I live in the Philadelphia area and think that cyclist should be given tickets WAY more often. They get super mad at you if you cut them off with your car - they start screaming about the laws concerning them...then they run every red light they can...maybe one out of ten actually obey the traffic rules. They should be given $150 tickets for every infraction and then they would obey the laws...then I wouldnt cut them off as often as I do. The way I see it; my Jeep is WAY bigger than their bike - so THEY should be the ones obeying all of the laws...they got WAY more to lose than I do! Also, they all got that tree-hugging smugness that comes with the territory.

I'm sure there are some nice people who ride bikes...just not in Philly. :)

Bicyclists in SF often ignore the fact that the state laws governing them are the same as they are for motorists. More often than not you will see cyclists roll through red lights and stop signs and completely ignore any law that even slightly inconveniences them.

San Fran has let the cyclist get way out hand for too long. It started many years ago when they started interupting traffic on purpose in what they called "critical mass". This was an organized assault on the daily car commuters to try and make some stupid political point that they want everyone to ride public transportation. The city and to a greater extent the police in San Fran turned a blind eye to their disruption of traffic. I somehow hope this case causes a backlash to all of the authorities that willfully ignored their actions. I even recall some of them coming out and siding with the cyclist.

i lived in SF for years and witnessed bicyclists run lights and stop signs DAILY. a friend of mine actually ran on over in her car after he failed to stop at a stop sign. if they want the privileges of riding on the street, they have to follow the same laws as other drivers.

So this guy was trying to set a speed record during the day on a busy street? What an idiot! Then to blog that he learned he should be wearing a helmet shows his lack of remorse for killing a man to feed his ego. If he had done this with a car it wouldn't have even made the news and he'd be screaming about how the driver endangered cyclists. I hope he gets more than probation and having to pick up litter for a couple of hours, he deserves the same jail time a car driver would have gotten.

the cyclist recalled being "too committed" to stop at the traffic light

So if I drive too fast, I don't have to stop at red lights either?

Not to mention they use the roads and pay nothing for use or maintenance.

Just another "hollier than thou" liberal.

Did you read the same article? I don't see his political position mentioned anywhere.

AC don't forget the nifty electronics device that he had mounted on his bike to record his mad dash for a record! Pretty much like some of the criminals here in STL that have videoed their crime spree and provided video evidence fro their trial.

I've been hit by a dozen cars because they a) speed through red lights, b) speed through crosswalks, c) drive up on the @!$%#ing curb because they're texting, d) don't use blinkers when turning, etc., etc. What did I learn? Make sure there are no cars around when crossing a road on my bike AND to always ride my bike on the sidewalk. Sorry, folks. But you drivers are just effing horrible at driving.

Cyclists who do obey traffic rules are every bit as upset with this guy as the rest of you. Yahoos like Bucchere make cycling more difficult for all of us.

I've been riding regularly for decades now, and still log about 6,000 miles a year on my bike (it's very good exercise). But when I see cyclists riding side by side on the road, riding on the wrong side, running lights and stop signs, and ignoring pedestrian crosswalks, I also see red. The traffic laws apply to all vehicles. That includes bikes.

On a side note, regarding:

Therefore, if they are in your way and not maintaining the speed limit, you should be able to bump them into the bushes.

A speed limit is a maximum allowable speed, not a lowest acceptable speed. I sincerely hope that was intended as tongue in cheek.

"Therefore, if they are in your way and not maintaining the speed limit, you should be able to bump them into the bushes."

Are you kidding me? As an avid cyclist (and one that obeys traffic laws) I take serious offense to this attitude that motorists somehow have priority over the road. How am I supposed to maintain the speed limit on a bike? Do you know how hard it is to ride at 30 mph? And you really think you can "bump" me without killing me? Would you take the same attitude with an elderly driver going below the speed limit? That's the kind of attitude that cyclists have to fight every time they get on the road. And you wonder why they yell at you when you cut them off. Why not slow down a little and respect other people's right to the road same as yours?

hell with you people, I disregard traffic rules all the time, a bicyclist is a pedestrian on wheels, my 20 stick of metal versus your 3000 lbs of steel and you think I will follow the same rules as you get real, my only rule is don't get hit, my odds of getting hit obeying all the rules are about the same as when I disregard them because it's not my mistake that will get me hit, it's yours, but any collision with a pedestrian is unacceptable, you can roll through a stop sign but 35mph through any area with pedestrians is bull$hit

michael-857922

hell with you people, I disregard traffic rules all the time...

I mounted an air horn under the hood of my pickup just for people like you. Did you know those speedos aren't waterproof?

Bicyclists are always complaining about cars, but percentage wise, the cars obey traffic laws more regularly. Of the 100 or so bicyclists I've seen on the road in my neighborhood the past year (and I'm not talking kids, but commuters), only 1 has ever stopped at a stop sign - 1 (and I remember that 1 because of how unusual it was). Usually they blow through it in front of cars that have stopped, including two days ago at a speed trap being monitored by police who did nothing. I won't feel sorry for them when one of the them eventually gets hit.

Michael-857922
You're exactly the problem. No you can't roll through stop signs. You are not a pedestrian on wheels. You're considered a motorist like the guy in a car and the fact that you and the guy above you that says he willingly rides on sidewalks choose to openly ignore the laws is exactly what is at issue.

To the person who said bicyclists don't pay to maintain the roads:

Most of us have cars, licenses, auto insurance, jobs, and pay taxes and fees to maintain the roads just like you do. Yet, when we are on our bikes we aren't doing damage to the roads like you do when you drive your vehicle.

And to the person who said cars obey traffic laws more regularly - I challenge you to find a driver who doesn't break a traffic law every single time they drive.

That said, I hope this particular cyclist gets the book thrown at him.

THis guy neeeds to be punished and the laws concerning Bike safety have to be enforced. Alll the haters on this board could use some counselling (Bob you can go first). I'm apppalled that no matter the topic there is so much hate and resentment expresssed by so many people. Well, at least, there wasn't anyone trying to blame this onPresident Obama. Or maybe it's just too early for those Lazy Corporate Welfare Republicans to be out of bed. To have resentment and hate against bicyclists? Doesn't that make you feel jus the slightest bit smalll?

