Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

bicycle-forum.net
Promoting biking discussion.

Main

Date: 01 Dec 2006 12:55:12
From: Yarper
Subject: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
working for a personal-injury law firm.

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death

What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.

Date: 10 Dec 2006 09:08:05
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Robert Coe wrote:
>
>
> My 2-year-old granddaughter can walk and talk at the same time. If you can't
> do it, I suggest that you have a problem.

If your 2-year-old daugher were walking while talking into a cell
phone, I think she'd be paying less attention to where she was
walking, who she was about to bump into, whether she was about to walk
out in front of a car, etc. At least, that's what I observe among
college students. She'd also be talking much louder than a normal
conversation, and talking loudly in inappropriate settings (like
meetings and restaurants).

OTOH, she'd be much more informed of her 2-year-old friends activities
- as in "What are you doing?.... Oh nothing... Are you going to Nikki's
tomorrow? ... What did you guys have for lunch?"

It's conversations like this that are so valuable that drivers (and
walkers) just _have_ to have a phone to their ear.

>
> Is this increasingly loony thread ever going to end?

To quote from your post yesterday:

"Who cares? Nobody says you have to read it."

Hope this helps!

- Frank Krygowski

Date: 10 Dec 2006 08:32:01
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Robert Coe wrote:
> Is this increasingly loony thread ever going to end?

HITLER HITLER HITLER HITLER

Date: 08 Dec 2006 18:15:39
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

k Hickey wrote:
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >k Hickey wrote:
> >> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> >I have had cagers yell and point at the "bike path" on several
> >> >occasions. I was not on the "bike path" since it appeared to have been
> >> >designed for a maximum speed of about 15 kph/10 mph [1] and the
> >> >intersections with the real road could only be safely negotiated by
> >> >dismounting and becoming a pedestrian.
> >>
> >> Help me out here... I'm trying to picture what kind of traffic
> >> patterns would require dismounting and walking. Mid-town Manhattan at
> >> rush hour? Maybe. Otherwise I can't imagine (I literally can't
> >> remember the last time I had to walk my bike across some sort of
> >> intersection).
> >
> >The point is I was able to ride SAFELY on the STREET at a reasonable
> >pace (~25 kph/15 mph), but could not do so on the "bike path". This
> >"bike" path was an extra-wide sidewalk with a white stripe and bicycle
> >icons. While being ON the path will protect one from motor vehicles
> >(unless one jumps the curb), there is more danger from pedestrians and
> >their accessories (dogs, strollers, children, etc.). However, the
> >intersections of the "bike path" with the real road are too dangerous
> >to ride through unless motor vehicle traffic is practically
> >non-existent. Hence, the need to dismount and act like a pedestrian.
>
> Still not getting it. It seems from your description that the danger
> at these intersections is from motor vehicles. But you're also saying
> that once you determine there aren't a lot of cars coming, that it's
> somehow safter (and necessary) to dismount to cross the intersection
> rather than riding across (which would obviously get you out of the
> way of oncoming traffic much, much faster). I simply can't imagine
> this scenario.

Well, one COULD ride on the pedestrian part of the side walk to get to
the "Walk" button, and then ride over the curbs and/or in the
pedestrian crosswalk, but this is bad form and defeats the purpose of
using the bicycle as a vehicle.

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

Date: 08 Dec 2006 12:18:53
From: Ed Pirrero
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

k Hickey wrote:
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >k Hickey wrote:
> >> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> >I have had cagers yell and point at the "bike path" on several
> >> >occasions. I was not on the "bike path" since it appeared to have been
> >> >designed for a maximum speed of about 15 kph/10 mph [1] and the
> >> >intersections with the real road could only be safely negotiated by
> >> >dismounting and becoming a pedestrian.
> >>
> >> Help me out here... I'm trying to picture what kind of traffic
> >> patterns would require dismounting and walking. Mid-town Manhattan at
> >> rush hour? Maybe. Otherwise I can't imagine (I literally can't
> >> remember the last time I had to walk my bike across some sort of
> >> intersection).
> >
> >The point is I was able to ride SAFELY on the STREET at a reasonable
> >pace (~25 kph/15 mph), but could not do so on the "bike path". This
> >"bike" path was an extra-wide sidewalk with a white stripe and bicycle
> >icons. While being ON the path will protect one from motor vehicles
> >(unless one jumps the curb), there is more danger from pedestrians and
> >their accessories (dogs, strollers, children, etc.). However, the
> >intersections of the "bike path" with the real road are too dangerous
> >to ride through unless motor vehicle traffic is practically
> >non-existent. Hence, the need to dismount and act like a pedestrian.
>
> Still not getting it. It seems from your description that the danger
> at these intersections is from motor vehicles. But you're also saying
> that once you determine there aren't a lot of cars coming, that it's
> somehow safter (and necessary) to dismount to cross the intersection
> rather than riding across (which would obviously get you out of the
> way of oncoming traffic much, much faster). I simply can't imagine
> this scenario.

The conflict happens when cars wish to turn right - they have to either
cross or occupy the bike lane. Another conflict occurs when the biker
has to turn left. I guess you'd just have to ride on some of these
things to see how truly crummy they are.

Where bike paths cross mid-block, it's even worse. You not only have
to watch cross-traffic, but parallel traffic turning right, becoming
cross-traffic. And fight the dogs, three-abreast walkers,
jogger-stroller middle-of-the-path runners, and ridiculously-low path
speed limits. Well, for vehicular bicycling, that is. Fine for
casual, out-for-a-Sunday-ride riders.

E.P.

Date: 08 Dec 2006 17:54:00
From: Mark Hickey
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Ed Pirrero" <gcmschemist@gmail.com > wrote:

>k Hickey wrote:
>> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> >The point is I was able to ride SAFELY on the STREET at a reasonable
>> >pace (~25 kph/15 mph), but could not do so on the "bike path". This
>> >"bike" path was an extra-wide sidewalk with a white stripe and bicycle
>> >icons. While being ON the path will protect one from motor vehicles
>> >(unless one jumps the curb), there is more danger from pedestrians and
>> >their accessories (dogs, strollers, children, etc.). However, the
>> >intersections of the "bike path" with the real road are too dangerous
>> >to ride through unless motor vehicle traffic is practically
>> >non-existent. Hence, the need to dismount and act like a pedestrian.
>>
>> Still not getting it. It seems from your description that the danger
>> at these intersections is from motor vehicles. But you're also saying
>> that once you determine there aren't a lot of cars coming, that it's
>> somehow safter (and necessary) to dismount to cross the intersection
>> rather than riding across (which would obviously get you out of the
>> way of oncoming traffic much, much faster). I simply can't imagine
>> this scenario.
>
>The conflict happens when cars wish to turn right - they have to either
>cross or occupy the bike lane. Another conflict occurs when the biker
>has to turn left. I guess you'd just have to ride on some of these
>things to see how truly crummy they are.
>
>Where bike paths cross mid-block, it's even worse. You not only have
>to watch cross-traffic, but parallel traffic turning right, becoming
>cross-traffic. And fight the dogs, three-abreast walkers,
>jogger-stroller middle-of-the-path runners, and ridiculously-low path
>speed limits. Well, for vehicular bicycling, that is. Fine for
>casual, out-for-a-Sunday-ride riders.

Still nothing in your description that makes me think you'd be safer
getting off the bike and spending more time in the intersection. I
haven't walked across any sort of intersection I can think of in many,
many moons, though I see people doing it occasionally (for no apparent
reason I can see other than probably lack of confidence on their
bike).

k Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

Date: 07 Dec 2006 19:06:00
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <ac6gn2trfbfbr8c54d10dgjrp9la67og7c@4ax.com >,
k Hickey <k@habcycles.com > writes:
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Ed Pirrero wrote:
>
>>> Have you ever had a driver shout "advice" to you about bicycles and
>>> traffic law? If so, have they ever been right? (If not, then count
>>> yourself lucky.)
>>
>>I have had cagers yell and point at the "bike path" on several
>>occasions. I was not on the "bike path" since it appeared to have been
>>designed for a maximum speed of about 15 kph/10 mph [1] and the
>>intersections with the real road could only be safely negotiated by
>>dismounting and becoming a pedestrian.
>
> Help me out here... I'm trying to picture what kind of traffic
> patterns would require dismounting and walking. Mid-town Manhattan at
> rush hour? Maybe. Otherwise I can't imagine (I literally can't
> remember the last time I had to walk my bike across some sort of
> intersection).

