulled over twice when I went thru a green light and there were pedestrians starting to cross against their light. (Not close enough to come near them.)
I explained to the cops that I didn't feel I could safely stop short at a green light and not get rear-ended by an inattentive driver behind me.
I also noted that I had the light and the peds didn't.
Have a nice day and on my way.
I refuse to enable that behavior. I will, at safe speed, take my light and yell at pedestrians to wait for their light.
Similarly when I am a pedestrian I never cross until it is safe to do so. I can't say I wait for every light but I don't walk when there's traffic.
MA and Boston could really take a lesson from CA and it's cities. Jay-walking and things like blocking the box are strictly enforced. I think this goes much more towards the level of driving knowledge than the licensing.
I've seen Cali drivers do some stupid shit that a scofflaw, but savvy, boston driver would never do.
Perhaps ...
But most pedestrians don't know the laws, assume time stops for them, etc. Most also have a license to drive.
But I was talking about drivers who will plow through a crosswalk where pedestrians have the light in their favor, and honk at the pedestrians. Daily event in Harvard Square.
See the problem? Wholesale ignorance + lack of enforcement = entitled buffoons driving, walking and biking. Enforcing solely on cyclists won't change that equation.
Most pedestrians do not have
Most pedestrians do not have a license to drive. That's why we don't see all of those infant to 14 year olds behind the wheel. Cyclists need to be licensed to drive on the roads just as motor vehicles are licensed. People are more likely to obey traffic laws if they know they can be held accountable. Case closed.
CA is also sprawl hell
I'm pretty sure there's a correlation between enforced jaywalking rules and sprawling suburban hell.
I'd rather live in a place where people walk in the streets, than a place where people are afraid to go outside without a car.
Cities are for people.
Not sure what sprawl has to do with it.
Traffic laws are enforced much more for pedestrians and drivers. Thus people pedestrians don't jaywalk and cars don't block the box.
People aren't afraid to go outside without their cars. The weather's beautiful- people are outside all the time.
I lived near the beach and would park my VW bus on Friday and ride my bike all weekend. Wouldn't drive again until Monday.
And yes, I waited for lights on my bike b/c cops would pull you over for not doing so.
(1) licensing of bicycle
Not stupid, for two reasons. First, you will need to pass a bicycle safety, bicycle laws test before getting your license. Second, the license can be revoked for repeat offenders.
Not stupid, for the same reason it's not stupid for cars. You have a way of identifying the bicycle that committed an infraction, hit you, ran a red light -- same as with cares.
And there are plenty of places to hang the plate. Googling reveals that this is being considered as legislation in several states (where, yes, the bike lobby is fighting it).
Well at least we agree on something.
Your bicycling comrades who have been posting here appear to disagree. But I'm glad you agree.
Some evidence of harm?
Almost every accounting of pedestrian deaths anywhere - not just Boston - shows drivers of cars making mistakes or intentionally killing people as the runaway generator of mayhem.
How many cycling-related deaths of pedestrians this year? How many drivers of cars have run down cyclists and pedestrians in at-fault situations?
I think that should govern our priorities for enforcement.
shows drivers of cars
Really?
Me wonders what percentage of car drive cars intentionally generating mayhem.
Im my thousands of miles of cycling in earlier decades I saw very, very few deliberate acts of malfeasance.
Perhaps as my cyclists where helmet cams we'll have move evidence?
The Point Is
NOTHING MATCHES DRIVERS OF CARS RUNNING DOWN PEOPLE FOR BODY COUNT!
We are talking nearly 10,000 people a year on US roads who are run down while cycling or walking.
THAT is where enforcement priority lies - regarless of intent of the drivers, that is where the numbers indicate a hazard.
We all hear about "almost hit by a cyclist", but cars kill.
NOTHING MATCHES DRIVERS OF
OR CANCER OR BULLETS EITHER! (See, I can use allcaps too.)
That's not the point, SwirlyGrrl. The steps we've been recommending won't make the world perfect, but they will make the world better.
All you need to do is to treat bicyclists the way all other wheeled vehicles entitled to use our roads are treated. No more, no less. There will still be bad bicyclists, just like there are bad drivers. But they will be fewer.
That this is controversial is just weird!
Plates
We got thru this every time. Plates are useless, and the only thing they would accomplish is to employ yet another state gov't employee - just what we need.
Given the small size of a plate that would be on a bike, nobody would be able to see it from more than 10 ft away.