I get annoyed by cyclists who take up the whole road and refuse to get out of the way while they go slow as hell.

Make him eat his bicycle one nut, bolt and brake pad at a time until he ingests the whole thing then put him in an MRI and leave him in there for a couple of hours to "bake."

No remorse is apparent in this guy, so give him the max.............

| "Therefore, if they are in your way and not maintaining the speed limit, you should be able to bump them into the bushes."

Would you take the same attitude with an elderly driver going below the speed limit?

Actually, yes. I sure wish I could...

I've beena seriously bicyclist for over 40 years and I'm appalled that this accident happened. It's a shame that someone had to die simply because a moron was behaving stupidly while on a bike. Believe it or not, there are many cyclists who do obey the laws and ride in a respectable manner.

But I feel compelled to respond to a couple of posters:

Bob-434277 - you're suggesting of "bumping" cyclists "into the bushes", puts you into the same class as Bucchere: a moron on wheels. If you're response is violence towards anyone who don't like then you need some serious therapy. Sooner or later, someone bigger than you is going to shove you into the bushes.

Micheal0859722 - You're a troll. Folks, don't feed the trolls.

We have a lot of cyclists in our neighborhood and it drives me crazy! I don't mind the single file riders that obey the laws. I have wanted to "nudge" the jerks that ride 2-3 abreast and impede traffic during rush hour. I swear they do it on purpose.

Mom2Five, I know how you feel. And believe me, I debate this issue with some fellow cyclists, some of whom subscribe to the idea that they should take up the whole lane to force drivers to change lanes instead of passing close to cyclists. Others are simply clueless and like to socialize and are completely oblivious to traffic around them. I'm trying to change that attitude.

@mom2five - Are you for real? Honestly as a parent to 5 children you should know better. If I ride on a road that does not have a dedicated bike lane and traffic cannot pass a rider without crossing the center (or lane divider) line then I have the RIGHT to "take the lane" (at least in California). Cyclists do not deliberately impede traffic to annoy other road users - they do it for their own protection. And if you are commuting on a road with cyclists that have to "take the lane" then you should not expect to be moving all that fast in any case.

@Gumps - do us all a favor and pick up your state DMV manual. You will find that in most states the law is as it is in California. As you all complain we should be treated as vehicles then you should have no problem allowing us the same rights as other vehicles including the right to take a lane for our protection. Clueless some riders may be, and those who ride during commutes are generally in better shape and in 30 mph zones can keep up with traffic (I know I can) without causing too much disruption for drivers.

Both of you - get a freakin life. You don't own the road because you are in a car - you have to SHARE THE ROAD with ALL OTHER ROAD USERS. Don't tar all cyclists with the same brush. There are those of us who always stop where legally required and obey all traffic laws when we ride. But of course you've never broken the speed limit, or driven with a few too many cocktails in you, or texted as you drove, or rolled a stop sign in your life.

Gross negligence should be easy to prove unless the defense stacks the jury with cyclists.

The way this @!$%# and so many others conduct themselves it's the peds in need of helmets.

All considered, the evidence seems to weigh heavily toward guilt, yet he claims no responsibility! Throw the book at him!

dieselbug, you are the one who should review your state DMV manual. In California, as in other states, bicyclists are supposed to ride as close to the right side as possible.In fact, "Ride on the right, but not so far that you might hit the curb" - I cut/pasted this from:

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/ffdl37.htm

You are typical of the problem cyclist that give the rest of us a bad rep. Grow up and wise up, or you may indeed end up like a bug on a diesel. Or nudged into the bushes...

I drive a car and I ride a bike, but I obey the traffic laws while on either vehicle and drive and ride using my brain. i do get out of the way of cars when on my bike because i have enough intelligence to realize my perhaps 40 lb bike is no match for a 2,000 lb vehicle.

If the cyclist was riding with such abandon for safety as reported, he deserves to be charged with vehicular homicide and should do both jail time and community service. As well as not being allowed to ride a bike or drive a car for a considerable time.

Please lock this guy up for life.

Unfortunately, many cyclist tend to forget or just do not care that they are subject to the same traffic laws as any car on the road. Red lights, stop signs, cross walks, etc. are just as relevant to a cyclist as a driver, you can not ignore them. I hope that this guy gets the prison sentence he deserves both because of what he did and because of his attitude as expressed in his blog post. I think that the attitude warrants giving him the maximum sentence. This guy just does not seem to understand the seriousness of what he did or his responsibility for what happened he treats it all like some big joke. I am constantly aware of any cyclists around me when I am driving and am amazed at how many of them completely ignore traffic laws. I almost killed a cyclist because he decided to go blowing through a red light going the opposite direction from me as I was making a left turn onto a side street with a turn arrow. The cyclist ignored the red light and did not even bother to look for turning or crossing traffic, it was on a down hill for him and all he seemed to care about was keeping up his speed to make it up the other side of the hill coming up in front of him. If cyclists want drivers to respect their rights on the road then they need to obey the traffic laws as well.

Wrong Gumps- The vehicle code says as far as is practical, big difference. You have no idea from your big metal box hurtling down the road whether there is rough, loose pavement or glass or other hazards that require a bike to drive more to the left than any of us would like to remain safe and avoid flats. You are the overtaking vehicle, all of the laws are against you, not the bicycle. No matter what speed. Bicycles do not have a responsibility to keep up with traffic when it is impossible for them to do so. Drivers always assume they have overwhelming rights to the road because there are more of them and they have built in lethal 'enforcement' with their big metal fender, but I assure you the law supports the bike in this scenario even if it is universally ignored to the point that even police officers often assume just like most drivers that the bike has an obligation to 'get out of the way.'

Anybody who thinks bikers put themselves into traffic any farther than is necessary is a blooming idiot.

biker4life, yes it says as far as practical. Riding two abreast so that one is in the middle of the traffic lane and socializing with a buddy while not paying attention to traffic behind you is not being safe nor practical. Perhaps you should read my prevous posts.