Ed Pirrero's description of his local bike path is reminiscent
to me of our own BC Parkway/7-Eleven Trail, especially through
Burnaby, BC. It's a multi-use path that more-or-less parallels
our SkyTrain light rail transit system, and indeed a 15 kmh/
10 mph speed limit is applied on it. Where the path crosses
certain streets, riders are met with a bollard in the middle
of the path and a sign that exhorts riders to dismount and
pedestriate across the street.

Of course nobody does, and Burnaby drivers are so well
socialized that they stop at the sight of anybody with
a bike anyway -- either out of courtesy, or from the
fearful expecation that the rider will heedlessly bolt
through, across their line. In fact if a rider does
the "right" thing, dismounts and yields to motorized
cross-traffic, it results in a hesitation waltz of:
"After you." "No, after you." So you might as well
just go (with a thank you wave,) and spare everybody
the delay.

Actually I find the BC Parkway useful for bypassing
a certain mega-mall and the Central Blvd/Imperial St
junction on my way to New Westminster and points east.
And it had some good blackberry picking before it got
housing-developed. It still has some spectacular views
overlooking the Fraser River, out to the Georgia Strait
islands, and even Mt Baker on a clear day.

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Date: 07 Dec 2006 18:56:25
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

dgk wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 17:36:13 GMT, "John Emmons"
> <johncyn@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>
> >Dragging gun laws into the debate is simply a red herring, if the person in
> >question had been say at a firing range, not paying attention to what she
> >was doing and "accidentally" shot someone, she would be tried for
> >manslaughter or even possibly murder in the 2nd degree, that is what she was
> >doing with her far more lethal weapons of choice, her car and her cell
> >phone.
> >
> >John E.
>
> Not quite true. Our VP shot a guy in the face and wasn't charged with
> anything....

I believe the critical words here are "Vice President".

The judicial system is not blind, with outcomes often depending more on
privilege, wealth and race than then available facts.

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

Date: 07 Dec 2006 18:35:40
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

k Hickey wrote:
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Ed Pirrero wrote:
>
> >> Have you ever had a driver shout "advice" to you about bicycles and
> >> traffic law? If so, have they ever been right? (If not, then count
> >> yourself lucky.)
> >
> >I have had cagers yell and point at the "bike path" on several
> >occasions. I was not on the "bike path" since it appeared to have been
> >designed for a maximum speed of about 15 kph/10 mph [1] and the
> >intersections with the real road could only be safely negotiated by
> >dismounting and becoming a pedestrian.
>
> Help me out here... I'm trying to picture what kind of traffic
> patterns would require dismounting and walking. Mid-town Manhattan at
> rush hour? Maybe. Otherwise I can't imagine (I literally can't
> remember the last time I had to walk my bike across some sort of
> intersection).

The point is I was able to ride SAFELY on the STREET at a reasonable
pace (~25 kph/15 mph), but could not do so on the "bike path". This
"bike" path was an extra-wide sidewalk with a white stripe and bicycle
icons. While being ON the path will protect one from motor vehicles
(unless one jumps the curb), there is more danger from pedestrians and
their accessories (dogs, strollers, children, etc.). However, the
intersections of the "bike path" with the real road are too dangerous
to ride through unless motor vehicle traffic is practically
non-existent. Hence, the need to dismount and act like a pedestrian.

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

Date: 08 Dec 2006 06:10:57
From: Mark Hickey
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote:

>k Hickey wrote:
>> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> >I have had cagers yell and point at the "bike path" on several
>> >occasions. I was not on the "bike path" since it appeared to have been
>> >designed for a maximum speed of about 15 kph/10 mph [1] and the
>> >intersections with the real road could only be safely negotiated by
>> >dismounting and becoming a pedestrian.
>>
>> Help me out here... I'm trying to picture what kind of traffic
>> patterns would require dismounting and walking. Mid-town Manhattan at
>> rush hour? Maybe. Otherwise I can't imagine (I literally can't
>> remember the last time I had to walk my bike across some sort of
>> intersection).
>
>The point is I was able to ride SAFELY on the STREET at a reasonable
>pace (~25 kph/15 mph), but could not do so on the "bike path". This
>"bike" path was an extra-wide sidewalk with a white stripe and bicycle
>icons. While being ON the path will protect one from motor vehicles
>(unless one jumps the curb), there is more danger from pedestrians and
>their accessories (dogs, strollers, children, etc.). However, the
>intersections of the "bike path" with the real road are too dangerous
>to ride through unless motor vehicle traffic is practically
>non-existent. Hence, the need to dismount and act like a pedestrian.

Still not getting it. It seems from your description that the danger
at these intersections is from motor vehicles. But you're also saying
that once you determine there aren't a lot of cars coming, that it's
somehow safter (and necessary) to dismount to cross the intersection
rather than riding across (which would obviously get you out of the
way of oncoming traffic much, much faster). I simply can't imagine
this scenario.

k Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

Date: 07 Dec 2006 15:10:47
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Ange1o DePa1ma wrote:

> You have obviously never hunted with a shotgun with a group of people.

I certainly have too...

> A person who "disappears" to get a better shot 50 years away can easily be
> mistaken for something edible.

Not at all what happened according to reports.

> Whatever you think of Cheney, that was an
> accident. And even if it were due to negligence who was going to snitch on
> him? He was with a party of friends and the victim, who was barely
> scratched, did not even consider pressing charges.

A good deal worse than barely scratched: (USA Today, starting quote
from a Ms. Armstrong, property owner):

"The vice president didn't see him," she said. "The covey flushed and
the vice president picked out a bird and was following it and shot. And
by god [sic], Harry was in the line of fire and got peppered pretty
good."

Armstrong said the shotgun pellets broke the skin.

"It knocked him silly. But he was fine. He was talking. His eyes were
open. It didn't get in his eyes or anything like that," she said.

The accident was not reported publicly by the vice president's office
for nearly 24 hours, and then only after it was reported by the Corpus
Christi Caller-Times on its website Sunday.

McBride said the vice president's office did not tell reporters about
the accident Saturday because they were deferring to Armstrong to
handle the announcement of what happened on her property.

Armstrong said everyone at the ranch was so "focused" on Whittington's
health Saturday that it wasn't until Sunday she called the Caller-Times
to report the accident. Her ranch is about 60 miles southwest of Corpus
Christi.

Sally Whittington told The Dallas Morning News her father was being
observed because of swelling from some of the welts on his neck. His
face "looks like chicken pox, kind of," she said. (end quote)

His observation was being carried out in the Intensive Care Unit. Loved
the small-g God thing. USA Today, always vigilant!

More, from a different source ( Wiki,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Whittington ):

<On February 11, 2006, Whittington, a Bush-Cheney campaign contributor,
was accidentally shot and injured by U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney
during a quail hunting trip, at a ranch in south Texas owned by
Katharine Armstrong. Armstrong is heavily involved in lobbying, mostly
with Republicans. Most of the damage from the shotgun blast was to the
right side of his body, including damage to his face, chest, and neck.
He was taken to Corpus Christi Memorial Hospital by ambulance.
Armstrong stated that Whittington was shot when Cheney was shooting at
a covey of birds. She also says that Whittington did not alert Cheney
to his location and was simply caught in the middle. The Kenedy County
Sheriff's office has cleared Cheney of any criminal wrongdoing in the
matter [2].
On February 14, hospital officials revealed that some of the lead
birdshot lodged in Whittington's heart caused a minor heart attack [3].
Doctors do not plan to remove all the pellets from Whittington's body.
They are not certain how many pellets are lodged in Whittington's body,
but estimated there are "less than 150 or 200." [4] [5]
Whittington was discharged from the hospital on February 17, 2006. >

"Lodged in the heart". A mighty deep scratch! "Armstrong heavily
involved in lobbying with Republicans". Six days in the hospital...

There were other quotes from various stories, such as "comes with the
territory" and "this happens in quail hunting". Aside from the
attempted first-line cover-up, of course.

So: Are you on the payroll ("barely scratched") or donating your time
for the cause?

My family were all hunters and fishermen. Shooting someone would indeed
have been an act of great shame-- Rule #1: Be sure of what you're
shooting at! ("Don't turn around to follow birds", which apparently is
what Cheney did, as Whittington was reportedly catching back up to the
shooting group after picking up a dead bird.)

Cheney admitted to "having a beer at lunch" (you may google for
confirmation). Drinking *anything* alcoholic in any amount before the
hunting day is over? Totally irresponsible, in terms of judgement and
eyesight acuity, especially for an older person. No alcohol blood tests
were taken, by report.

> Had Cheney been firing away while talking to his stockbroker on his cell
> phone, then I say hang the guy.