I can hear the cops now - "A bike with plat 12R26 just ran a red light? Sure, we'll drop this murder case and get right on it". Yup, that'll happen.
There's nothing that relates plate to a bike like a VIN number. And, I'm supposed to get a plate for each of my 6 bikes? And I still have no place to put it.
Stupid. Accomplishes nothing.
Plates on bicycles will serve
Plates on bicycles will serve the same purpose they serve on cars and on motorcycles (where they are also small). No, they won't solve every possible problem, yes they are an imperfect solution - but the ability to identify traffic offenders will help reduce the number of offenses, and make it easier to catch those who offend.
If bicycles are allowed to use the streets and (in theory) have to obey the traffic laws, there is no reason for them to be a unique exception to licensing and identification requirements that apply to all other street vehicles.
Write to your state rep
I suggest you write your state rep and make these suggestions. After they get a good laugh out of it, your letter will end up on the Wall of Incredibly Stupid Requests, way up near the top.
Licensing and plates will accomplish nothing.
That's why car and motorcycle
That's why car and motorcycle drivers don't need to be licensed, and why their vehicles don't need plates, I guess. Why didn't I think of that!
As well as...
pedestrians, wheelchairs, Segways, skateboards, baby carriages, ....
Pedestrians, wheelchairs,
Pedestrians, wheelchairs, Segways, skateboards and baby carriages do not legally travel in the roadways alongside cars and motorcycles. Bicycles do.
I used to be a bike commuter...
I used to ride from the burbs (Norwood) to Cambridge, Kendall Square (2-3 times per week), as well as from JP to Boston University (daily). Now this was many years ago (fewer cars and bikes on the road) but I respected the rules of the road (much to the charign of some of my fellow byclists) and generally had very pleasant journeys. I did not ride like a bat out of hell, stopped at red lights and got off my bike when I deemed the situation was dangerous. I used hand signals and made eye contact with drivers when turning. If I saw a person sitting the in driver's seat of a parked car, I slowed down just in case the person would throw the door open. I kept my eyes out for pedestrians in crowded areas where I knew there would be pedestrians crossing (and I never hit one). And I did not have lovely bike lanes to ride in! Yes, there were jerks out there (got wacked on my butt once by someone in a passing car, had a cig butt thrown at me and was hit once by a older driver not paying attention) but I did not condemn all car drivers as awholes and think I was on a mission from God. In other words, I road my bike like a car, obeyed the rules and respected drivers and I got respect back. As a bike rider, you can't change the attitudes of all car drivers but you can control your attitude towards them. So take the higher road and act like you would like them to act (and I speak in generality). Even with the city roads more crowded today and folks more stressed out, a little respect goes a long way.
Yes, we get it...
you are entitled to be angry. sigh.
You seem to hate everyone.
You seem to hate everyone.
there is something terribly
...and the profanity-laced "commentary" by Beaned exemplifies this better than anything else could (not to mention the other commenter who considers it a horrible infringement of his freedom to have to make himself visible at night when on his bike).
And I don't think it's just a few bad apples on bikes that run lights and pedestrian crosswalks. During heavy traffic times, you can look at any busy intersection in Cambridge, and watch as bike after bike after bike sails through the red light. It's the rule, not the exception.
Now let's be clear. Whether the truck or the bicyclist was at fault in this accident, it is a tragedy. But if I understand correctly, no charges have been filed against the truck driver. Let's see what happens next.
Regardless of the details of this accident, the way bicyclists ride in this city is a menace to others and to themselves. I've never seen anything like it anywhere else in the world, and there's no reason why such a dangerous situation should be allowed to continue.
Are some drivers dickheads to
Are some drivers dickheads to me, as a pedestrian?
Absolutely!
Does it mean I think I have the right to be a dickhead back to everybody on the street?
Absolutely not!
Does that mean I am a member of an oppressed minority and/or some form of transport Messiah, as you seem to view yourself?
Absofuckinglutely not!
You are not the victim of systematic oppression, you're just, well, an asshole with an axe to grind. Get over yourself.
And how exactly am I being a dickhead?
Please, detail specifically and exactly how I'm being "a dickhead back to everybody on the street".
I'm not a victim of systematic oppression?
If you beat, stab, or shoot me it's investigated thoroughly, you're arrested, booked, charged, tried. If I'm on a bicycle and your weapon is a car, a cop looks things over, asks YOU what happened, and it's declared an "accident."
I'm repeatedly told that I have no right to be in the road.
