Reply With Quote
Doesn't the person in the front do most of the pedaling? Lazy!
Yeah. A lot of group bike rides in the area.
Doesn't the person in the front do most of the pedaling? Lazy!
No Sherlock.
Saw that.
Don't you know how to pars wording?
“He lost control of his vehicle and drove off the road,” Badillo said. “He overcorrected and as a result of that struck the bicyclists.” is an assumption. Like I said, were there witnesses? Did the driver say this?
No, I am pointing out what is factually known, and showing the what else can be assumed.WC making assumptions and casting aspersions again.
I do not state facts that I don't know.
Bike riders want all of these rights and to be treated equally on the road, as if they were a car or motorcycle. then I see some cyclist pedal through a red light or weave between slow moving traffic. dumb. Not to mention the lame spandex outfits.
and ride on the sidewalk.
they're like pavement hovercrafts.
I'd rather them be on the sidewalks and not in my way on the road
id rather them be in your way on the road and outta my way on the sidewalks
I've observed a lot of that sort of behavior too. Not all bikers of course. In fact most of the "neighborhood" riders I've encountered are extremely safe and conscientious. But the pro guys in the hideous spandex really do challenge the traffic at times. They ride 3 or 4 abreast and get around traffic signals if they can. It's like they are trying to make a point to the cars, but some do it very dangerously.
They just must be guessing. I mean, who actually looks at evidence at the scene of an accident and deduces facts from that evidence? Skid marks? LOL those could be from ANYTHING.Highway 16 was shutdown for about two hours as crews worked to clear the accident site. Investigators say there are no charges on the driver. They believe this was an accident and that somehow the driver lost control of his truck.
How do they know the bicyclists didn't draw him off the road with their shiny pedals? I mean, those things are death traps for drivers. So distracting.a man in a pickup veered off the road and hit them.
This guy is just making up."He looked off, he was looking at something else and realized the curve in the road came a lot faster than what he anticipated," explained Deputy Chief Dale Bennett of the Bexar County Sheriff's Office.
WC...you suck at life. Just FYI.
Until there is a report that tells us that the driver admited these things happened, or an eye witness accout, this is an expert opinion that can be wrong. That's all I'm saying. To take the word of this man at face value is rather ignorant. It could be true, it could be a best guess, or worse yet, he could have made it up.
Bottom line is there is nothing I have seen that was reported as a factual witnessed account.
I got hit by a car on a motorcycle and thats is the same bull I was told "oops" I didn't see you.
the laws need to get tighter.......cars need to yield to anything smaller than they are PERIOD.
Yield to something they can't see? Makes sense.
That guy was effectively dead anyway. No self respecting guy would ride a tandem bicycle in public.
I drive up there all the damn time. The cyclists are easy to spot.
Cyclists are very annoying, but it really pisses me off that some idiot hit this couple.
Why do cyclists go for that Darwin Award.
I'm sorry, but I would never ride on a stretch of road with a posted 65 MPH speed limit. I'm just not that stupid.
Last edited by Wild Cobra; 11-06-2009 at 05:15 PM.
what are all those scuff marks on the concrete barriers from anyways?
No kidding.
It's bad enough to have bicycle lanes on a 40 MPH stretch and have to crash into a car next to you because a bicycle swerves. I don't think they ever stay in their lane.
I witnessed such an accident, the bicyclist left the scene. No plates, couldn't trace the mofo. I gave my view of what I saw, and no way to collect damages from the cyclist. When I learned on that, I told them, well, I'll hit the bicyclist instead of the car then if I must to collect damages.
I found an interesting article. Apparently, only about 6% of bicycle accidents are the fault of a driver of a car:
Bike/Car Intersection Collision Liability Portland, OR
Often, the suits get rediculous:
Lars Larson on Bike vs. Bus SuitA young boy ran a red light on his bicycle. He was hit by a bus. The bus killed him. But really he killed himself. The police determined that it was his fault for the accident.
The problem is, his parents decided to sue anyway. Their lawyers went after the bus company and when they were done the bus company agreed to pony up hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Last edited by Wild Cobra; 11-06-2009 at 06:48 PM.
I have said it before and I will say it again- if bicyclists want to be treated like any other vehicle on the road, they should have a licence, registration with plates to identify them, and insurance to cover the accidents they cause.
Your opinion having never seen the accident or anything involving it >>> expert's opinion
Taking the word of a police officer whose job it is to get these things right is rather ignorant.That's all I'm saying. To take the word of this man at face value is rather ignorant.
A guess based on evidence. Something you don't seem to understand.It could be true, it could be a best guess,
Again, you suck at life. You'll find ANY reason you can to be a contrarian here and this situation just happens to involve the deaths of a mother and father of a young child.or worse yet, he could have made it up.
Bottom line is you're a horses ass. Why don't you go down to SA and investigate and get to the bottom of this police conspiracy.Bottom line is there is nothing I have seen that was reported as a factual witnessed account.
Legally speaking, in nearly every state a bicycle is considered to be a "vehicle" and therefore, just like motorists, cyclists must follow the rules of the road. When it comes to collisions occurring at intersections, liability usually boils down to who had the right-of-way -- the car or the bike.
Where did you get that number? I read through that article you posted and didn't see it. Are you making things up again?
Again?
I don't make things up. Don't you know how to parse what you read?
I did that purposely. It proves a lack of misunderstanding readers like yourself have, that a story can be written factually to give a false impression.
Try to figure out what I did if you can.
Yeah, except what I said was actually in the story I quoted, stated by a L.E.O. Your was made up.
By your theory (I refuse to call it reasoning), a dead body could be found next to fresh tire marks in soft mud, and since no one witnessed the killing/dumping, there should be no consequences to the killer, even though the tire marks match his vehicle's, right down to a nail and a few embedded stones. Forensic evidence is used EVERY DAY to convict people of criminal offenses, which, by the way, have a much higher standard of evidence than Tort offenses.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