Nice try at further deflection. Had Cheney learned about shooting in
the military (fire zones), since he obviously didn't get any early
training at home, this "accident" wouldn't have happened. Well, as he
said, he had better things to do...

http://www.nhgazette.com/cgi-bin/NHGstore.cgi?user_action=list&category=%20NEWS%3B%20Chickenhawks

or the same in TinyURL: http://tinyurl.com/qkor

Thanks for your time. --D-y

Date: 07 Dec 2006 09:16:11
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Bruce Gilbert wrote:
> Come to Houston to experience the beauty of a traffic environment designed
> for cycling perfection. We have more ways to go straight from the saddle to
> the morgue than anyplace I have ever seen.
>
> Some years ago I was on the Braes Bayou bike trail waiting at a traffic
> light, minding my own business, doing a trackstand. Some lady with a baby
> carriage rams me into the intersection, right into a line of cars. She has
> the audacity to tell me I was blocking her path. I guess she was in a
> hurry....

Well, you *were* in her way, obviously! Duh! Or she wouldn't have (had
to) run into you!!! (<g >)

Bicyclists are the lowest form of life on the Food Chain. You must have
forgot or something.

Good museums. Easy access to fundamentalist radio. Velodrome. Recent
murders at any number of locations up and down the Braes Bayou trail
(incl at my grocery store and dry cleaners) at least during my years
there. Crazy drivers who dive heedlessly at 80mph from the left lane
for their usual exit, but then let you in line the next time around.
Carjackings, (real) ghettos, and the Medical Center.

Houston, a true microcosm of the USA: The best and the worst, all mixed
together.

I enjoyed talking to the bike cop on that trail who explained to me
that they didn't ride past a certain point on the way to MacGregor Park
"so we don't get hassled".

That's a group of at least two Houston officers, in uniform, with
sidearms and radios.

If you happen to know, is there still a ride at Planetary at 6:00,
Wednesdays? Great group. It's the only way to ride the surface streets
in Houston. --D-y

Date: 07 Dec 2006 07:07:38
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

compubyte wrote:
> > doing something illegal and someone dies as a result, you deserve to go to
> > jail.
> >
>
> Last I knew. driving and using a cell phone WASN't Illegal . .
>
> In a nutshell. IT WAS AN ACCIDENT. and to say people who drive and use a
> cell phone should be fined. well . BS .. I've been using a cell phone and
> driving since they first came out. ya know the BIG OLD phones in your car
> bag.. I haven't hit anyone yet. . OH WAIT.. I think it's because I CAN
> MULTITASK..

And if ya don't agree with me. I'll kill ya!!!! Got lots of guns, ya
know.

Now dumbass's that can't chew gum and walk at the same time.
> well Duhh Maybe they shouldn't be driving and talking on a cell phone.. I
> truely don't believe everyone should suffer because of a few idiots.. let's
> face it .. i see idiots on cell phones riding bikes. not paying attention.
> let's fine them to. and LORD KNOWS how many morons I've seen WALKING and
> talking on a cell phone. Just walking into traffic or crossing the side
> street not looking. Now were gonna fine anyone using a cell phone NOT
> sitting down .. . it's simple People.. YOU SCREW UP. TAKE RESPONSIBLITY..
> doesn't mean everyone else needs to suffer. It's no more simplier than
> that.
> Kinda like all those damn gun laws over 22,000 in the USA.. I mean come on.
> 22,000 + . wouldnt 1 gun law work? YOU commit a crime with a gun. YOU get
> an AUTOMATIC GO TO JAIL for 20 years and NO more guns for you. Period!!
> Now using a cell phone and causing an accident is NOT a crime per say . I
> mean I saw people in here saying SHE should NOT be allowed to every drive
> again, she should not be allowed to use a cell phone ever again. WONDEFUL if
> she INTENTIONALLY go into a car. and on her cell phone to RUN SOMEONE DOWN
> on purpose.. I realize all your folks throwing stones NEVER EVER caused an
> accident doing something Careless .. and I wish the rest of us were as good
> as you. But come. OK.. I'm done venting. after reading all those comments I
> had to say something LOL

Date: 06 Dec 2006 20:04:00
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Date: 07 Dec 2006 06:43:16
From: Mark Hickey
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:

>Sounds to me like your personal standards are just too low. Hang up
>and learn to drive.

Well said.

k Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

Date: 06 Dec 2006 19:52:01
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <AbSdnZbkPJ0TwerYnZ2dnUVZ_uGdnZ2d@comcast.com >,
"compubyte" <compubyte0417@hotmail.com > writes:

> .. I haven't hit anyone yet. . OH WAIT.. I think it's because I CAN
> MULTITASK..

So you think. Maybe you've just been lucky.

http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/512657/

Excerpt:

"Multitasking: You Can't Pay Full Attention to Both
Sights and Sounds

The reason talking on a cell phone makes drivers less safe
may be that the brain can't simultaneously give full
attention to both the visual task of driving and the
auditory task of listening."

--
Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Date: 06 Dec 2006 18:15:15
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Ed Pirrero wrote:
> k Hickey wrote:
> >
> > Personally, I prefer the 6' (2m) plus bike lanes here in the Phoenix
> > Arizona east valley over a foot less width left of the auto
> > decation. But for some strange reason, some cyclists can't imagine
> > that having a lane with lane kings the discourages auto incursion
> > to our LEFT is a good thing. Go figger.
>
> It discourages, but doesn't prevent. In addition, it encourages
> drivers to think that the rest of all the other roads are for cars
> only.
>
> Have you ever had a driver shout "advice" to you about bicycles and
> traffic law? If so, have they ever been right? (If not, then count
> yourself lucky.)

I have had cagers yell and point at the "bike path" on several
occasions. I was not on the "bike path" since it appeared to have been
designed for a maximum speed of about 15 kph/10 mph [1] and the
intersections with the real road could only be safely negotiated by
dismounting and becoming a pedestrian.

> In any case, just about every bike lane I've ever seen is an
> afterthought, in the door zone, less than 3 feet wide, not contiguous
> (ends at intersections) or contains a lot of road debris. Or some
> combination thereof. Pretty much any one of those things makes cycling
> in and around autos harder, not easier.
>
> A wide lane, with no bike ghetto off to the right, is my ideal
> commuting set-up. If only for the reason that auto drivers not get the
> idea that bikes MUST remain in the bike lanes.
>
> Those lanes in your area sound nice, if you accept the idea of a bike
> ghetto to begin with. They would be way ahead of anything I've ever
> had the "priviledge" of riding on.

The only place I have ever really wanted separate bicycle lanes is
along certain controlled access bridges and elevated roads, where there
are no reasonable alternate routes.

[1] Before someone points out this is mathematically incorrect, I am
using approximate values and a strict conversion would lead to a false
impression of the actual precision intended.

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

Date: 07 Dec 2006 06:41:29
From: Mark Hickey
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote:

>Ed Pirrero wrote:

>> Have you ever had a driver shout "advice" to you about bicycles and
>> traffic law? If so, have they ever been right? (If not, then count
>> yourself lucky.)
>
>I have had cagers yell and point at the "bike path" on several
>occasions. I was not on the "bike path" since it appeared to have been
>designed for a maximum speed of about 15 kph/10 mph [1] and the
>intersections with the real road could only be safely negotiated by
>dismounting and becoming a pedestrian.

Help me out here... I'm trying to picture what kind of traffic
patterns would require dismounting and walking. Mid-town Manhattan at
rush hour? Maybe. Otherwise I can't imagine (I literally can't
remember the last time I had to walk my bike across some sort of
intersection).

k Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

Date: 07 Dec 2006 21:59:15
From: Claire Petersky
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com > wrote in message
news:ac6gn2trfbfbr8c54d10dgjrp9la67og7c@4ax.com...

> Help me out here... I'm trying to picture what kind of traffic
> patterns would require dismounting and walking. Mid-town Manhattan at
> rush hour? Maybe.

Situation: I can't legally turn left from northbound on 3rd Ave on to
Madison at rush hour. . 4th Ave has much denser traffic (3rd is buses or
bikes only), and is steeper than 3rd, so I don't consider it an alternative.
2nd is one-way the other way. The entrance to the garage for the building
where I work is on Madison. Madison itself is incredibly steep (probably
lose 40' of elevation in that half block), and one way.

I dismount and walk through the intersection, then continue down to the
garage entrance.

