Hey, there! Log in / Register

JP bicyclist dies on California highway

Michael Arthur, 24, crossing the median on I-80.

Neighborhoods: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

The death is a sad and hopefully they'll be able to figure out what why he was trying to cross the median.

While I don't think this is the case, many Interstates out west allow cyclists on the shoulder as it's the only way to get between two distant places. I know it sounds nuts to ride on the interstate but the roads are much wider and with fewer exits so it's not so bad and sanctioned by the authorities.

It dosen't look like the section of I-80 that this person was killed allows cycling.

up
Voting closed 0

I can't say for certain about all highways, but I believe interstate highways are always closed to pedestrians and bikes, nationwide. Anyone who knows this particular highway would be aghast to think that someone tried to actually cross it, even at 4:30 in the morning. It is the main north-south interstate for the East Bay, and is something like 8 or 10 lanes across, always busy and full of traffic. It would be like someone trying to cross the MassPike in Newton or something along those lines.

up
Voting closed 0

in the western states are actually open to bicycle travel. This is generally confined to rural areas where traffic volumes are low and there is no reasonable alternate route for the cyclists.

Although certain sections of Interstate in California are open to bicycles, I can't imagine CalTrans permitting cyclists to use this section of I-80. Then again, we're talking about CalTrans, so anything is possible.

up
Voting closed 0

It sounds like he wasn't riding along the road -- he was trying to cross to the median. Which is never allowed.

up
Voting closed 0

Many interstates are open to cyclists - but most interstates have wide breakdown lanes that aren't open to traffic, too.

There are entire states that are crossed only by interstates out west. Wyoming and Montana come to mind. That's because there are only limited options for getting through mountain ranges (see also Lewis and Clark, which many out here never heard of before IMAX at the Museum of Science).

up
Voting closed 0

I lived there for five years. One place where I remember seeing "BICYCLES MUST EXIT HERE" signs was on I-280 somewhere in or near Palo Alto. US 101 (not an Interstate, but definitely a freeway) allows bicycling on one section between Ventura and Santa Barbara.

up
Voting closed 0

Usually bicycles have to take every exit ramp, so they're not crossing the stream of exiting traffic.

This isn't a big deal on rural interstates, where the exits are very far apart, and the ramps form a simple diamond that don't take you far out of your way.

up
Voting closed 0

There's really in the end no excuses for bikes to be on highways like this. The other day I saw a bunch of fools walking across Storrow, despite there being walking bridges over it. Some people are simply fools.

What are the usual outcomes for the person who hits someone like this? Hopefully they don't get something like manslaughter, because in the end there's only so much you can do going 65+ surrounded by other cars also going 65+

up
Voting closed 0

So, I cannot comment on CA law, but in Massachusetts, motor vehicle homicide by negligent operation is a misdemeanor. Most of the traffic related deaths do not in fact get prosecuted because most involve contributory negligence on behalf of the victim (running into traffic, being intoxicated, etc.) and because of the idea of "the accident."

The problem with most fatal collision is that the deceased does not get to weigh in on what happened. If you strike and kill a bicyclist it's your word versus what a crash reconstruction team can determine, and they cannot actually determine whether or not the person ran out, or you just didn't see the person, etc.

If you think about it, this means that most drivers can get away with killing jaywalkers or cyclists who do not follow traffic laws and not be charged with a crime. So, if you step off the curb hoping traffic will stop, you are essentially giving a driver the chance to kill you for free. The best part is that when most pedestrians or bicyclists die and the driver isn't charged, the family of the deceased gets the news that "yeah, your daughter is dead because she walked into traffic." It's astoundingly sad to have these conversations, mostly because you can see the disbelief and disappointment on the faces of the family members. "Yeah, sorry that you paid for Harvard, but your 24 year old died because he couldn't wait 15 seconds for the light to change."

So yeah, usually: nothing happens to drivers that kill others, save for the loss of license pending the outcome of the investigation. I'm honestly surprised more drivers aren't just hitting cyclists and pedestrians because basically, they can.

up
Voting closed 0

Pedestrian or cyclist gets hit and killed because of their negligent actions (be they from inattention, impatience, or utter stupidity), and you want to charge the driver that struck them with a crime.

"yeah, your daughter is dead because she walked into traffic."

"Yeah, sorry that you paid for Harvard, but your 24 year old died because he couldn't wait 15 seconds for the light to change."