Anybody who thinks bikers put themselves into traffic any farther than is necessary is a blooming idiot.

You sir, do not drive in Pittsburgh. I've had a bicyclist attempt to ride me off the road and I was in a car! 1am in the morning with no traffic he gets into the center of the lane, I move to the oncoming lane to give him a wide berth to pass. He attempts to speed up and then tries to come into the oncoming lane with me!

Go ahead, Bob-434277, "bump" a bicyclist into the bushes. Hope you enjoy the suspension of your license, not to mention your stay in jail for vehicular assault, leaving the scene of an accident, etc.

It's bad enough I must fear for my life every time I commute to work in my car. I don't need even more reason to fear for my life when riding my bike on the weekends.

Gumps, sometimes cyclists do that because it's simply not safe for a vehicle to pass without moving over the yellow line. Maybe the lane is too narrow. Maybe there are cars parked along the side and the cyclist is trying to avoid getting "doored". Maybe the cyclist is about to make a left turn. Yet, many will try to squeeze past the cyclist anyway. There are times when I ride a little more to the left than absolutely necessary, just to force a driver to move over and pass. I've had a few too many times where I was staying "as far right as practical" and nearly got hit because some idiot only passed me with inches to spare. I've found that taking the lane is actually safer in some circumstances.

Of course, there are those who ride two abreast because they are idiots. But there are idiots everywhere. Cyclists do not have a monopoly on that.

Oh, and one very important point - cyclists are traffic. Cyclists do not "impede traffic", they are part of it. Step away from your car-centric viewpoint and hate, and recognize that other users have just as much right to the public right-of-way.

Actually there is a minimum speed on the road also. You CAN be ticketed for going too slow.

I watch bike users ride against traffic, 2 and 3 abreast, through stop signs and lights and on the side walk all the time. I actually am surprised when I see one riding correctly on the right side of the road who wears a helmet and obeys traffic laws its so rare on the road.

Cops need to start ticketing those who ride against traffic, on the side walk or go through stop signs/lights. they are a danger to themselves and everyone else on the road.

JS in SD

Unfortunately, many cyclist tend to forget or just do not care that they are subject to the same traffic laws as any car on the road. Red lights, stop signs, cross walks, etc. are just as relevant to a cyclist as a driver, you can not ignore them.

I love how people speak to the laws as they apply to cyclists when they know nothing about it. I have seen over and over that cyclists have to obey the same laws as vehicle. Not always true, and you should know your state/county/city rules. They will change depending on where you are. In my state, the code says I do not have to stop at a stop sign if there is not other traffic. If there are other cars stopped, I must stop. At a red light, I have to stop, but I can ride through once traffic clears. This is because the bike will not trigger the light. I agree that there are bad cyclists out there that give the rest of us a bad name, but assuming they are doing something wrong because you do not know the law is ridiculous. The law is not what you think it is in your head, it is what is in the books and real cyclists know them by heart. Again...they vary by state/county/city.

Not to mention they use the roads and pay nothing for use or maintenance.

You know that bikers cause minuscule damage to the roads right? And by riding on bikes as opposed to cars, they are actually saving maintenance costs?

In addition IdahoSteve, some states treat cyclists differently when interacting with cars.

For example, in MN we have to give a 3' berth to cyclists when passing. In Iowa, you have to give an entire lane.

Taken from the California Rules of the Road handbook:

Bicyclists have the same rights and responsibilities as vehicle and motorcycle drivers. Pedestrian safety is a serious issue. A pedestrian is a person on foot or who uses a conveyance such as roller skates, skateboard, etc., other than a bicycle. A pedestrian can also be a person with a disability using a tricycle, quadricycle, or wheelchair for transportation. Remember, if a pedestrian makes eye contact with you, he or she is ready to cross the street. Yield to the pedestrian.

Of course I see bicyclists blowing through stop signs all the time. When they do this, if they get ran over by my, as Michael put it, 3000 lbs. of steel....they've caused the accident and it is their fault......just the same if I blow through a red light and get crushed by a semi truck. This guy kills a pedestrian and has the arrogance to write a blog about the importance of helmet safety?.......I hope they make an example of him & he gets the full sentence that vehicular manslaughter carries.

Accidents are quite common in the Castro District. There are a lot of rear end collisions.

Actually there is a minimum speed on the road also. You CAN be ticketed for going too slow.

After a little research, I find that bikes are exempt from that minimum speed requirement, or they aren't allowed on roads that have a minimum speed limit. Here, for example, is Oklahoma's ruling on the topic:

No vehicle may be operated below the minimum speed limit on any part of a high­way with a declared minimum speed limit. (Title 47 § 11-804)

The Oklahoma Department of Transportation has established a minimum speed for all controlled access facilities, such as interstates.

No bicycle will be allowed to operate on these facilities unless a portion is designated and signed as a bicycle route. On such desig­nated routes, bicycles may not be ridden on the travel lanes of the highway.

The minimum speed will not apply to bicycles on a designated route.

http://www.oklahomabicyclesociety.com/OklaBicycleManual/OBM_p05.htm

And here is Arizona's Revised Statutes (ARS):

A person shall not drive a motor vehicle at a speed that is less than the speed that is reasonable and prudent...

http://azbikelaw.org/excerpts.html

Note that ARS does not establish a minimum speed for bicyclists.

If you can find a minimum speed requirement for bicyclists, I'd be interested in seeing it.

@Rocklin, California, I am sure is different from other states. My post was that cyclists should know the rules where they drive. I agree 100% with you that he should get the full sentence. I am an avid cyclists, and this guy makes us all look like jerks. I am just asking that people use some common sense and know that not every cyclist is out there being an idiot. We are just trying to stay alive on the road.

Just another "hollier than thou" liberal.

Yeah, cuz being a condescending control-freak conservative is SOOO much better.

And it wasn't even mentioned, so all you are doing is demonstrating your ignorance, thanks for sharing!

Red lights, stop signs, cross walks, etc. are just as relevant to a cyclist as a driver, you can not ignore them.