--
Warm Regards,

Claire Petersky
http://www.bicyclemeditations.org/
See the books I've set free at: http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky

Date: 07 Dec 2006 14:37:37
From: Bruce Gilbert
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com > wrote in message
news:ac6gn2trfbfbr8c54d10dgjrp9la67og7c@4ax.com...
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Ed Pirrero wrote:
>
> >> Have you ever had a driver shout "advice" to you about bicycles and
> >> traffic law? If so, have they ever been right? (If not, then count
> >> yourself lucky.)
> >
> >I have had cagers yell and point at the "bike path" on several
> >occasions. I was not on the "bike path" since it appeared to have been
> >designed for a maximum speed of about 15 kph/10 mph [1] and the
> >intersections with the real road could only be safely negotiated by
> >dismounting and becoming a pedestrian.
>
> Help me out here... I'm trying to picture what kind of traffic
> patterns would require dismounting and walking. Mid-town Manhattan at
> rush hour? Maybe. Otherwise I can't imagine (I literally can't
> remember the last time I had to walk my bike across some sort of
> intersection).
>
> k Hickey
> Habanero Cycles
> http://www.habcycles.com
> Home of the $795 ti frame

k,

Come to Houston to experience the beauty of a traffic environment designed
for cycling perfection. We have more ways to go straight from the saddle to
the morgue than anyplace I have ever seen.

Some years ago I was on the Braes Bayou bike trail waiting at a traffic
light, minding my own business, doing a trackstand. Some lady with a baby
carriage rams me into the intersection, right into a line of cars. She has
the audacity to tell me I was blocking her path. I guess she was in a
hurry....

Bruce

Date: 07 Dec 2006 15:37:43
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Bruce Gilbert" <bhgilbert@hal-pc.org > wrote in message
news:RGVdh.7693$tM1.2409@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com> wrote in message
> news:ac6gn2trfbfbr8c54d10dgjrp9la67og7c@4ax.com...
>> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Ed Pirrero wrote:
>>
>> >> Have you ever had a driver shout "advice" to you about bicycles and
>> >> traffic law? If so, have they ever been right? (If not, then count
>> >> yourself lucky.)
>> >
>> >I have had cagers yell and point at the "bike path" on several
>> >occasions. I was not on the "bike path" since it appeared to have been
>> >designed for a maximum speed of about 15 kph/10 mph [1] and the
>> >intersections with the real road could only be safely negotiated by
>> >dismounting and becoming a pedestrian.
>>
>> Help me out here... I'm trying to picture what kind of traffic
>> patterns would require dismounting and walking. Mid-town Manhattan at
>> rush hour? Maybe. Otherwise I can't imagine (I literally can't
>> remember the last time I had to walk my bike across some sort of
>> intersection).
>>
>> k Hickey
>> Habanero Cycles
>> http://www.habcycles.com
>> Home of the $795 ti frame
>
>
> k,
>
> Come to Houston to experience the beauty of a traffic environment designed
> for cycling perfection. We have more ways to go straight from the saddle
> to
> the morgue than anyplace I have ever seen.
>
> Some years ago I was on the Braes Bayou bike trail waiting at a traffic
> light, minding my own business, doing a trackstand. Some lady with a baby
> carriage rams me into the intersection, right into a line of cars. She has
> the audacity to tell me I was blocking her path. I guess she was in a
> hurry....
>
> Bruce
>
Same kind of thing happened to me and to my chagrin the cop car that saw it
looked at me like he disapproved of me and was going to talk to me but
thought he was too busy anyway.

She yelled at me while I stared at her. I being up on curb had given way
to the ramp up but I did not notice there was a telephone pole blocking her
progress behind me. She was smoking while pramming her baby. They all do
in Surrey. Hate to be her kid.

Date: 06 Dec 2006 10:54:35
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Ed Pirrero wrote:
> Have you ever had a driver shout "advice" to you about bicycles and
> traffic law?

This is where a cell phone that takes photos that can be downloaded to
a remote place for saving is a very handy thing.

Mine doesn't really take pictures but I've shut up a couple of drivers
pronto with it anyhow.

Maybe the times are finally a-changin!!!

I've called 911 on pay phones (remember pay phones?) in the past and
had a squad car respond. "I'm being threatened by a driver" while
giving location, lic. #, car/driver description. Do it! ("I'm going
about my lawful business" is a handy phrase)

> If so, have they ever been right? (If not, then count
> yourself lucky.)

I know what you mean, but I never count myself lucky or unlucky
depending on the behavior of others. Abuse is abuse; same for
threatening. "Get off the road" is a threat, plain and simple.

> In any case, just about every bike lane I've ever seen is an
> afterthought, in the door zone, less than 3 feet wide, not contiguous
> (ends at intersections) or contains a lot of road debris. Or some
> combination thereof. Pretty much any one of those things makes cycling
> in and around autos harder, not easier.
>
> A wide lane, with no bike ghetto off to the right, is my ideal
> commuting set-up. If only for the reason that auto drivers not get the
> idea that bikes MUST remain in the bike lanes.
>
> Those lanes in your area sound nice, if you accept the idea of a bike
> ghetto to begin with. They would be way ahead of anything I've ever
> had the "priviledge" of riding on.

Shoal Creek Blvd, Austin Tx has been a "proving ground" of sorts over
the last year or so.

What works on this curvy street is pushing the vehicular traffic to the
middle of the ROW, with a "Parking/Bikes" lane striped to the right.
Excuse me if I don't provide measurements here. There's about 2'
between the side of a minivan and the stripe:

http://bicycleaustin.info/roadways/shoalcreek-aca.html

The cars slow down because they don't want a headon collision (proving
some intelligence, after all!), while they seem to really respect the
parking/bike stripe if for no other reason than the parking part is
"for them", if you know what I mean.

Some local "zealots" (a few of whom have commandeered the Austin
Cycling Association's bully pulpit) are still trying to get all MV
parking out of bike lanes here but that's not going to happen before
$30/gal gas. Actually, it was their ("zealot", not ACA necessarily,
just to be clear) misguided efforts that caused the furor IRT SCB in
the first place, where wacky lane pattern options were publicly
considered, such as a meandering ROW with parking alternating from side
to side--IOW, approx. half of the residents would have lost their
street-front parking. Let's not pretend to be surprised that they were
mighty PO'd about it. Then, the city paid a ton of money to construct
"parking islands" which obstructed the parking/bike lane in a really
dangerous manner. A swat back at the "No Cars!!!" zealots? Certainly a
"solution" no one liked.

Not surprisingly, a couple of these "Dragons' Teeth" took the oilpan
out from underneath an AARP Buick or two. Not to mention making it
impossible to use a street sweeper... or the fact that much (most, most
all) of the time, there were more parking islands on the street than
parked cars!

So, sanity prevailed and they pulled up the parking islands-- a really
rekable and welcome admission of error-- and left the Parking/Bikes
lane stripe where it was. I've been riding SCB for 20+ years; there is
a new civility present and obvious; the best bike road in Austin got
better. And more: sections of the street that have not had sidewalks
are being improved not just with sidewalks on both sides, but really
attractive limestone block retaining walls where needed, and also new
driveways, curb cuts, and aprons, again per need. Quite a few residents
are having their old water meters replaced, with new WM boxes and new
homeowner cutoffs, and some old water service yardlines are being
replaced as needed; some sewer line work is being done, also. It's a
fairly extensive re-do and IMHO a showpiece for "how it can be done".
Note, the stripe itself is about the cheapest improvement possible;
along with a few new signs denoting use, a big return on minimal cost.

You'll see complaints in the "hazards to cyclists" theme (such as in
the website above) but IMHO there's an attitude problem* at the base of
this rhetoric, plus a lack of simple real-world riding skills, like
listening and looking behind you, and looking into parked vehicles to
see if someone is about to open a door, not waiting until the last
second before veering around a parked car, adjusting your speed to flow
in traffic, and so forth.

*Anger at past incidents, plus an unwillingness to "share the road";
which after all is a two-way street.

I've been known to slow or even stop (solo riding) at some safe
distance behind a parked car or truck to let a cluster of drivers get
on down the road on SCB (and other places). Some cyclists regard this
as a shameful, or even cowardly act, "letting them push you around",
etc. etc. All I can say is, I take the lane often as not but at the
same time, courtesy to drivers is noticed, appreciated, and returned.
Not in every case, of course. But, why be an asshole *too*?

OK, back to the new novel: "Grime and Polishment". Should be finished
in a couple of years or so!
--D-y

Date: 06 Dec 2006 12:36:15
From: Ange1o DePa1ma
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
> Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
> to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
> working for a personal-injury law firm.
>
> http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death
>
> What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
> they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.

Unless they're built in as roads are constructed they will be too expensive,
often impossible to deploy. Unless they provide a physical barrier it will
not save many cyclists.

What we *really* need is a first-time $500 fine for assholes who talk on
their phones while driving. I can't tell you how many people drive around my
town barely paying attention to the road because they're yapping on their
phones. My kids walk home from school on these same streets.

Second offenders should lose their licenses for a month and be fined $2500.