Municipal response to cyclist injuries and fatalities, most of which occur while we're doing nothing wrong or illegal, is to write US tickets.
I'm repeatedly threatened and harassed for simply being on the road, minding my own fucking business, just trying to get to work.
You want to talk entitlement? Here you go:
https://scintillator.wordpress.com/2011/11/08/the-...
If you beat, stab, or shoot
Oh really? I'm sure that's EXACTLY what happens in Mattapan and Roxbury.
If it's that bad, please consider using public transportation like the rest of us. Honestly, if your personal experience of cycling in the city is as horrendous as you describe it, then why do it?
I don't have to answer that.
"Honestly, if your personal experience of cycling in the city is as horrendous as you describe it, then why do it?"
I don't have to answer that any more than a woman has to answer the question "If your personal experience of walking home at night is as dangerous as you describe it, then why do it?"
howabout it's cheaper, faster
howabout it's cheaper, faster and more reliable than the T?
No, you don't have to answer that but...
from your posts it sounds like you really are having a difficult time riding in the city. It might be good for your soul to take a break and take the T.
First: let's see some data.
First: let's see some data. And not anecdotes from some cycling advocacy group: actual hard data from government sources.
Second:
Clearly, you don't get it, so I will lay it out for you. "Systematic oppression", "bigotry", "white privilege", and so on, are terms we, as a society, use for people who are born with specific things they cannot change: skin color, gender, sexuality, and so on.
You weren't born on a bicycle. You can stop riding a bicycle any time you feel like it with absolutely zero negative repercussions or real cost to you. Similarly, there are not laws restricting your civil rights because you ride a bicycle. And don't hand me some garbage about road laws; your riding a bicycle has nothing to do with whether you can vote, get married, buy property, open a bank account, and on and on and on.
Do I agree that our road laws need revising? Absolutely. But the use of terms like "driver privilege" don't help and in fact hinder because it tries to play bicyclists as something they're not: people without a choice in how they commute. Especially around here, that's just not the case.
So, I'll say it again: you are not the victim of systematic oppression. And frankly, for insisting you are, you're the asshole.
Driver Privilege
Yes. You can murder someone with a car and get away with it in MA.
Yep.
MA routinely clocks in with some of the the lowest functioning drivers according to the GMAC survery YEAR AFTER YEAR.
MA has some of the most lax enforcement of roadway rules according to the Insurance Institute for Highway safety YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR.
The fact that there are many drivers who would have their licenses yanked and pay thousands per year in insurance in states that give a shit like California and that you would have to take a full road test and a full rules test if you moved to most Canadian provinces is evidence of driver privilege in MA.
murder in MA
You can murder someone with or without a car and get away with it in MA. Sad.
Let's see those stats Swirrly
If you include automated enforcement laws, the numbers can be boosted and examined however you want to look at them.
I'd check out the FARS system from the NHSTA. They give the best raw numbers.
I beg to differ a bit, anon.
One doesn't have to be dressed like a psychedelic traffic cone, but it's important to at least wear something light-colored when bicycling at night so that s/he can be seen by drivers, and s/he definitely should have lights on his or her bicycle.
If the truck was making a right turn onto a street, the truck driver wasn't going the wrong way down a one-way street. Trucks often have to make wide right turns, and cyclists, as well as automobile drivers need to be aware of that.
Unfortunately, while not all cyclists engage in this kind of arrogant, irresponsible behavior, as a bicyclist myself, I've seen many cyclists run red lights, ride on the wrong side of the road, go the wrong way down one-way streets, and weave in and out of traffic. They not only put themselves in grave danger, but they've caused a lot of accidents by such tactics as well.
That's not blaming the victim to point out that there are ways in which a cyclist can protect him or herself and at least minimize the chances of getting permanently maimed or killed while bicycling, especially while bicycling at night, which is even more risky, in its own right.
STOP REPEATING LIES.
"They not only put themselves in grave danger, but they've caused a lot of accidents by such tactics as well."
And because our mayor and Princess Czarina Nicole told me it, it must be true!"
GO GOOGLE "CYCLIST DEATHS FAULTS" and read story after story about how even the most flawed studies have found drivers to be responsible for the majority of cyclist deaths.
Go look at the Australian survey, which instead of relying on faulty post-crash data collection which has been repeatedly found to be anti-cyclist, they gave twelve riders helmet-mounted cameras. http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/drivers-at-f...
"In 88.9% of cases, the cyclist had been travelling in a safe/legal manner prior to the collision/near miss. Most happened at or near a junction (70.3%) and most were caused by sudden lane changes by the motorist, with sideswipe the most frequent cause (40.7%).
