Woman Hit by Cyclist on Four Mile Run

[Megabeth]

Story at ArlNow: http://www.arlnow.com/2012/06/11/woman-seriously-injured-after-being-hit-by-cyclist/

Topic

[txgoonie]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]1231[/ATTACH]

[jordash]

Seldom do I call out when passing. I’m careful to recognize when I’m in an area that requires prudence. For instance, on crowded paths I can’t pass people immediately because of all the pedestrians and cyclists all using a 5 foot-wide path. Just because you have a bell or a giddy voice does not mean everyone can or even should move to the side. When there’s a cyclist too center or swerving, I will call out “on the left” as I was taught to do while circling Minneapolis’ lakes with my father. 95% of the time I pass unannounced, often times this means waiting a moment for adequate space and timing my run appropriately (like you’d do in a car on a 2 lane highway).

Conversely, when I’m on foot or passed by another cyclist, I appreciate a warning call if I can help them pass me, otherwise it’s startling, annoying, and a useless sounding. Clearly only an instant’s discombobulation can lead to calamity. Announcing your presence doesn’t preclude you from responsibility in accidents or even mean you’re doing the neighborly thing. I understand why tourists, D.C. natives, or other cyclists become agitated when they hear a high-pitched bell or hear a someone bark a few gruff words. At times, it’s akin to “GET OUT OF THE WAY PLEBEIAN!”

Bonus factoid: In D.C. it’s illegal not to have a bell on your bike.

[pfunkallstar]

@jnva 22926 wrote:

But I do that every day. Wow lots of angry people on this forum, I seem to have hit a nerve. I hope your not this angry while riding on the trails because you might run into someone.

Of course accidents happen. How I have managed to avoid hitting anyone on the wod/custis for the past 20 years must be a miracle then, huh?

The word you are looking for is curmudgeonly – in a pinch cantankerous would also work. But your blanket logic sucks. Now everyone go get a snow cone and enjoy the ungodly number of hours of daylight.

[DOS]

@jordash 22961 wrote:

Bonus factoid: In D.C. it’s illegal not to have a bell on your bike.

I did not know that.

[jabberwocky]

I’m not angry at all, I just think taking the position that cyclists are always at fault is totally ridiculous. Pedestrians do some dumbass things, and no matter how responsible you are sometimes it just isn’t possible to avoid them. I’d react the same if someone proposed that cars always be responsible in car-bicycle collisions. If I run a red light on the way to work and a car hits me, how is that their fault?!

We have rules that govern trail use. The point of those rules is to allow multiple user groups to share the trail safely. Maybe I’m crazy, but in a collision, I think blame lies with the party that wasn’t obeying those rules.

[JeffC]

All this back and forth just makes me realize how wonderful a bikes only path would be in the afternoon.

I left work Wednesday afternoon at 4:30 pm and because it was a bit early, the Custis Trail had a detour, and (mainly) it was 99F, I passed about 3 die hard joggers the whole time who understood the importance of sticking farther right than Rick Santorum. I actually got to day dream a bit, let my mind wander, and not obsess about passing speeds and be constantly scanning for peds. Ahh the way biking could be (and one would expect it to be in a Bicyclying Magazine Gold Star City or whaterver Arlington is supposedly).

In contrast the morning was packed with joggers and walkers trying to take advantage of the cool temps knowing it was going to be a scorcher in the afternoon. Unforutnatly the way it was last morning was the way it usually is in the afternoon when temps are below 90F.

[jnva]

FYI:

It’s official! Arlington County has been designated a Walk Friendly Community by the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center. Walk Friendly Communities is a national recognition program developed to encourage towns and cities across the United States to establish or recommit to a high priority for supporting safer walking environments. The WFC program recognizes communities that are working to improve a wide range of conditions related to walking, including safety, mobility, access and comfort.*

It’s not all about biking. This is a cycling forum, so what was I thinking posting an anti-cycling opinion? Must be crazy. It’s not all about simply obeying the rules. An 80 year old woman dies, oh well she wasn’t obeying the rules. A toddler gets run over – he shouldn’t have been there. This is what I am hearing from a lot of folks here. I hope that if I hit and kill someone on the trail that you all will stand up for me in the same way!