In this case, the woman should be charged with vehicular homicide. If you're
doing something illegal and someone dies as a result, you deserve to go to
jail.

Date: 06 Dec 2006 19:12:56
From: compubyte
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

> doing something illegal and someone dies as a result, you deserve to go to
> jail.
>

Last I knew. driving and using a cell phone WASN't Illegal . .

In a nutshell. IT WAS AN ACCIDENT. and to say people who drive and use a
cell phone should be fined. well . BS .. I've been using a cell phone and
driving since they first came out. ya know the BIG OLD phones in your car
bag.. I haven't hit anyone yet. . OH WAIT.. I think it's because I CAN
MULTITASK.. Now dumbass's that can't chew gum and walk at the same time.
well Duhh Maybe they shouldn't be driving and talking on a cell phone.. I
truely don't believe everyone should suffer because of a few idiots.. let's
face it .. i see idiots on cell phones riding bikes. not paying attention.
let's fine them to. and LORD KNOWS how many morons I've seen WALKING and
talking on a cell phone. Just walking into traffic or crossing the side
street not looking. Now were gonna fine anyone using a cell phone NOT
sitting down .. . it's simple People.. YOU SCREW UP. TAKE RESPONSIBLITY..
doesn't mean everyone else needs to suffer. It's no more simplier than
that.
Kinda like all those damn gun laws over 22,000 in the USA.. I mean come on.
22,000 + . wouldnt 1 gun law work? YOU commit a crime with a gun. YOU get
an AUTOMATIC GO TO JAIL for 20 years and NO more guns for you. Period!!
Now using a cell phone and causing an accident is NOT a crime per say . I
mean I saw people in here saying SHE should NOT be allowed to every drive
again, she should not be allowed to use a cell phone ever again. WONDEFUL if
she INTENTIONALLY go into a car. and on her cell phone to RUN SOMEONE DOWN
on purpose.. I realize all your folks throwing stones NEVER EVER caused an
accident doing something Careless .. and I wish the rest of us were as good
as you. But come. OK.. I'm done venting. after reading all those comments I
had to say something LOL

Date: 07 Dec 2006 17:36:13
From: John Emmons
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

While using a cell phone and driving may not have been technically illegal,
driving recklessly is, if it results in someone's death that is what some
might call evidence of recklessness. The person who was killed wouldn't have
been if the driver had been paying attention to what she was supposed to be
doing, driving.

Next year it will be illegal to use anything but a handsfree cell phone in
California. I believe that New York state already has a law similiar to that
in place.

As for your claims about multitasking, bully for you. Driving while using a
cell phone is more dangerous than driving when not whether you can multitask
or not. Look it up next time you're shaving and eating breakfast at the same
time.

As for using a cell phone and causing an accident, I believe the person in
question killed someone, sounds like she needs to "take responsibility" for
her actions as you say.

I think the expression you were looking for is "per se".

No one is claiming or has claimed that the woman in question acted with
malice or with forethought but her irresponsibility caused the death of
another. She should have been tried for manslaughter and from the sound of
it, she should have been convicted.

Venting is great, when someone you love is killed thru the irresponsible,
preventable actions of another, feel free to vent to your heart's content.

Dragging gun laws into the debate is simply a red herring, if the person in
question had been say at a firing range, not paying attention to what she
was doing and "accidentally" shot someone, she would be tried for
manslaughter or even possibly murder in the 2nd degree, that is what she was
doing with her far more lethal weapons of choice, her car and her cell
phone.

John E.

"compubyte" <compubyte0417@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:AbSdnZbkPJ0TwerYnZ2dnUVZ_uGdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> > doing something illegal and someone dies as a result, you deserve to go
to
> > jail.
> >
>
> Last I knew. driving and using a cell phone WASN't Illegal . .
>
> In a nutshell. IT WAS AN ACCIDENT. and to say people who drive and use a
> cell phone should be fined. well . BS .. I've been using a cell phone and
> driving since they first came out. ya know the BIG OLD phones in your car
> bag.. I haven't hit anyone yet. . OH WAIT.. I think it's because I CAN
> MULTITASK.. Now dumbass's that can't chew gum and walk at the same time.
> well Duhh Maybe they shouldn't be driving and talking on a cell phone.. I
> truely don't believe everyone should suffer because of a few idiots..
let's
> face it .. i see idiots on cell phones riding bikes. not paying attention.
> let's fine them to. and LORD KNOWS how many morons I've seen WALKING and
> talking on a cell phone. Just walking into traffic or crossing the side
> street not looking. Now were gonna fine anyone using a cell phone NOT
> sitting down .. . it's simple People.. YOU SCREW UP. TAKE RESPONSIBLITY..
> doesn't mean everyone else needs to suffer. It's no more simplier than
> that.
> Kinda like all those damn gun laws over 22,000 in the USA.. I mean come
on.
> 22,000 + . wouldnt 1 gun law work? YOU commit a crime with a gun. YOU get
> an AUTOMATIC GO TO JAIL for 20 years and NO more guns for you. Period!!
> Now using a cell phone and causing an accident is NOT a crime per say . I
> mean I saw people in here saying SHE should NOT be allowed to every drive
> again, she should not be allowed to use a cell phone ever again. WONDEFUL
if
> she INTENTIONALLY go into a car. and on her cell phone to RUN SOMEONE DOWN
> on purpose.. I realize all your folks throwing stones NEVER EVER caused
an
> accident doing something Careless .. and I wish the rest of us were as
good
> as you. But come. OK.. I'm done venting. after reading all those comments
I
> had to say something LOL
>
>
>

Date: 08 Dec 2006 06:41:53
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article
<hiYdh.165137$Fi1.124409@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att
.net >,
"John Emmons" <johncyn@worldnet.att.net > wrote:

> As for your claims about multitasking, bully for you. Driving while using a
> cell phone is more dangerous than driving when not whether you can multitask
> or not. Look it up next time you're shaving and eating breakfast at the same
> time.

Most people cannot walk and talk at the same time;
literally. Come on. All of you while walking have had
to dodge a cellular telephone addled zombie on the
sidewalk/pavement.

--
Michael Press

Date: 10 Dec 2006 10:53:43
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 06:41:53 GMT, Michael Press <jack@fake.net > wrote:
: In article
: <hiYdh.165137$Fi1.124409@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att
: .net >,
: "John Emmons" <johncyn@worldnet.att.net > wrote:
:
: > As for your claims about multitasking, bully for you. Driving while using a
: > cell phone is more dangerous than driving when not whether you can multitask
: > or not. Look it up next time you're shaving and eating breakfast at the same
: > time.
:
: Most people cannot walk and talk at the same time;
: literally. Come on. All of you while walking have had
: to dodge a cellular telephone addled zombie on the
: sidewalk/pavement.

My 2-year-old granddaughter can walk and talk at the same time. If you can't
do it, I suggest that you have a problem.

Is this increasingly loony thread ever going to end?

Date: 10 Dec 2006 11:17:20
From: gamer
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone

Robert Coe wrote:

>On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 06:41:53 GMT, Michael Press <jack@fake.net> wrote:
>: In article
>: <hiYdh.165137$Fi1.124409@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att
>: .net>,
>: "John Emmons" <johncyn@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>:
>: > As for your claims about multitasking, bully for you. Driving while using a
>: > cell phone is more dangerous than driving when not whether you can multitask
>: > or not. Look it up next time you're shaving and eating breakfast at the same
>: > time.
>:
>: Most people cannot walk and talk at the same time;
>: literally. Come on. All of you while walking have had
>: to dodge a cellular telephone addled zombie on the
>: sidewalk/pavement.
>
>My 2-year-old granddaughter can walk and talk at the same time. If you can't
>do it, I suggest that you have a problem.
>
>Is this increasingly loony thread ever going to end?
>
>

Talk about the dumbest reply on record. You win (that award).

Date: 10 Dec 2006 11:32:17
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 11:17:20 -0500, gamer <edc4h@cox.net > wrote:
: Robert Coe wrote:
:
: >On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 06:41:53 GMT, Michael Press <jack@fake.net> wrote:
: >: In article
: >: <hiYdh.165137$Fi1.124409@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att
: >: .net>,
: >: "John Emmons" <johncyn@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
: >:
: >: > As for your claims about multitasking, bully for you. Driving while using a
: >: > cell phone is more dangerous than driving when not whether you can multitask
: >: > or not. Look it up next time you're shaving and eating breakfast at the same
: >: > time.
: >:
: >: Most people cannot walk and talk at the same time;
: >: literally. Come on. All of you while walking have had
: >: to dodge a cellular telephone addled zombie on the
: >: sidewalk/pavement.
: >
: >My 2-year-old granddaughter can walk and talk at the same time. If you can't
: >do it, I suggest that you have a problem.
: >
: >Is this increasingly loony thread ever going to end?
: >
: >
:
: Talk about the dumbest reply on record. You win (that award).

