Quote "There hasn't been an actual accident in over 100 years."


Simple Definition of accident

• 
  : a sudden event (such as a crash) that is not planned or intended and that causes damage or injury
  
• 
  : an event that is not planned or intended : an event that occurs by chance
  

Source: Merriam-Webster's Learner's Dictionary

Off topic from this specific thread......but lets just sue for everything.....no such thing as an accident......

Ehh, I am not sure that is necessarily true. I would say an accident happens only when the driver didn't do anything wrong, yet something bad still happened. If you are going down a highway and your axle snaps, sending you careening off into the median, I would call that an accident. Could you possibly lay some blame on the car manufacturer for a poorly designed axle? Maybe. (Assume for the sake of argument that poor maintenance was not the issue).

A collision caused by someone making an improper lane change, or a rear ending, or a T-bone or driving drunk, etc is different. In those cases the driver himself or herself made a poor decision and caused a collision related to that poor decision. That is NOT an "accident"

Let's give some credit in advance to the police and the prosecutors here. It actually is pretty hard to get a conviction for a serious crime (e.g. manslaughter or murder) arising out of a car crash when most of the witnesses are dead and the rest were hit from behind and did not see anything. The basic facts are that he hit them from behind, which makes him minimally liable since they had the right of way but anything beyond a ticket is going to be because of the professional work done by the cops investigating and documenting the scene and the prosecutors in court. They will nail this guy but it will take some work and, based on press reports, they seem eager to do that work.

The highest "murder" charge in Michigan I think he could be charged with is involuntary manslaughter (aside from, of course, him admitting he meant to kill or hurt these cyclists). And I think STP is right, it's not a slam dunk if he wasn't drunk or high on something. But it's not crazy to go forward with the charges if he was just simply speeding or driving recklessly -- a death "resulting from recklessness" is right in the definition. (http://statelaws.findlaw.com/...anslaughter-law.html)

Supposedly a warrant will be issued today, so we'll find out. Hopefully they do the right thing.

Meanwhile, they had a memorial ride yesterday for the victims: http://woodtv.com/...for-killed-cyclists/

Ill do that sometimes too. Basically strongly assert my position on the road to make sure the car does not think I will ride on the gravel if they want to pass close. Get them plan to execute a proper passing maneuver as if I were a vehicle.

Perhaps the best use of our collective experience, especially within this forum that tends to be a collective of more experienced cyclists in some cases, is to talk about ways to make ourselves safer on the road.


Thank you Tom.

There will be endless speculation on this, until the trial and the verdict. History has shown, that the rulings in these cases, are more times than not disappointing. Maybe this time it will be different. We can only hope.

As to your main point in this post - yes, this is collectively what we must ALL(everyone who rides a bike) do:

- Remain vigilant on the roads.

- Ride to the rules of the roads at all times. Yes, that means stopping at stop signs and lights!!

- Be is visible as we can be.

- Help, contribute time and energy to local cycling advocacy groups in your area. In Ontario/Canada we have - http://www.sharetheroad.ca/

- Use good commonsense when riding at all times. When in doubt, yield the right of way to motor vehicles and/or be more cautious.

- When riding in groups, adhere to proper group riding etiquette and protocol at all times

- Look out for one another.

- Report, through whatever local mechanism you have, drivers who are abusive, or who have clearly broken the law, and/or infringed on your safety in ANY way. In Canada we have this - http://www.roadwatch.ca/...etectCookieSupport=1

That last point may seem like a waist of time, but there are millions of us (cyclists) on the roads. If enough complaints/reports start to pile-up in Police files collectively, maybe they will start to take this more seriously. Keep making the reports and filing the complaints.

A big driver of the behavior of motorists on the roads, is drivers THINK they are completely anonymous - but they are not. Their vehicle and license plate number can link to them quickly and easily. Keep making the reports and filing the complaints.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

If he gets charged with four counts of OWI Causing Serious Injury, a 5-year felony, that's 20 years:


Michigan OWI Causing Serious Injury: In Michigan, you can be charged with drunk driving causing a serious impairment or body function. This is a five year felony with a fine ranging from $1000-$5000, vehicle forfeiture and mandatory vehicle immobilization

Plus five counts of OWI Causing Death, a 15-year, felony, for an additional 75 years:

Michigan OWI Causing Death: Michigan OWI Causing Death is an elevated and more serious offense for drunk driving in Michigan. The penalty for this offense is a maximum of 15 years in jail, a fine between $2,500 and $10,000, vehicle forfeiture, mandatory vehicle immobilization and possible restitution.

(link to the law at legislature.mi.gov)

If he has a prior conviction, those five counts become 20-year felonies and the four counts become 10-year felonies.

In theory, he could be locked away for the rest of his life. If he was drunk, I hope he is.

---

http://mediocremultisport.blogspot.com

Thanks Sasquatch. This whole thing has me rattled. We ride, mostly, on rural mountain roads in SW Pa. Many opportunities for blind hills. I'll get my light taken care of today and not rely on my riding partners' light systems.

Also, the Kalamazoo Gazette's more in-depth piece.