Of course they are, and as soon as every driver stops texting/phoning while driving AND follows all of the rules related to red lights, stop signs and crosswalks, THEN you can be a sanctimonious blowhard.

That being said, many cyclists DO NOT follow the rules, and they should, for tehir own safety as well as others.

Those kids who bullied the school bus monitor? This is the kind of individual they grow up to be. Someone who doesn't give a flick about anyone or anything; it's all about what's fun for them.

I've been a cyclist for 20 years but I shutter at some of the things my fellow cyclists do. It is no wonder we are all hated by motorists.

IdahoSteve...I agree, not all bicyclists are arrogant jerks. That arrogance goes both ways! Anyone who would put another person's life in jeopardy & "bump them" just to make a point does not belong on the road either. Patience is one thing a lot of us Californian's lack.

If this jerk gets away with killing this person due to his own negligence and complete disregard for another human beings life.......when the law is the same as if he were in a motor vehicle....I hope the family sues him for everything he has...or will ever have.

dieselbug ~ I have a great life but thank you for your concern. I am sorry I wasn't clearer about my frustration with the cyclists driving 2-3 abreast on the main road impeding traffic. The road does in fact have a bike lane, so I do get angry when the cyclists feel the need to ride not only in the bike lane but in my lane of traffic. I expect to be able to travel at 35mph which is the posted speed limit. Have a fantastic day!

I get annoyed by cyclists who take up the whole road and refuse to get out of the way while they go slow as hell.

In many states I have as much legal right to a lane as a motorist does.

Wrong again Gumps- This time your 'tarring everyone with the same brush' as a previous poster put it. Again you imply it is my responsibility to watch out behind me and get out of the way of overtaking vehicles. I point this out not due to the obvious common sense of that, but because you and everyone else is yelling about the strict adherence to the law. Well it seems only when that is convenient to you. The car is the overtaking vehicle in this scenario, which puts the responsibility on them to pass safely. You can bark about what a bike does as you approach them all you want (most states allow side by side riding by the way, however it is something I never do because it needlessly blocks traffic and puts the left rider at significantly higher risk) but because some idiot on a bike did something stupid in your presence doesn't mean the next bike deserves your pay back.

And let's be clear- this is about insecure car drivers wanting to push their weight around when they see a vulnerable target on the side of the road when they've had a bad day or whatever. The safe drivers don't endanger bikers so they aren't the problem. They give plenty of room, they don't argue on comment threads about the fine points of law that they think are in they're favor while ignoring the ones that aren't. They don't try to point to all bikers as scofflaws and complain about them to somehow justify their aggressive actions in regard to cyclists.

It all comes down to bullying.

Ruken.......you're right........at least in California, you do have the same rights as a motorist. The problem I see with SOME bicyclists here is, they give themselves the same rights as a motorist......but the same responsibilities as a pedestrian.

This issue isn't exclusive to SF. I see it in Phoenix all the time. Cyclists want to have it both ways, depending on what is convenient to them in that very moment.

• When the light is green, they are on the road and act as motorists.
• When the light is red, they cross over multiple lanes of traffic to the cross walk and roll through an intersection that way, as if they were pedestrians.

YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!!!!!

You are either a motorist and need to stay in the bike lane and wait at the light with the other cars. Or you're a pedestrian and need to stay on the sidewalks. PICK ONE, and STICK WITH IT!!!

I know there are a lot of avid bike riders on this thread, and I would hope that none of them are guilty of this practice. But let's be honest, you've all done it at least once, especially if you were running late or just generally impatient that day.

If you can't follow that basic policy then I don't feel sorry for any cyclist that gets hit by a car. You had it coming. Sorry, but the truth hurts.

@Lolly- While this scenario you describe is not one of them, remember there are many laws that differ specifically for bikes. Cars and bikes are both vehicles, but they are not the same in the eyes of the law nor should they be.

Everybody loves poetic justice and instant karma, but I would hope that you or anyone reading this would be sure the bike is not following the law as it applies to bikes before you run them down as a form of instant justice or applaud another for doing so.

biker4life: "Again you imply it is my responsibility to watch out behind me and get out of the way of overtaking vehicles." I don't imply it, I make an overt assertion. It is true that many cyclists do ride responsibily, but I see way too many who regard the whole road as their own instead of sharing the road. You see this behavior a lot on organized rides - many participating cyclists assume that they can take up the whole lane. I recall one incident in Arizona - a team was out on a training ride on a single lane road. I was behind them in my truck patiently waiting for them too move over - they were in a no passing zone. The guys in the back of the group simply looked back at me and did nothing. I finally did pass further down the road, but I did have to resist the urge to "nudge them". Twits.

Some cyclists are tooling around with earbuds, listening to music, which is not only dangerous but stupid. they have to crank up the music volume to overcome the ambient wind noise and they are oblivious to audio cues that alert them to overtaking traffic. I've startled a lot of slower cyclists even though I've called out as I approach from behind. Add this behavior to riding out in the middle of the traffic lane and you're going to be subjected to rude behavior.

Sure Gumps- but again your premise is the bikers have a responsibility to get out of the way. According to the law the overtaking vehicle has the responsibility to pass safely. I overtake cars on my bike occasionally (it's not as weird as it may sound, it happens often on twisty descents) and in that scenario I have the responsibility to overtake safely. Period.

Now in the practical world we all live in does it happen this way? Of course not. Due to lack of enforcement by the police and ignorance of the law by car drivers we end up in a situation where if a biker wants to live to ride tomorrow he better watch out for cars passing too close today. You bring up 2 abreast and other behaviors that, again you assume the bike is required to give way to cars. It is simply not the case.

Bike lanes are not for bikes to stay in. They are for cars to stay out of. If a bike needs to use any part of the lane to progress down the road, be it due to doors from parked cars, glass, torn up pavement or whatever the bike has the right of way to use any and all of the lane as is necessary.

You mention group rides. Group rides are not required to ride single file, but I guarantee you I can find a cop who will tell you they are. That is the extent of the ignorance of the law as it applies to bikes that exists among car drivers. When a car encounters a group ride on a quiet road fanned out across the lane they are 20-100 vehicles in traffic and you are 1. Together you all make up the traffic on that particular road, at that particular place and time.