The motorist was judged at fault in the majority of events (87%), and 83.3% of drivers didn't realise the danger they had put the cyclist in – or at least didn't show any reaction."
Then there's the Toronto survey which found 90% of the time drivers were responsible.
Even more stats here: http://bicycleuniverse.info/transpo/almanac-safety...
AND HEY HOW ABOUT THIS: UK stats show "HGV" (Heavy Goods Vehicles) are responsible for 43% of cyclist deaths in cities but are only 4% of vehicle trips. http://www.londoncyclist.co.uk/cycling-london/hgv-...
I disagree with you, Beanrat!
I stand by what I've said.
crazy driving / biking in cambridge
Mass Ave in Cambridge is DANGEROUS FOR ALL: all the crazy signs on the roadway, the pedestrian crossings, bike lanes that aren't wide enough for bikes & are located way to close to parked cars...any non local would have a treacherous time getting through it all in one piece (whether walking, driving, biking) which means it ain't good design.
signs?
I take exception to this comment. Roadways are narrow in Cambridge, yes, as this forces cars to slow down. Wider lanes encourage faster traffic speeds.
Ideally there would be more cycle tracks (a la Vassar Street), but the city refuses to plow them. Vassar Street exists as is because MIT plows it.
In terms of pedestrian "craziness", I'm wondering how the original commenter would improve things. And don't say "exclusive crosswalks", because then I'll really know you don't know what you're talking about.
Hey, Beaned!
Fuck fuck fuckity fuck bicycle fuck fuck fuckity. Fuckity asshole cars fuckity fuck fuck pedestrians fuck and fuck.
And in closing, fuck fuck fuck, fuckity fuck.
Ad hominem
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
You know....
it's not usually advised to mix anger and Wikipedia...and oh, yes, fuck.
Beaned on YouTube!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3nMnr8ZirI
dvdoff, you've got the tune all wrong
It's better to the tune of Frosty the Snowman:
Fuckity Fuck Fuck
Fuckity Fuck Fuck
Look at Beaned's head blow...
:)
Fuckity Fuck Fuck (etc.) Yes,
Yes, we've got some scary crazy bike riders ranting here. Yes, there's a real problem with the lax enforcement of traffic laws for cyclists, and the dangerous riding habits of -- well, of virtually all of them, from what I see on the road.
But let's also not forget that this thread got started as a reaction to a bicyclist's death in a traffic accident. Whatever the cause of the accident might turn out to be, this is probably not an appropriate place for goofy humor.
City of Cambridge at Fault
Cambridge made the intersection of Vassar and Mass Ave too tight for trucks to turn like many other intersections. Trucks have to go outside marked lanes in order to make the turn on this sanctioned truck route. Its the same at other intersections where Cambridge has widened sidewalks and created "bump outs", bulb outs, or curb extensions. These things hamper snow removal and only reduce safety, with no record of improving it. There have been other truck turning accidents for corners made to tight. Since the change about 10 years ago, a pedestrian was hit by a truck which had to drive over the corner to make the turn. Cambridge needs to be sued before it stops making roads more dangerous.
angles
the city makes these "tight" turns to stop cars from whizzing around at high rates of speed.
The city does have data to show decreased speed due to traffic calming. See contact details on the city traffic calming web site.
Cambridge is not making roads more dangerous, but safer for all.
Truck routes need slip lanes not choke points
The turn from one truck route (Mass Ave.) to another (Vassar St.) is impossible to make with an 18 wheeler without breaking a traffic law on lane usage. Cambridge designed it that way. Congesting streets may bog down traffic, but has not shown to reduce accidents. Prior to 1997, Central Square had four travel lanes. Now with just two with bike lanes, it leads the state in bicycle accidents and #2 in pedestrian accidents - Boston isn't even on either top ten list!
Cambridge also approved the overly bright signs on the ATM kiosk which blind road users at night - you can see the light in pictures from the scene.
Both narrowing truck routes and approving overly bright lighting is bad engineering, right on the MIT campus. I guess Cal Tech is better.
slip lanes
I'd like to know where your figures come from for pedestrian accidents in Central Square, as they certainly don't agree with mine.
The brightly lit ATM at Mass & Vassar is not a long term resident. My glass ball tells me it will be gone within a few years. You can thank MIT for that, not CalTech.
New article in the Globe on
New article in the Globe on this intersection in light of the accident:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/art...