---

http://mediocremultisport.blogspot.com

Ill do that sometimes too. Basically strongly assert my position on the road to make sure the car does not think I will ride on the gravel if they want to pass close. Get them plan to execute a proper passing maneuver as if I were a vehicle.


The behavior of drivers when even momentarily having to slow down slightly behind cyclists is interesting. There is something about this situation and dynamic that seems to infuriate many drivers.

Replace the cyclist with a slow moving farm vehicle, funeral procession, construction equipment, or whatever and the behavioral sane approach for the driver of slowing down, observing what's going on, and then when safe, make a wide and safe pass.

Not so with cyclists - it's like all caution and concern, for anyone's safety, most particularly the cyclists, who are extraordinarily vulnerable, is tossed completely aside by many motorists.

I've tested this myself many times when I am driving and I pull up behind a cyclist, on either a two or four lane road. I slow down, and hold that slower speed until a truly safe opportunity to pass comes up. On average, it's 5 sec. or less that I have to "wait", to make that pass. Note, I have not stopped. I'm still rolling along. The actual real-time delay is less then 5 sec. So for all that, many motorists are willing to severaly risk the safety of the cyclist, other motorists, and even their own safety! It's absolutely absurd!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Quoted in post 3 or 4 is MI's second degree murder charge language. Might apply here. But I am not a MI lawyer so would defer to them. They'll charge the most serious offense they think they can convict on, including lesser offenses

As to the post above yours I think I read somewhere that there was a witness on the phone just prior to the accident and sounds like they saw it as well

The 3 foot law is a joke.


Dave,

We just had a 1M(3ft) pass law passed in Ontario.

I can't say as I have noticed any real difference. When I have had the squeeze put on me and I have the opportunity to interact with the offending motorist - at a stop light. When I have nicely tried to explain the new Law to them, most often I am told the usual "F-Off" or given the finger.

What I am doing as a matter of habit now, to help proactively and to reinforce better behavior is to give a nice wave to the motorists who do, give me a wide berth and who have obviously, considered my safety before they make the pass. I would encourage all of you to do the same.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

I think there is just an ingrained visceral notion in many drivers' heads that cyclists should not be there in the road. Other motor vehicles, even if moving slowly are "normal" annoyances which can upset people but generally don't give permission to go crazy. But cyclists somehow, in drivers' minds, are doing something bad to them and on purpose. More widespread education on cyclists' road rights could actually help a bit with that.

I'd agree with your first comment, to a point, but I disagree with your conclusion.

The common current philosophy that there is no such thing as an accident is predicated on the assumption that everything has a root cause (I agree) and that all root causes should be eliminated (I disagree).
If you keep your vehicle roadworthy, drive only when fit to do so (not intoxicated with alcohol or drugs or too tired/emotional to drive), do your best to maintain awareness of what's happening around you and attempt to drive carefully and safely, you will still make mistakes and one of them may result in an incident. Were you negligent? No. you attempted to minimise the foreseeable risks but driving is not a risk free activity and never will be. Stuff will happen.
Similarly, a company manufacturing a vehicle to best practices in terms of design, manufacture and quality control, will minimise but not eliminate the possibility of a manufacturing fault. Faults will still occur, but they should be extremely infrequent. If an incident occurs it does not demonstrate negligence on the part of the vehicle manufacturer. By all means an investigation should be conducted to identify the root cause and avoid repeat occurrences but that does not mean blame should be assigned. In fact assigning blame in these circumstances is utterly counterproductive.

What is your definition of an accident? Will one of these do?

"an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury"
or
"
an event that happens by chance or that is without apparent or deliberate cause"




An accident is not something that happens without cause. It's something unintentional and unforeseen. IMO the incident that is the topic of this thread was an accident unless the driver intentionally struck the cyclists (in which case I'd consider it murder). It was an accident due to recklessness or negligence and perhaps criminality if the driver was not fit to drive or was driving in an unsafe manner which seems highly likely (the fact I use the word accident does not mean I don't condemn the actions of the driver).


"There hasn't been an actual accident in over 100 years. " - Nonesense based on a reinvention of the word accident as a tool of Health and Safety people.....IMO

This. Can't make all drivers not be a holes, but the more polite riders they see, maybe they start to think we're all not a holes ourselves (and we do exist)

I am not condoning the reckless behavior but do you really not see any difference between the 3 instances you site and cycling? We are an impatient society. That cannot be fixed.

I survived being hit by a pick-up truck in 2014, while touring, and haven't been on the road again. Maybe I'm just more aware of the number of accidents now but there sure seem to be a lot.Cars and bikes just don't work together so unless the road is closed to traffic, or it is off-road, I don't bike anymore.

Ever notice it usually a pick up truck causing these accidents?

Yes, I have noticed that trend.

In my case, I was on a fully-loaded touring bike, the bags were bright green, and I was wearing bright clothing and a helmet, and in a narrow bike lane. I don't use mirrors because I find they don't help, I am actually more at risk if I look in my mirror, as it is easier for me to veer into traffic.