Who's driving at a speed appropriate for the conditions? The 50 or so riders all doing the same speed or the 1 car behind who wants to drive a lot faster than every other vehicle on the road at that point? In this situation I would certainly not wish to impede any traffic (even you) and I would gladly (most likely long before you got to the point of passing) move over to give room for you. Do you expect 50 bikes to communicate and move en masse to give you room? have you ever seen 5 cars do anything together?

You and many others posting here need to remember that the law does not exist to make it convenient for you to drive your car at 'the posted speed limit' as Mom2five seems to think is her minimum right. They exist for the safety of all users of the road. Like it or not that includes bicycles. I would much prefer to ride exclusively on bike paths and you would never see me, but until they exist in enough number the bikes will be on the road. Maybe you car drivers vote for some new bike paths in your area?

biker4life, yes it is the responsibility of an overtaking vehicle to pass safely. But that does not give cyclists license to take up a whole lane needlessly. If a group is on a single lane road and a motor vehicle is following behind, common courtesy as well as commonsense dictates that the cyclists move into a single file in or to facilitate safe passage by the overtaking vehicle.

I can see we are going to disagree no matter what. You mention common sense and common courtesy, yet you don't seem to think that is a 2 way street. As I've mentioned previously and repeatedly, yes due to lack of enforcement and ignorance of the law by car drivers it is necessary to give way for self preservation.

But it is not the law. Make no mistake about it. The ranks of the common bike rider are growing not shrinking, no matter what car drivers would like. God help all of them when the law is finally enforced, then we will see who the violators really are and how fast the driving public wises up. You claim to ride yourself, if that is true you are worse than the car drivers. Their ignorance is understandable to a degree. Yours is not.

biker4life, # 1.56 you said "Cars and bikes are both vehicles, but they are not the same in the eyes of the law nor should they be."

I agree with some things you say....some motorists do not give bicyclists their legal rights to the road. But that's not what happened here. For this particular case the article is referring to, are you actually defending this bicyclist killing a pedestrian when he blatantly ignored his responsibility to operate his vehicle safely and abide by the same rules the rest of us do? Which actually do apply to him......& for this case.....rightfully so!

No Rocklin, not defending him in the least. Hang him myself given the chance, and not just because of the bad name he gives bikers.

We're way off topic here, as sometimes happens in comment threads.

Thanks for clarifying! Guilty of the off topic thing myself!

"...a rare felony prosecution of a bicycle rider..." and I'll make a rare exception to my opposition of the death penalty. Chain him to his bike and heat it with a torch - arrogant twerp.

I'd like to see a national 'Door Day'.

Cheetah- While I agree on punishment and would like to see something harsh for this guy, you realize that national 'door day' will just force a national 'ride in the middle of the lane day', right? If parked cars are opening doors on bikes they have to ride further into the lane blocking motorized traffic. Nobody wins.

"If parked cars are opening doors on bikes they have to ride further into the lane blocking motorized traffic." Newsflash: Cyclists are supposed to ride far enough away from parked vehicles that if a door opens there will be no collision.

Now you're just trolling Gumps.

No, not trolling. I'm actually not surprised that you are ignorant of this fact. Perhaps you should check with the League of American Bicyclists and educate yourself - Mr. "biker4life". With your attitude, I suspect your life will be very short.

Now your just a bating douche bag. This thread is dead. Have a nice life buddy.

Yep, I burned out a clutch in my Jeep Wrangler while manuevering the hills in San Fran. Won't drive a car with a stick there again. Riding a bike there is trecherous, with all of the hills and tourist drivers, making it necessary for any rider to be on their guard. This guy, having shown total disregard for anyone else, should pay dearly for this.

I'm sure they believe it was the pedestrians fault for not getting out of the bicycles way.

Race2THree - step away from your radio. Step away from your radio and come out with your hands up.

If your trying to beat some speed record for a popular bike route, maybe you should make sure that you have brakes that can stop you JUST IN CASE you may need too! This guy is a moron for not having the correct gear. He should definitely get into some kind of trouble for killing the man.

Blake I agree like maybe the same punishment a car or motorcycle driver would get in the same situation... Jail time! To do otherwise is like giving someone a longer sentence because they used a gun rather than a knife.

says you, cops couldn't care less about bicyclists because in the street it's our lives on the line, people who run into pedestrians need to be punished however

For all you bikers that whine about cars not showing proper respect, those motorists "that show no respect" show more respect to you bikers than you show them. So you deserve your suffering.

Seriously Fenix? Cyclists deserve "suffering" because they show less respect to drivers than drivers show to them? That remark makes absolutely no sense.

There are far more drivers out there than cyclists, with far deadlier machines at their control. Both parties need to follow the rules of operating a vehicle. When there is a cyclist on the road and the motorist has no room to pass, the motorist has to slow down to wait for a safe place to pass. I really try to be consious of cyclists on the road. Is it OK for me to run someone down because they are not showing me proper respect? No. I can't plow into another car that is poking along, disrupting traffic any more than I can plow into a cyclist. Stop with the thinking that you deserve to be respected by everyone out on the road. You are just another driver - nothing special at all. You are responsible for making sure you don't cause harm to anyone just because you have some weird, inflated ego.

@Sally. Yes they deserve a lot of what they get. Bikers always complain about drivers on the road not doing the right thing, but it is the bikers themselves doing the wrong things and not being conscious of the drivers on the road. Both parties need to keep an eye out for each other but bikers think they own the road and block traffic by riding in the middle of the lane during rush, can weave in and out of people stopped at a red light, go THROUGH red lights and stop signs. So again, yes they earn their bad name.