[bobco85]

@jnva 22984 wrote:

It’s not all about biking. This is a cycling forum, so what was I thinking posting an anti-cycling opinion? Must be crazy. It’s not all about simply obeying the rules. An 80 year old woman dies, oh well she wasn’t obeying the rules. A toddler gets run over – he shouldn’t have been there. This is what I am hearing from a lot of folks here. I hope that if I hit and kill someone on the trail that you all will stand up for me in the same way!

I admit I’ve been more of a lurker than a contributor on this forum (hopefully that will change), but it seems like there’s too much dichotomy going on in these incidents and not enough acceptance of the grey areas surrounding these kinds of situations.

The main two arguments that seem to be forming (both inside and outside of this forum) are as follows:
1) An 80 year old woman died because a cyclist hit her. He should have maintained full control of his bike, even if he called his pass. There’s no excuse for not respecting pedestrians on a trail. He is fully responsible for her death. [insert generalization of disrespectful cyclists]
2) The cyclist did what he was supposed to do. He called his pass, and she turned into his path. He’s not Superman, and the surrounding environment on the trail made it difficult for him to safely avoid hitting her. [insert defense of the 99.999% of cyclists who have not killed a pedestrian]

While I like the discussion that has risen up, I don’t like the fact that the middle (and probably more rational) ground is being left out.

That said, here’s my opinion of the situation (for better or worse):

Looking at the accident as a whole, I say it was a freak accident because most of the time in a collision between a pedestrian and cyclist, deaths are rare. While the cyclist did call his pass, he does bear some responsibility to slow down, especially in an area of trail where it’s safer to go slower. If his account is true and the woman suddenly turned into his path, then I wouldn’t fault him as much for not being able to avoid her in time. It’s a weird situation where the cyclist kinda did the right thing (called his pass and attempted to move around the left side) but also did the wrong thing (going too fast to be able to react and assuming that she fully understood his call), and the pedestrian suffered the most (falling and hitting her head which later led to her death) yet was also partially responsible (turning to the left instead of moving to the right when someone is passing and not being conscious of other trail-users).

[jabberwocky]

@jnva 22984 wrote:

It’s not all about biking. This is a cycling forum, so what was I thinking posting an anti-cycling opinion? Must be crazy. It’s not all about simply obeying the rules. An 80 year old woman dies, oh well she wasn’t obeying the rules. A toddler gets run over – he shouldn’t have been there. This is what I am hearing from a lot of folks here. I hope that if I hit and kill someone on the trail that you all will stand up for me in the same way!

I think characterizing this as blind pro-cycling bias is also silly. See the “reckless cyclist charged with manslaughter” thread and you’ll see nobody defending the cyclist when they are being willfully reckless.

You seem to be taking this as people saying the cyclist is never at fault, which is untrue. If the cyclist was the one not obeying the rules (passing where there isn’t room and hitting someone, for example) I think most (if not all) folks here would be condemning them. I certainly would be. Its just that in this situation, the pedestrian was the one who didn’t behave correctly.

[jabberwocky]

@bobco85 22989 wrote:

If his account is true and the woman suddenly turned into his path, then I wouldn’t fault him as much for not being able to avoid her in time. It’s a weird situation where the cyclist kinda did the right thing (called his pass and attempted to move around the left side) but also did the wrong thing (going too fast to be able to react and assuming that she fully understood his call), and the pedestrian suffered the most (falling and hitting her head which later led to her death) yet was also partially responsible (turning to the left instead of moving to the right when someone is passing and not being conscious of other trail-users).