I was hit in Oregon, on highway outside of Bend. The driver of the truck said he moved to the right because there was an oncoming transport truck. He said he didn't see me, despite all the bright colors. There was no evidence of alcohol, or even texting. Not sure how you can miss a cyclist but that is the story.

He was charged with failure to yield to a cyclist. I was touring around the world for a few years and witnessed a lot of things that drivers do. It is the texting that seems to be the big risk, people just aren't paying attention, and it is going to get worse. In countries like Thailand, drinking (or drugs) and driving is the big risk but in North America, my sense is the distraction is the top of the list.

You may want to brush up on your reading skills.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

I give the peace sign rather than a wave, the intent of waves can be misconstrued. I also think we need to be really careful to follow the traffic laws to the best of our abilities. Be the cuclist that is showing cars we aren't all douchebags, then call out the douchebags.

The driver of the truck said he moved to the right because there was an oncoming transport truck. He said he didn't see me, despite all the bright colors. There was no evidence of alcohol, or even texting. Not sure how you can miss a cyclist but that is the story.

Ah yes, yet another "I didn't see them" defense!


When I used to run on country roads,I would run facing traffic on the shoulder as you are advised to do. What I always found interesting and a little scary as I tracked cars coming at me, was how late, many cars would actually see me, and correct with a bit of a swerve to their left. I'm thinking - I'm 6'2", wearing bright neon colours, and running right at you, and you did not see me until less then 30 meters away?

He was charged with failure to yield to a cyclist. I was touring around the world for a few years and witnessed a lot of things that drivers do. It is the texting that seems to be the big risk, people just aren't paying attention, and it is going to get worse. In countries like Thailand, drinking (or drugs) and driving is the big risk but in North America, my sense is the distraction is the top of the list.

The whole mobile phone thing is out of control. We really let the genie out of the bottle with that one, and now it will be VERY hard to get it back in the bottle. Even here in Ontario, where we have pretty severe penalties ($500 and 3 demerit points), I still see many drivers blatantly talking on mobile devices and many more crotch/lap staring either while driving or stopped at lights. The message has not got across to drivers that, ANY use of a mobile device in a car is a serious distraction.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

I'm only making the point, that not every time a bicycle is hit by a car, should we have murder charges. But certainly in this case, the evidence so far is gross negligence from wreckless driving and worse if he was DUI. Some seem the think that any bicycle car collision should immediately be prison time.

Please understand, I'm defending this individual at all. Based on the information given, the profile I've personally put together, is pretty damning. But I just responding to some generalizations that folks make, as though they are perfect drivers or riders that never, ever make mistakes.

---

TrainingBible Coaching
http://www.trainingbible.com

The whole mobile phone thing is out of control. We really let the genie out of the bottle with that one, and now it will be VERY hard to get it back in the bottle. Even here in Ontario, where we have pretty severe penalties ($500 and 3 demerit points), I still see many drivers blatantly talking on mobile devices and many more crotch/lap staring either while driving or stopped at lights. The message has not got across to drivers that, ANY use of a mobile device in a car is a serious distraction.

B.C just increased the penalty for communicating with a hand-held device to $368 for a 1st offense and $888 for a second. Repeat offenders will have a license review. People are so addicted to their phones (God help us if we miss a call !!!) that I don't see it changing at all.

I'm only making the point, that not every time a bicycle is hit by a car, should we have murder charges. But certainly in this case, the evidence so far is gross negligence from wreckless driving and worse if he was DUI. Some seem the think that any bicycle car collision should immediately be prison time.

Please understand, I'm defending this individual at all. Based on the information given, the profile I've personally put together, is pretty damning. But I just responding to some generalizations that folks make, as though they are perfect drivers or riders that never, ever make mistakes.


My sense feeling is that because so many cyclists feel such a blatant disregard, for cyclists safety, from so many motorists, that there is a feeling that, when stuff like this happens cyclists REALLY get their backs up - it's understandable.

In my most recent close call, I was nearly run-over in a round-about, when I had the right of way in a round about and the car coming into the round about did not stop. To avoid contact with the car I had to take evasive action, and bunny hop at speed up onto the middle of the round about. When I caught up to the offending motorist at a stop light 200m down the road, I calmly asked him what he thought he was doing back at the roundabout? He laughed the whole thing off, like it was some big joke. No apology. No acknowledging of responsibility. No respect. It was not funny in the least. Had I NOT done what I did, I could have been seriously injured.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

For the photos on one news site, at least 2 bikes in that group had mirrors.

From the photos, I can imagine what velocity was required to cause that amount of damage and kill 5 of the riders almost instantly. Meaning he probably wasn't slowing or swerving during the first 20 feet or more. The final report will be horrifying I imagine. I anticipate speeds of at least 60mph. Sounds like he may have approached so quickly, in a 35mph zone, that they never even had a chance to react.

---

TrainingBible Coaching
http://www.trainingbible.com

a couple of interesting/disturbing points about Mr. Pickett.

http://heavy.com/...ims-photos-facebook/

In January HE posted this on his Facebook page...hmmm...