I occasionally bike my 5-mile commute to work. I DO follow the laws. I stay as close to the curb as possible. The only time I'm in a traffic lane is when I'm taking a left-hand turn. I stop at red lights (even when going right, which most folks in cars seem to view as optional). I stop at stop signs. I wear a helmet, have reflectors, wear a reflective vest, and have lights front and back. And what to I have to deal with? People in cars who think it's funny to "buzz" the biker by riding so close I've actually been clipped by their side mirrors. Folks who shout out the window or honk their horn right behind you, hoping to get you to wipe out. People throwing things out their window at me, and even trying to touch me as they pass. This guy should have the book thrown at him. What he did was totally irresponsible, dangerous, and proved deadly. But all these car drivers who are acting holier than thou - yeah, real funny when you try to get the bike to wipe out. And if you did, and I was injured, my guess is you'd speed off and leave me lying in the road, laughing about the great fun you had spooking the biker.

I love how people speak to the laws as they apply to cyclists when they know nothing about it. I have seen over and over that cyclists have to obey the same laws as vehicle. Not always true, and you should know your state/county/city rules. They will change depending on where you are. In my state, the code says I do not have to stop at a stop sign if there is not other traffic. If there are other cars stopped, I must stop. At a red light, I have to stop, but I can ride through once traffic clears. This is because the bike will not trigger the light. I agree that there are bad cyclists out there that give the rest of us a bad name, but assuming they are doing something wrong because you do not know the law is ridiculous. The law is not what you think it is in your head, it is what is in the books and real cyclists know them by heart. Again...they vary by state/county/city.

Just another Opinion-3700104

You hit the nail squarely on the head. We have the same problem down in Laguna Beach, Ca. They ride down the canyon road ignoring the bike lane and instead purposely try to block traffic by riding in the car lanes 2 and 3 abreast forcing cars to have to pass them in the oncoming traffic lanes. I have personally witnessed this several times and was almost hit headon by a car trying to get around these 2 wheel a$$h0les. And since this town is so liberal the cops don't stop them but instead escort them from behind on several occasions making people late to their jobs and appointments.

Accident? The bicyclists went through several red lights. How was this an ACCIDENT? If you ride like only you matter, then there darn well is malicious intent.

Youre wrong. Obeying the laws of the road is totally controllable. He clearly didn't.

yeah its a sad tradgedy that he caused by riding carelessly and without concern for the other people on the road or sidewalk. I dont think he did it thinking that by riding a bike there was any way he could harm some one but again he was careless, he didnt care about any one else who might be using the street. He ran through red lights that by law he was supposed to stop at, and plowed into some one who wouldnt be dead today if the man on the bike had simply used some judgement.

I think the fact that there was no attempt made to stop despite the fact that his own words state that there was no path through the crowd of people in the crosswalk, shows malicious intent.

As a former avid cyclist myself, I can say unequivocally, that I would have tipped the bike and taken a fall myself before plowing into a crowd of people.

Roberta,

Please grow a brain.

This a-hole was purposely speeding, running red lights and stop signs just so he could claim to be the fastest on this route. I ride a bike quite often and I do not tempt fate against pedestrians and 3000 pound cars. This guy did this due to his "Hollier than thou" bicyclist attitude.

This was not an accident: this was an unfortunate occurence caused by negligence.

Put the lawbreaker behind bars and make him pay court costs.

Roberta K. Starkey: I was taught growing up that there is no such thing as 'an accident'. Someone in the mix was negligent and not following good sense! This bicyclist was clearly not only negligent but proud of his accomplishment by his own blog. He shows no remose whatsoever. He needs to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Cause = gross repeated negligence, and

reckless disregard for public safety, and

he just doesn't care about the rest of humanity.

No malicious intent? Seriously? Ignoring an obvious risk and intentionally not braking when heading into a group of pedestrians is about as malicious as it gets.

No malicious intent? Seriously? Ignoring an obvious risk and intentionally not braking when heading into a group of pedestrians is about as malicious as it gets.

And the fact the dude didn't even brake kinda hurts his defense.

Yup, let's hope President Drone gets re-elected.

Unfortunately car drivers who kill cyclists get away scot-free in many cases, citing the unbelievable "I didn't see him" excuse. Google "i didn't see him cyclist" - you might be surprised to see how easy it is to kill someone and get away with it....

I'd like to direct your attention to the "Enter" key on your keyboard. It's used to cause paragraphs.

I'd like to direct your Attention to "cause paragraphs" to "create paragraphs" SmartA$$

I'd like to direct your attention to the improper capitalization of the word "attention". Yours is an error. Mine is technically correct even if not someone's preferred phrasing. A$$.

Since you've obviously got so much time on your hands - would you care to breakdown the demographics of riders who obey the laws and those who don't? Where I live those who ride on the wrong side of the road and/or sidewalk are ALWAYS riding cruiser bikes. Running stop signs? Cars, and cyclists. Running red lights? Cruisers.

I live in an area with many bike clubs. We ride in larger groups, generally during morning hours after the commute (or early on weekends) to avoid traffic congestion, and a$$holes who try to drive us off the road. We take the lane where applicable (see your state traffic laws if you don't know what I mean) and follow all road laws. Yet still we get yahoos in pickups tossing soda & beer cans and fruit at us, calling us fags because we wear spandex and shave our legs.

I'm not condoning this cyclists actions in any way - he should face the justice system - but I am countering the same old tired claims by so many that cyclists never stop, they don't follow any laws etc.

I walk daily and have almost been hit several times by cyclists riding on the sidewalk. No warning they speed up behind me keeping as far away from the traffic side as they can. There is a selfish attitude that they have a greater right to be there and can push others out of the way. In our city it is illegal to ride on the sidewalk but is not enforced.

Joan- And there's the issue. When the individual perceives low risk to himself, the actions he takes do not consider the risk to others.

That's why SUV's will ride the bumper of smaller cars, cars edge close to bikes, and bikes zigzag through walkers. That's the way it is. And no one in any category will see themselves as having done anything wrong, but will instead claim that they are the victim. It's been this way for a long time, and probably won't change any time soon.

You shave your legs to ride a bike??? Disgusting!

You shave your legs to ride a bike??? Disgusting!

Racers do all the time. Less wind resistance.

It's the same reason Olympic swimmers remove literally all body hair.

