Altercation in Rock Creek Park Today. Insight?

[KLizotte]

Just remember everyone that MD, VA and DC are pure contributory negligence states meaning that “the doctrine a victim who is at fault to any degree, including only 1% at fault, may be denied compensation entirely, which is known as pure contributory negligence.”

Irrespective of how you think about the laws, breaking one, even a little bit, will probably mean you can’t seek redress in the courts.

[lordofthemark]

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Water+Street+Southwest,+Washington,+DC&hl=en&ll=38.878502,-77.023313&spn=0.000001,0.0006&sll=38.893596,-77.014576&sspn=0.37089,0.614548&oq=water+stret&t=h&hnear=Water+St+SW,+Washington,+District+of+Columbia+20024&z=21&layer=c&cbll=38.878563,-77.023392&panoid=9uQy_ZM5o7TuNBhm45SkSA&cbp=12,137.43,,0,5.33

See that stop sign? I pass it every time I commute to work. If I’m on the right proceeding down Water to make a box left (which since I will either walk or bike in the crosswalk across Maine, is what I usually do) there is no way a car turning left from 7th onto SE bound Water can hit me. And that’s the only traffic that can interfere with ANYONE bike or motor vehicle going through (but motor vehicles do not proceed as far right.) And there are almost never pedestrians there in the morning, and at 6-8 MPH and with excellent visibility I can easily stop if they should show up. The LAW in all its majesty wants me to stop – and argue about foot down or not foot down, stop means stop, not proceed at 8 MPH, or even slow down to 5 MPH.

Every time I see that stop sign I think of these kinds of discussions.

[mstone]

@KLizotte 83926 wrote:

Just remember everyone that MD, VA and DC are pure contributory negligence states meaning that “the doctrine a victim who is at fault to any degree, including only 1% at fault, may be denied compensation entirely, which is known as pure contributory negligence.”

Irrespective of how you think about the laws, breaking one, even a little bit, will probably mean you can’t seek redress in the courts.

1) Completely different argument than “you’re responsible for how other people perceive all cyclists”
2) good luck not breaking any laws. have you signaled every stop today?
3) Yeah, if you decide to slow instead of stop at a stop sign and then proceed through an empty intersection after looking and get run down by a truck, contributory negligence will bite you. I guess everyone can make their own judgement about whether they can correctly identify an empty intersection. This is still a different argument than “stop for the empty intersection for the sake of appearance”.

[DismalScientist]

I Idaho stop signs even if there isn’t an Idaho law. Of course I Idahoed a stop sign on a freeway offramp in rural Nebraska. There was a car 1/4 mile away. Turns out it was a cop car. I got a warning.:rolleyes:

[baiskeli]

@DismalScientist 83938 wrote:

I Idaho stop signs even if there isn’t an Idaho law. Of course I Idahoed a stop sign on a freeway offramp in rural Nebraska. There was a car 1/4 mile away. Turns out it was a cop car. I got a warning.:rolleyes:

You should have Nebraskaed instead.

[lauraemills]

As far as that location goes, I bike past there a lot and haven’t had any issues.

But I usually go by there when there aren’t that many people around.

I avoid that area on the weekends, too crowded for me.

I never walk my bike over that bridge, but I do yield to joggers and pedestrians coming the other way, and they seem cool with that.

[off2ride]

To sum it all up…..them blokes were just crazy. Ride on!!!

[Author]

Posts