You prove my point. Increasingly loony.

Date: 07 Dec 2006 23:21:14
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 06:41:53 GMT, Michael Press <jack@fake.net >
wrote:

>All of you while walking have had
>to dodge a cellular telephone addled zombie on the
>sidewalk/pavement.

Or not.

You get extra points if they drop the phone and then step on it
themselves.
--
zk

Date: 07 Dec 2006 14:37:03
From: dgk
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 17:36:13 GMT, "John Emmons"
<johncyn@worldnet.att.net > wrote:

>Dragging gun laws into the debate is simply a red herring, if the person in
>question had been say at a firing range, not paying attention to what she
>was doing and "accidentally" shot someone, she would be tried for
>manslaughter or even possibly murder in the 2nd degree, that is what she was
>doing with her far more lethal weapons of choice, her car and her cell
>phone.
>
>John E.

Not quite true. Our VP shot a guy in the face and wasn't charged with
anything. One would have to say that shooting someone in the face is
proof that they weren't paying attention.

Here in NYC we just had a case where a guy drove the wrong way on a
highway and killed two people. Then he had the nerve to argue that he
wasn't drunk. To me, that just makes it worse. Then he drove the wrong
way on purpose.

Date: 07 Dec 2006 16:12:21
From: Ange1o DePa1ma
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"dgk" <dgk@somewhere.com > wrote in message
news:l6rgn2lmopb00g7u1g25via3rb3vnv0gpa@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 17:36:13 GMT, "John Emmons"
> <johncyn@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Dragging gun laws into the debate is simply a red herring, if the person
>>in
>>question had been say at a firing range, not paying attention to what she
>>was doing and "accidentally" shot someone, she would be tried for
>>manslaughter or even possibly murder in the 2nd degree, that is what she
>>was
>>doing with her far more lethal weapons of choice, her car and her cell
>>phone.
>>
>>John E.
>
> Not quite true. Our VP shot a guy in the face and wasn't charged with
> anything. One would have to say that shooting someone in the face is
> proof that they weren't paying attention.

You have obviously never hunted with a shotgun with a group of people. A
person who "disappears" to get a better shot 50 years away can easily be
mistaken for something edible. Whatever you think of Cheney, that was an
accident. And even if it were due to negligence who was going to snitch on
him? He was with a party of friends and the victim, who was barely
scratched, did not even consider pressing charges.

Had Cheney been firing away while talking to his stockbroker on his cell
phone, then I say hang the guy.

Date: 07 Dec 2006 12:44:56
From: Notan
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring

dgk wrote:
>
> On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 17:36:13 GMT, "John Emmons"
> <johncyn@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> >Dragging gun laws into the debate is simply a red herring, if the person in
> >question had been say at a firing range, not paying attention to what she
> >was doing and "accidentally" shot someone, she would be tried for
> >manslaughter or even possibly murder in the 2nd degree, that is what she was
> >doing with her far more lethal weapons of choice, her car and her cell
> >phone.
> >
> >John E.
>
> Not quite true. Our VP shot a guy in the face and wasn't charged with
> anything. One would have to say that shooting someone in the face is
> proof that they weren't paying attention.
>
> Here in NYC we just had a case where a guy drove the wrong way on a
> highway and killed two people. Then he had the nerve to argue that he
> wasn't drunk. To me, that just makes it worse. Then he drove the wrong
> way on purpose.

Not that we're interested in the whole stories, but your snippets have
little bearing on anything.

Notan

Date: 07 Dec 2006 05:50:20
From: fluffy bunny
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <AbSdnZbkPJ0TwerYnZ2dnUVZ_uGdnZ2d@comcast.com >,
"compubyte" <compubyte0417@hotmail.com > wrote:

> it's simple People.. YOU SCREW UP. TAKE RESPONSIBLITY..
[...]
> mean I saw people in here saying SHE should NOT be allowed to every drive
> again, she should not be allowed to use a cell phone ever again. WONDEFUL if
> she INTENTIONALLY go into a car. and on her cell phone to RUN SOMEONE DOWN
> on purpose..

But wait -- you seem to be speaking with forked tongue. One might think
you want to give her a pass because, as you wrote:

> In a nutshell. IT WAS AN ACCIDENT.

QED: you want to give her a pass.

Your keen insight and epistomological rigor is an inspiration to us all.

.max

Date: 07 Dec 2006 05:44:18
From: fluffy bunny
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <AbSdnZbkPJ0TwerYnZ2dnUVZ_uGdnZ2d@comcast.com >,
"compubyte" <compubyte0417@hotmail.com > wrote:

> Last I knew. driving and using a cell phone WASN't Illegal . .

in many places using a handset to talk is illegal (headsets ok) unless
parked, and in virtually every jurisdiction, inattentative driving is
just plain always illegal.

so ... sorta not.

Date: 06 Dec 2006 21:07:41
From: Ange1o DePa1ma
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"compubyte" <compubyte0417@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:AbSdnZbkPJ0TwerYnZ2dnUVZ_uGdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> doing something illegal and someone dies as a result, you deserve to go
>> to jail.
>>
>
> Last I knew. driving and using a cell phone WASN't Illegal . .
>
> In a nutshell. IT WAS AN ACCIDENT. and to say people who drive and use a
> cell phone should be fined. well . BS .. I've been using a cell phone and
> driving since they first came out. ya know the BIG OLD phones in your car
> bag.. I haven't hit anyone yet. . OH WAIT.. I think it's because I CAN
> MULTITASK.. Now dumbass's that can't chew gum and walk at the same time.
> well Duhh Maybe they shouldn't be driving and talking on a cell phone.. I
> truely don't believe everyone should suffer because of a few idiots..
> let's face it .. i see idiots on cell phones riding bikes. not paying
> attention. let's fine them to. and LORD KNOWS how many morons I've seen
> WALKING and talking on a cell phone. Just walking into traffic or crossing
> the side street not looking. Now were gonna fine anyone using a cell
> phone NOT sitting down .. . it's simple People.. YOU SCREW UP. TAKE
> RESPONSIBLITY.. doesn't mean everyone else needs to suffer. It's no more
> simplier than that.
> Kinda like all those damn gun laws over 22,000 in the USA.. I mean come
> on. 22,000 + . wouldnt 1 gun law work? YOU commit a crime with a gun. YOU
> get an AUTOMATIC GO TO JAIL for 20 years and NO more guns for you.
> Period!!
> Now using a cell phone and causing an accident is NOT a crime per say . I
> mean I saw people in here saying SHE should NOT be allowed to every drive
> again, she should not be allowed to use a cell phone ever again. WONDEFUL
> if she INTENTIONALLY go into a car. and on her cell phone to RUN SOMEONE
> DOWN on purpose.. I realize all your folks throwing stones NEVER EVER
> caused an accident doing something Careless .. and I wish the rest of us
> were as good as you. But come. OK.. I'm done venting. after reading all
> those comments I had to say something LOL

LOL LOL!! I have news for you:

It is a traffic offense to use a handset while driving in NJ. It should be a
crime, or at least a serious moving violation. LOL!! Why? Because it is
extremely easy to kill someone when you're not paying full attention to the
road ahead of you. Personally, I wish everyone who drives and talks on their
cell phone would run their car into something big, hard, and immovable. The
world will be a better place without them. LOL. LOL!!

I do a lot of driving in town and on the highway. I can't tell you the
number of times a car has swerved into my lane, sometimes head on, because
the driver was looking down, or staring at their phone held at arm's length
in front of them in plain sight. While I'm driving my son to school in the
morning three quarters of the motorists driving past the intersection at the
bottom of my street are going 30 miles over the speed limit, downhill, in
their SUVs or trucks while gabbing on their goddamned phones. LOL!! I would
love to know who all these brain dead morons are speaking with at 7:40 in
the morning. Two years ago one of these imbeciles went off the road and
knocked down a telephone poll. LOL!! Too bad they survived, LOL!!

My daughters walk home on this same street almost every day, about 8 feet
from traffic. LOL!!!

Some day one of these stupid motherfuckers is going to kill a cop, or a some
big shot politician, or judge. At that point we'll get some meaningful laws
against this incredibly stupid, dangerous fetish some people have with
driving and talking on the phone. LOL!!