Shaving your legs also helps with cleaning out road rash after crashes (you know, when car drivers run us off the road . . ).

It's legal to ride your bike on Seattle sidewalks, that's why the police "don't do a damn thing".

In many places it's actually illegal to ride your bike on the sidewalk.

Riding a bike on sidewalks is dangerous, which is why it is illegal in some places. As far giving cyclists 1.5 meters, I belonged to a club in California (ACTC) that lost a dozen cyclists in one outing when a distracted teenage driver plowed into the group from behind - this occurred many years ago, and the club initiated a "Share the Road" campaign. We ask drivers to give cyclists 3 feet, which is not too much to ask.

If only. Drivers who kill cyclists have very low conviction rates - many never even face charges.

I love the bike envy on this page. Riding a bike in traffic is no fun, you try doing a workout breathing exhaust fumes from a bus dodging certain death on every trip. If you don't have the balls to try it don't try to criticize it

Mike you make me want to vomit. What are you ten..no wait, probably a yuppie 20 or 30 something. Right? You ride your bike and have this superior attitude thinking you're so much better than the pukes in the cars around you, and pat yourself on the back for being so environmentally friendly and flex your muscles inside your tight spandex and slightly gay riding apparel.(do you really think it makes you go faster? lol or do you just like to show off your ass?). I know how you think, I was there once too. I ran, ran 4 miles a day, every day, ran everywhere I went. Same mindset. So get off your high horse. Wait till your knees give out or your hips. I have a 504 year old buddy, a former triathlete who has already had both his hips replaced. Me? Both my ACLs repaired. So its only a matter of time before you too will be stuck in traffic cursing at the cyclists too, or end up under the wheels of an SUV.

mudrake2.....mike is a troll....if you ignore him he will pout and go away.... :)

Too funny Mudrake...Too funny. I was just asking my friends if I anyone else found it hilarious that bicyclists wear their Tour de France uniforms to ride. It would be like me getting out my high school football uniform and pads to play flag football in the park.

mudrake - if you rode a bike instead of running everywhere you'd still have your ACLs. Same for your 504? year old triathlete buddy and his hips.

BTW when are you coming out of the closet? You, and so many like you, seem to be repressed when you keep referring to road bikers and their choice of clothing being 'gay'. Same for GedePrime. The clothing is practical for the exercise. And you can't hide your 'manhood' (or lack of it) in it - probably why you wouldn't wear it ;-)

I like the people who ride their bike maybe 5 miles tops, but have to get out their little biking shoes, biking socks, biking shorts and biking shirt. Geez-Louise! they spend more time changing clothes than riding!

My gi and black belt is practical for when I want to go outside to practice my forms, but I don't wear them. Playing football in my pads is practical, but I don't do it.

If you want to wear your bike outfits to ride, then do it. I just think it's funny and honestly a little pretentious. Let's face it. Bikers wear that stuff for the same reason that people wear skimpy outfits to the gym. It's not because they're wearing the most efficient outfit for the sport. It's because they want to be noticed...hence being pretentious.

Well, your partially correct about cyclists wearing what they wear in order to get noticed. We will do whatever it takes to get noticed, including wearing bright colored jerseys.

Enma3, how do you know how far cyclists ride? Do you follow them in your car? I know you're not riding a bike because you couldn't keep up.

GedePrime, if you'd like to expand your horizons, I'd like to invite you to join a group of us who will ride our bikes across Texas in October - if you think you can keep up with a group of retirees.

Well Gumps being a little presumptuous aren't you? I'm talking about people who live in my neighborhood that i see on a regular basis who don't ride very far and some that I know don't ride very far because they couldn't make it more than 5 miles round trip!

As to keeping up? I'm not 25 any more but I can keep up with these casual cyclists--I'd be leaving them in the dust as I don't like to ride as slow as they do. If you read my posts, I am a bicyclist too. I'm not retired as you are, so no, I probably could not keep up with you as I don't have the time to ride my bike for long distances on a regular basis.

Gumps -

Thanks for the offer. If it was logistically possible, I'd honestly concider it.

GedePrime, if you'd like to expand your horizons, I'd like to invite you to join a group of us who will ride our bikes across Texas in October - if you think you can keep up with a group of retirees.

You do Texas Hell Week in March?

At 62, I can complete the HotterNHell 100 mile course in under 5 1/2 hours, Ruken - care to join me? The ride is in Wichita Falls in August.

Absolutely wrong, GedePrime. The clothes are very practical. If you wear a normal t-shirt or gym shorts on a bike, then you're essentially wearing a parachute. Also, try sitting on a set pedaling for 3-4+ hours in cotton briefs. You'll chafe like mad. I assure you the outfit is VERY practical.

really, how many people do they kill, moron

Ron's right, its you, Michael who are the moron. People who use the road should obey the same rules and be required to carry a level of liability coverage. I have on more than one occasion almost hit riders who have blown through stop signs obviously thinking they are indestructable or to important to obey the rules. When I turn one into a grease spot, who is going to pay for the scratched and blood stains on my SUV? I shouldn't have to. If anything they should have liabiltiy coverage to cover the damages they do to the vehicles they end up under.

And tell me one good reason that people shouldn't need a license and plates for their vehicle.

Tailgate? Really? You sound like one of those people who use the "I didn't see him" excuse when you kill someone on a motorcycle.... while you are texting, playing with the radio, eating your lunch and speeding.

You're typical of the problem. You say "I would never ride fast through a stop light." Dummy, you're obligated to stop just like a car. You are part of the problem. Learn the rules of the road, or do you think you are above them?

A stop light means STOP. You must STOP. People in crosswalks with the "walk" light, or motorists with a green light, will not feel all warm and fuzzy because they see you running a red light at a "considerate speed", with them in mind.

Good on you, mate. Too bad he didn't get intimate with a tree. I see cyclists blow through stop signs all the time and it you mash one, guess who will get sued? We need more tickets issued. I spoke with someone at a bar the other day and he was incredulous that he had gotten a ticket for failure to stop at a stop sign when he was on his bike. I told him I wanted to shake the hand of the cop who issued it to him. He was not amused. I guess he thought I would be sympathetic.