Are you really that self-centered that you believe for a moment that either of these cases would be the driver's fault and would justify a manslaugter charge against them.

up
Voting closed 0

Anon brings up some poor examples to advocate for stricter laws when autos are involved in incidents with cyclists or pedestrians. Personal responsibility plays a huge roll in your safety, especially when the other element involved is a car driving towards you. So stopping at reds, waiting for walk signals, signalling, understanding right of way and following the rules of the road are good ways to ensure your own safety.

But there is also personal responsibility on the drivers end, in which they too must also follow the rules of road, like stopping at reds, not doing "rolling" stops through the crosswalk, paying attention to cyclists in their blind spot, using mirrors and signaling when turning. Accidents will happen but there is a burden of fault that will fall on one of the parties involved. And it seems that this particular incidents mentioned in the post was the result of someone crossing where they shouldn't have been crossing, so one would think that the driver won't be facing any charges.

But there is something to be said about laws with some teeth that protect a cyclists/pedestrians safety BEFORE an accident, rather than merely increasing the penalty afterwards — and then only if the driver is charged with careless driving.

up
Voting closed 0

Perhaps I was not clear, sorry. I am not advocating for any new laws to increase responsibility for drivers at all (though I do wish some of laws would actually be enforced), but I was pointing out that the current state of laws generally give drivers the advantage in fatal collisions, as well as respond to the other commenter's question about what happened. I am advocating more caution for pedestrians and cyclists.

I think walking into traffic is stupid and my point was that by doing so you may be giving someone the power to kill you and nothing will happen. As a bicyclist why run the red light knowing that if a driver hits you, you will likely be hurt (as opposed to the driver) and that charges won't issue, there's no civil suit, and you're hoping the driver's insurance company isn't looking for you to pay for the damages. Just wait the freaking 4 minutes for the light to change.

I don't think people actually think through the consequences of their actions. Not only will they potential die or become injured, but their family will be left with the idea that this person died for nothing. Nothing heroic or noble or even memorial worthy. There's no statewide or citywide funds, there's no windfall, it's just a completely avoidable, pointless death (again, I am speaking of the incidents in which the deceased was negligent and the driver is likely not to be charged).

up
Voting closed 0

this:

But there is something to be said about laws with some teeth that protect a cyclists/pedestrians safety BEFORE an accident, rather than merely increasing the penalty afterwards — and then only if the driver is charged with careless driving.

doesn't happen until it's too late, if one gets the drift. '

That being said, the law has to work in such a way that's objective and fair for both cyclists and drivers, both of who need to face up to their responsibilities on the road. Drivers have to watch out for cyclists, and not hit them, and then make up lame excuses. As for cyclists, a bicycle is a vehicle too, and therefore also subject to the rules of the road, as well.

up
Voting closed 0

Will mankind ever learn their lesson? Will the people of California ever finally accept the automobile as a reasonable mode of transportation?

(Just picking up the slack until Markk can weigh in.)

up
Voting closed 0

I can't even imagine what prompted him to cross other than being chased by someone? Even if he made it to the median, there's no shoulder to take a pause and continue across the other flow of traffic in the opposite direction. University Ave passes over the highway nearby, so why would he not just do that. There has to be more to this.

EDIT: You *cannot* bike on University Ave over the highway. But there is a bicycle/pedestrian bridge to the south and another roadway much further north.

up
Voting closed 0

Warning, sarcasm ahead!

What prompted him? He was from Boston, so he crossed the street wherever he felt like it! Fuck that pedestrian bridge, I ain't walkin' down there!

Seriously, yeah, too soon, but having spent far too much time avoiding jaywalkers who couldn't walk half-a-block to the nearest crosswalk, that's my first thought.

up
Voting closed 0

Was anyone else impressed by the layout of the Patch site? I've never seen such a decent site for a Patch around here.

up
Voting closed 0

Sad. Is there any other explanation? Its a traumatic thing for the driver or train engineer when someone does this. Anybody know the victim?

Note, the bike collision produced the usual traffic back-up and an additional accident where a SUV hit a stopped vehicle.
http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/crime-law/bicyclist-...

up
Voting closed 0

This is the area:
http://goo.gl/maps/yFPyb

He probably figured he could cross that early in the morning and didn't realize there was a bike path bridge on the other site of the interchange.

up
Voting closed 0

The street crossing I-80 AT the interchange itself would have been sufficent for the cyclist to use.

up
Voting closed 0

Bike are banned from the University Ave overpass. Here's streetview of the sign: http://goo.gl/maps/yDM1w

up
Voting closed 0