Angelo DePalma

Date: 07 Dec 2006 15:29:23
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Ange1o DePa1ma" <angelodpnospam@nospam.gmail.com > wrote in message
news:6IucnXBBFvkL6urYUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> "compubyte" <compubyte0417@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:AbSdnZbkPJ0TwerYnZ2dnUVZ_uGdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>> doing something illegal and someone dies as a result, you deserve to go
>>> to jail.
>>>
>>
>> Last I knew. driving and using a cell phone WASN't Illegal . .
>>
>> In a nutshell. IT WAS AN ACCIDENT. and to say people who drive and use a
>> cell phone should be fined. well . BS .. I've been using a cell phone and
>> driving since they first came out. ya know the BIG OLD phones in your car
>> bag.. I haven't hit anyone yet. . OH WAIT.. I think it's because I CAN
>> MULTITASK.. Now dumbass's that can't chew gum and walk at the same time.
>> well Duhh Maybe they shouldn't be driving and talking on a cell phone..
>> I truely don't believe everyone should suffer because of a few idiots..
>> let's face it .. i see idiots on cell phones riding bikes. not paying
>> attention. let's fine them to. and LORD KNOWS how many morons I've seen
>> WALKING and talking on a cell phone. Just walking into traffic or
>> crossing the side street not looking. Now were gonna fine anyone using a
>> cell phone NOT sitting down .. . it's simple People.. YOU SCREW UP. TAKE
>> RESPONSIBLITY.. doesn't mean everyone else needs to suffer. It's no more
>> simplier than that.
>> Kinda like all those damn gun laws over 22,000 in the USA.. I mean come
>> on. 22,000 + . wouldnt 1 gun law work? YOU commit a crime with a gun.
>> YOU get an AUTOMATIC GO TO JAIL for 20 years and NO more guns for you.
>> Period!!
>> Now using a cell phone and causing an accident is NOT a crime per say . I
>> mean I saw people in here saying SHE should NOT be allowed to every drive
>> again, she should not be allowed to use a cell phone ever again. WONDEFUL
>> if she INTENTIONALLY go into a car. and on her cell phone to RUN SOMEONE
>> DOWN on purpose.. I realize all your folks throwing stones NEVER EVER
>> caused an accident doing something Careless .. and I wish the rest of us
>> were as good as you. But come. OK.. I'm done venting. after reading all
>> those comments I had to say something LOL
>
> LOL LOL!! I have news for you:
>
> It is a traffic offense to use a handset while driving in NJ. It should be
> a crime, or at least a serious moving violation. LOL!! Why? Because it is
> extremely easy to kill someone when you're not paying full attention to
> the road ahead of you. Personally, I wish everyone who drives and talks on
> their cell phone would run their car into something big, hard, and
> immovable. The world will be a better place without them. LOL. LOL!!
>
> I do a lot of driving in town and on the highway. I can't tell you the
> number of times a car has swerved into my lane, sometimes head on, because
> the driver was looking down, or staring at their phone held at arm's
> length in front of them in plain sight. While I'm driving my son to school
> in the morning three quarters of the motorists driving past the
> intersection at the bottom of my street are going 30 miles over the speed
> limit, downhill, in their SUVs or trucks while gabbing on their goddamned
> phones. LOL!! I would love to know who all these brain dead morons are
> speaking with at 7:40 in the morning. Two years ago one of these imbeciles
> went off the road and knocked down a telephone poll. LOL!! Too bad they
> survived, LOL!!
>
> My daughters walk home on this same street almost every day, about 8 feet
> from traffic. LOL!!!
>
> Some day one of these stupid motherfuckers is going to kill a cop, or a
> some big shot politician, or judge. At that point we'll get some
> meaningful laws against this incredibly stupid, dangerous fetish some
> people have with driving and talking on the phone. LOL!!
>
> Angelo DePalma
Well done Angelo
I mean it. This guy is obviously not a cyclist and no one has to be
shouting for 5 minutes LOL

Date: 06 Dec 2006 20:45:25
From: gamer
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone

compubyte wrote:

>>doing something illegal and someone dies as a result, you deserve to go to
>>jail.
>>
>>
>>
>
>Last I knew. driving and using a cell phone WASN't Illegal . .
>
>

It is in New York & Connecticut (and something like 23 countries
including England, Italy, Switzerland, etc).

Another 20+ states are currently considering the same.

>In a nutshell. IT WAS AN ACCIDENT. and to say people who drive and use a
>cell phone should be fined. well . BS .. I've been using a cell phone and
>driving since they first came out. ya know the BIG OLD phones in your car
>bag.. I haven't hit anyone yet. . OH WAIT.. I think it's because I CAN
>MULTITASK..
>

Anyone driving & talking on a cell phone causing an accident should be
charged with reckless driving.

Perhaps the worse / most pathetic (non accident) use I've seen was
someone backing up from a parking spot in a crowded grocery store lot
with one hand on the wheel & the other holding the phone - while talking
/ taking short, one handed jabs at the wheel while backing up.

No question it's reckless driving, even without accidents.

Then again, I can't think of a single reason to be on a phone while I'm
driving. Guess I take driving too seriously. IMO, only a moron would
talk on a phone while driving.

Date: 06 Dec 2006 17:32:22
From: Notan
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring

compubyte wrote:
>
> > doing something illegal and someone dies as a result, you deserve to go to
> > jail.
> >
>
> Last I knew. driving and using a cell phone WASN't Illegal . .
>
> In a nutshell. IT WAS AN ACCIDENT. and to say people who drive and use a
> cell phone should be fined. well . BS .. I've been using a cell phone and
> driving since they first came out. ya know the BIG OLD phones in your car
> bag.. I haven't hit anyone yet. . OH WAIT.. I think it's because I CAN
> MULTITASK.. Now dumbass's that can't chew gum and walk at the same time.
> well Duhh Maybe they shouldn't be driving and talking on a cell phone.. I
> truely don't believe everyone should suffer because of a few idiots.. let's
> face it .. i see idiots on cell phones riding bikes. not paying attention.
> let's fine them to. and LORD KNOWS how many morons I've seen WALKING and
> talking on a cell phone. Just walking into traffic or crossing the side
> street not looking. Now were gonna fine anyone using a cell phone NOT
> sitting down .. . it's simple People.. YOU SCREW UP. TAKE RESPONSIBLITY..
> doesn't mean everyone else needs to suffer. It's no more simplier than
> that.
> Kinda like all those damn gun laws over 22,000 in the USA.. I mean come on.
> 22,000 + . wouldnt 1 gun law work? YOU commit a crime with a gun. YOU get
> an AUTOMATIC GO TO JAIL for 20 years and NO more guns for you. Period!!
> Now using a cell phone and causing an accident is NOT a crime per say . I
> mean I saw people in here saying SHE should NOT be allowed to every drive
> again, she should not be allowed to use a cell phone ever again. WONDEFUL if
> she INTENTIONALLY go into a car. and on her cell phone to RUN SOMEONE DOWN
> on purpose.. I realize all your folks throwing stones NEVER EVER caused an
> accident doing something Careless .. and I wish the rest of us were as good
> as you. But come. OK.. I'm done venting. after reading all those comments I
> had to say something LOL

"This is your brain on drugs."

Notan

Date: 07 Dec 2006 00:30:26
From: Steven J. Sobol
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <AbSdnZbkPJ0TwerYnZ2dnUVZ_uGdnZ2d@comcast.com >, compubyte wrote:
>> doing something illegal and someone dies as a result, you deserve to go to
>> jail.
>>
>
> Last I knew. driving and using a cell phone WASN't Illegal . .

Where've you been? It is in many states, and has been for years.

> bag.. I haven't hit anyone yet. . OH WAIT.. I think it's because I CAN
> MULTITASK.. Now dumbass's that can't chew gum and walk at the same time.
> well Duhh Maybe they shouldn't be driving and talking on a cell phone.

Right. Cell phone usage isn't the only thing that causes distractions.

On the other hand, if someone's not paying attention, regardless of
reason, they DO need to be punished. Severity of the punishment should
be determined by how much trouble they caused.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Victorville, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED

It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.

Date: 06 Dec 2006 07:50:16
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> Zoot Katz wrote:
> > On 5 Dec 2006 07:07:13 -0800, "nash" <SMNate@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Where did you get yours ZK? Do you bring it with you when leaving the
> > >bike?
> >
> > It was a gift. I think it originally came from The Bike Doctor.
> >
> > By the time you've got the clamp mounted and the hose tied down with
> > zip-ties, it's kind of hard to remove.
>
> No bicycle accessory mounting is complete unless it involves the use of
> ALL of the following:
>
> - inner tube rubber shim
> - Jubilee clips (hose clamps)
> - cable (zip) ties
> - electrical tape
> - hooks and loops (aka Velcro [TM])
> - rubber bands
> - Fabrizio Mazzoleni hyperventilating when he sees it ;-)
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

I bought mine yesterday when I got my disc bike rack installed.
anyone want one? I might be able to get more at half price. $25
AirZound I live in Surrey, BC
I do not know if they have any left but I can try.