While I agree somewhat, I’ve seen no evidence that the cyclist was actually going all that fast. It just seems to be an assumption that people are making. The thing is, even at low speeds, there is still a reaction time and non-zero stopping time to take into account. Which is my main problem with jnva’s “cyclists are always at fault in collisions” viewpoint. Even at low speeds, there is a point where you can’t avoid something suddenly entering your path.

[DismalScientist]

@bobco85 22989 wrote:

Looking at the accident as a whole, I say it was a freak accident because most of the time in a collision between a pedestrian and cyclist, deaths are rare. While the cyclist did call his pass, he does bear some responsibility to slow down, especially in an area of trail where it’s safer to go slower. If his account is true and the woman suddenly turned into his path, then I wouldn’t fault him as much for not being able to avoid her in time. It’s a weird situation where the cyclist kinda did the right thing (called his pass and attempted to move around the left side) but also did the wrong thing (going too fast to be able to react and assuming that she fully understood his call), and the pedestrian suffered the most (falling and hitting her head which later led to her death) yet was also partially responsible (turning to the left instead of moving to the right when someone is passing and not being conscious of other trail-users).

There is other known information. The cyclist was a 62 year old man riding a Next PowerClimber, which is a cheap department store mountain bike. This suggests to me (but does not prove) that he likely was not riding very quickly.

[baiskeli]

@DismalScientist 22995 wrote:

There is other known information. The cyclist was a 62 year old man riding a Next PowerClimber, which is a cheap department store mountain bike. This suggests to me (but does not prove) that he likely was not riding very quickly.

I suspect he was headed down that really really steep hill at that part of the trail though, which could explain the speed. To me, his bike choice indicates a possible lack of bike skills or lack of good brakes. All speculation of course.

[MCL1981]

@jnva 22984 wrote:

It’s official! Arlington County has been designated a Walk Friendly Community by the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center. Walk Friendly Communities is a national recognition program developed to encourage towns and cities across the United States to establish or recommit to a high priority for supporting safer walking environments. The WFC program recognizes communities that are working to improve a wide range of conditions related to walking, including safety, mobility, access and comfort.[/quote]
Which has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion. In fact it’s the opposite. A pedestrian leaped into the path of moving cyclist at the last second and was killed. The pedestrian committed the dangerous act that caused her death. Some feel-good status does not change that. Peds still have a responsibility to themselves and others. You don’t seem to get that, or care.

@jnva 22984 wrote:

It’s not all about biking. This is a cycling forum, so what was I thinking posting an anti-cycling opinion? Must be crazy. It’s not all about simply obeying the rules. An 80 year old woman dies, oh well she wasn’t obeying the rules. A toddler gets run over – he shouldn’t have been there. This is what I am hearing from a lot of folks here. I hope that if I hit and kill someone on the trail that you all will stand up for me in the same way!

That might be what YOU are hearing. But that is not what anyone is saying. You’re making that up, for your own personal agenda, and putting words in everyone’s mouth. In other words, you’re a liar. If you are going to take a position on something, you might try not blatantly lying about it. Nobody said anything like that. Nobody every would say anything like that.

But despite you being a liar, if you did hit someone by no fault of your own, yes we would all support you, just on principle.

[jnva]

This is what I disagree about. How do you know this is what happened?

“. A pedestrian leaped into the path of moving cyclist at the last second and was killed. The pedestrian committed the dangerous act that caused her death.”

I can’t see an 80 year old woman leaping anywhere.

Also, I have come close to hitting people but never have, because I slow down enough to come to a stop. Within inches, but always able to stop. This incident, it seems to me could have been avoided.

[vvill]

@jnva 23011 wrote:

How do you know this is what happened?

@jnva 23011 wrote:

This incident, it seems to me could have been avoided.

Exactly. No one knows exactly what happened. Maybe it seems like it could have been avoided, but it wasn’t… it was an accident. If you have come within inches before then there’s no reason why one day you might react a split second too late and actually hit someone.

[Author]

Replies