I live on the east coast and it's often the same here. Some of our city officials are bicycle enthusiasts, and resent any thought of having more or stricter bicycle laws. You describe your "near misses" to them with concern, and they come back at you with, "Oh yeah? I almost got doored the other day! You think bicyclists have it easy?" The mayor and other area officials recently promoted a program, hoping to get MORE people to ride bicycles, despite not being able to solve existing problems. They really believe (and want others to believe) that bicyclists will do the right thing and police themselves. They blab about "education" and make flyers available. I had a near miss with a bicyclist who ran a red light a couple of weeks ago. I yelled, "Excuse me, the light is red!" and he flipped me the finger. It isn't good bicyclists who I disdain, it's self entitled people like him, and even some good bicyclists will excuse or ignore this behavior. Maybe a flyer would have helped.

Just how does the need to have a license to operate a moving vehicle infringe on your personal liberties? You need to show you have the aptitude and understanding of the law to operate most every other vehicle on public roads, so why not bikes?

@Gede

Where something was once unregulated, but is now regulated due to the failure of personal responsibility, liberty is lost. If you want to build a case for licensing all vehicles, I have no objection, but consider what that would represent to people who are unable to afford that process. My point here is strictly that we have become our own worst enemies, simply by failing to live up to the most basic responsibilities; that can't be fixed with regulation. Mishandling of firearms, abuse of driving privileges, and any other of a dozen things have resulted in increased regulation and/or legislation. The more regulation, the less freedom. That road leads to a totalitarian society, where there is an illusion of safety, and little liberty. It's where we're headed, unless we grow up quickly. Good luck with that.

"Where something was once unregulated, but is now regulated due to the failure of personal responsibility, liberty is lost."

Really? At one time cars weren't regulated. Traffic laws impede on freedom? At one time building codes didn't exist. They impede on freedom? If a car hit you running a red light, or if your house collapsed on you due to shoddy construction, you'd be screaming about YOUR rights, you wouldn't be defending the "freedoms" of others.

All people do not police themselves. All people do not do the right thing. This is human nature, and it is why we have laws and regulations. Your concerns about lost freedoms border on the paranoid, and put blame on the wrong thing.

Cygnus -

You hit the nail on the head when you said that people are unable, or unwilling, to live up to the most basic responsibilities. Acting like a civilized human being is our responsibility if we don't want Government telling us what we have to do.

You also hit a bulls-eye when you used the word "privileges". Operating a moving vehicle, be it motorized or self propelled, is a privilege not a right. You can restrict privileges for lack of compliance without it infringing on your liberties. There is a difference.

As far as the de-evolution of or basic liberties goes, I still don't see the correlation between that and licensing a vehicle. If anything, we have to have a license for things that could be construed as basic human rights, such as getting married and hunting for food.

We are our own worst enemies. The entitlement mindset running rampant through the American culture will do more to degrade our basic liberties than anything. And those who think that there should be no restrictions on our liberties are toying with the de-evolution of society towards anarchy. Like all things, the answer is somewhere in between. Do all cyclists act recklessly? No...that's just silly and to say so would be idiotic. But there are enough that do that perhaps it's for the benefit of society that they be exposed to the same laws, and justice for not abiding by them that the rest of society are held to for the privilege to get from point A to point B in a vehicle.

Gede

I would agree that the relationship between licensing, no matter what is licensed, and liberty is cloudy, but I have to ask myself: "Why is a license now required, when none was required before?"

Most of the time, licensing is for the public good, i.e., safety, health, etc., and that is well and good. What we have to decide is, how far we are willing to go in that direction by means of regulation, and whether regulation of that item is genuinely necessary, or just a way to avoid dealing with the root of the problem: irresponsible behavior.

With every freedom, there is an attendant responsibility. Our failure, as a society, to live up to that inescapable truth has put us in a bad position with regard to the future. The question I ask, is: Where does it stop? While autos, and you might argue scooters and motorcycles, are means of transportation, necessary to working and daily life, bicycles, roller skates, pogo sticks, foot scooters, tricycles, skateboards, et al, are mostly recreational. It is incumbent upon those who use these recreational items to use them responsibly. In nature, the penalty for irresponsible behavior is usually death. In the human world, sometimes that also applies, but most of the time we almost subsidize that behavior by turning a blind eye to it, or giving the miscreant a slap on the wrist. There needs to be serious consequences for irresponsible actions, along with increased training and awareness.

We have lost regard for our fellow man, confused "license" (not the issued kind) with liberty. We wish to do as we please, and expect to get away with it. That attitude brings us closer to totalitarian government with every passing day. How many times do you see convicted traffic violators issued "work licenses", in order to maintain their employment? It may seem harsh, but if you weren't thinking about keeping your job when you committed the offense, why should the justice system worry about it? We give out way too many "second chances", in my opinion. Like Baretta used to say: "If you can't do da time, don't do da crime."

I don't favor anarchy, neither do I relish its opposite. True liberty is the ability to do what you wish, while respecting the liberty of others, and accepting the consequences of your actions. The actual definitions of liberty are varied and sundry, muddied by societal contract and the need to maintain order. There is a middle ground, but that takes responsible, adult behavior and good will. The old saying goes: "Where mores are sufficient, laws are unnecessary; where mores are insufficient, laws are unenforceable." "Mene, Mene, Tekel Upharsin".

I have no axe to grind. I rode a bicycle recreationally for years, always obeyed the traffic laws, had it licensed in accordance with my town's ordinance, maintained it well, and respected other people's right of way. It wouldn't have disturbed me in the slightest if the state enacted a licensing/testing law. I'm sure though, depending on the process, that it would present a difficult equation. At what age does a license become necessary? Are children who ride their bikes to school or around their neighborhoods required to comply? It's a tough question, and one that would certainly infringe on liberty. The sad fact is, anyone who uses a vehicle improperly could be classified as a violent criminal. Pretty stiff definition, but accurate. I suppose there's a rational way out of this, but aside from increased education and strict punishment for consequence, I'll be darned if I can come up with one.