Date: 06 Dec 2006 05:54:58
From: Ed Pirrero
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

k Hickey wrote:
>
> Personally, I prefer the 6' (2m) plus bike lanes here in the Phoenix
> Arizona east valley over a foot less width left of the auto
> decation. But for some strange reason, some cyclists can't imagine
> that having a lane with lane kings the discourages auto incursion
> to our LEFT is a good thing. Go figger.

It discourages, but doesn't prevent. In addition, it encourages
drivers to think that the rest of all the other roads are for cars
only.

Have you ever had a driver shout "advice" to you about bicycles and
traffic law? If so, have they ever been right? (If not, then count
yourself lucky.)

In any case, just about every bike lane I've ever seen is an
afterthought, in the door zone, less than 3 feet wide, not contiguous
(ends at intersections) or contains a lot of road debris. Or some
combination thereof. Pretty much any one of those things makes cycling
in and around autos harder, not easier.

A wide lane, with no bike ghetto off to the right, is my ideal
commuting set-up. If only for the reason that auto drivers not get the
idea that bikes MUST remain in the bike lanes.

Those lanes in your area sound nice, if you accept the idea of a bike
ghetto to begin with. They would be way ahead of anything I've ever
had the "priviledge" of riding on.

E.P.

Date: 06 Dec 2006 17:57:51
From: Mark Hickey
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Ed Pirrero" <gcmschemist@gmail.com > wrote:

>k Hickey wrote:
>>
>> Personally, I prefer the 6' (2m) plus bike lanes here in the Phoenix
>> Arizona east valley over a foot less width left of the auto
>> decation. But for some strange reason, some cyclists can't imagine
>> that having a lane with lane kings the discourages auto incursion
>> to our LEFT is a good thing. Go figger.
>
>It discourages, but doesn't prevent.

If that painted line to my left suggests to the teenage text-messaging
daddy's SUV-driving menace that they should at least TRY to keep it
between it and the nice yellow line to their left, I'll be happy.

> In addition, it encourages
>drivers to think that the rest of all the other roads are for cars
>only.

Generally, in this area, the lanes are either plenty wide to make
cycling safer than 90% of the semi-urban areas I've seen, or they're
roads that bikes would tend to avoid. In my area, about half of the
major roads (on a 1 mile grid pattern) have bike lanes, and there are
many wonderful smaller roads that are very suitable for riding (with
and without bike lanes) between them. It's easy to get almost
anywhere without resorting to forcing cars to change lanes.

>Have you ever had a driver shout "advice" to you about bicycles and
>traffic law? If so, have they ever been right? (If not, then count
>yourself lucky.)

Who hasn't? It happens MUCH less here than when I rode in New Jersey
(where wide roads didn't have bike lanes). Of course, part of that
may be bacause Arizonans are nicer than New Jersians (if only because
they don't have to live in New Jersey). ;-)

>In any case, just about every bike lane I've ever seen is an
>afterthought, in the door zone, less than 3 feet wide, not contiguous
>(ends at intersections) or contains a lot of road debris. Or some
>combination thereof. Pretty much any one of those things makes cycling
>in and around autos harder, not easier.

I can appreciate that, but what you describe bears absolutely NO
similarity to the system in this area (fortunately). I've ridden in
many urban environments, and this is by far the best (though Beijing
had a more extensive bike lane system - it's just that 7 million bikes
tended to make it slow to get around).

>A wide lane, with no bike ghetto off to the right, is my ideal
>commuting set-up. If only for the reason that auto drivers not get the
>idea that bikes MUST remain in the bike lanes.

I spend a lot of time on roads like that - but most of the ones that I
ride on WITH bike lanes are 45mph (72km/h) four or six-lane roads. I
don't find sharing the right lane with vehicular traffic to be that
much fun on a road like that sans bike lane, personally.

>Those lanes in your area sound nice, if you accept the idea of a bike
>ghetto to begin with. They would be way ahead of anything I've ever
>had the "priviledge" of riding on.

If you ever come out this way, bring a bike - I promise you'll be
impressed.

k Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

Date: 05 Dec 2006 19:34:55
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

wiscojohn wrote:
> This is just awful! Here in Madison, WI we have quite large bike lanes
> and drivers still manage to take us out from time to time. People need
> to get off their phones and pay attention!...

Well, some of them are just bad design. The two-way bike lane on the
south side of University Drive (one-way, westbound) in the campus area
is one. Many drivers will not be looking for cyclists when they (the
drivers) turn left, and even if they are cyclists are easily missed in
the hoards of UW student pedestrians waiting to cross the street on the
sidewalk, the barrier island between the motor vehicle lanes and in the
bike lanes themselves. In my opinion, these bike lanes should be
scrapped, and replaced with a right-hand motor vehicle lane that is
about 5 feet wider than standard.

It should also be noted that many of the cyclists (priily UW
students) behave in a totally unpredictable manner that completely
ignores traffic signage, traffic signals and rules of the road, so they
are not blameless in many cases.

--
Tom "Former West Wilson resident" Sherman - Post Free or Die!

Date: 06 Dec 2006 06:26:24
From: Mark Hickey
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote:

>
>wiscojohn wrote:
>> This is just awful! Here in Madison, WI we have quite large bike lanes
>> and drivers still manage to take us out from time to time. People need
>> to get off their phones and pay attention!...
>
>Well, some of them are just bad design.

And some aren't. Unless you're talking about the cell phones, in
which case, some aren't.

> The two-way bike lane on the
>south side of University Drive (one-way, westbound) in the campus area
>is one. Many drivers will not be looking for cyclists when they (the
>drivers) turn left, and even if they are cyclists are easily missed in
>the hoards of UW student pedestrians waiting to cross the street on the
>sidewalk, the barrier island between the motor vehicle lanes and in the
>bike lanes themselves. In my opinion, these bike lanes should be
>scrapped, and replaced with a right-hand motor vehicle lane that is
>about 5 feet wider than standard.

Personally, I prefer the 6' (2m) plus bike lanes here in the Phoenix
Arizona east valley over a foot less width left of the auto
decation. But for some strange reason, some cyclists can't imagine
that having a lane with lane kings the discourages auto incursion
to our LEFT is a good thing. Go figger.

>It should also be noted that many of the cyclists (priily UW
>students) behave in a totally unpredictable manner that completely
>ignores traffic signage, traffic signals and rules of the road, so they
>are not blameless in many cases.

They're just as clueless when walking or riding a bike (I ride through
ASU at least several times a week, and have to be in "swivel-head
mode" all the time). Yesterday a college student on a road bike blew
through a red light about 5 seconds after it turned, potentially
taking me out (fortunately I was looking), and just about ended up on
the hood of a car turning right (who also was watching).

k Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

Date: 05 Dec 2006 19:17:23
From: wiscojohn
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

This is just awful! Here in Madison, WI we have quite large bike lanes
and drivers still manage to take us out from time to time. People need
to get off their phones and pay attention!

Yarper wrote:
> Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
> to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
> working for a personal-injury law firm.
>
> http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death
>
> What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
> they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.

Date: 08 Dec 2006 18:20:32
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

k Hickey wrote:
> "Ed Pirrero" <gcmschemist@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >k Hickey wrote:
> >> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> >The point is I was able to ride SAFELY on the STREET at a reasonable
> >> >pace (~25 kph/15 mph), but could not do so on the "bike path". This
> >> >"bike" path was an extra-wide sidewalk with a white stripe and bicycle
> >> >icons. While being ON the path will protect one from motor vehicles
> >> >(unless one jumps the curb), there is more danger from pedestrians and
> >> >their accessories (dogs, strollers, children, etc.). However, the
> >> >intersections of the "bike path" with the real road are too dangerous
> >> >to ride through unless motor vehicle traffic is practically
> >> >non-existent. Hence, the need to dismount and act like a pedestrian.
> >>
> >> Still not getting it. It seems from your description that the danger
> >> at these intersections is from motor vehicles. But you're also saying
> >> that once you determine there aren't a lot of cars coming, that it's
> >> somehow safter (and necessary) to dismount to cross the intersection
> >> rather than riding across (which would obviously get you out of the
> >> way of oncoming traffic much, much faster). I simply can't imagine
> >> this scenario.
> >
> >The conflict happens when cars wish to turn right - they have to either
> >cross or occupy the bike lane. Another conflict occurs when the biker
> >has to turn left. I guess you'd just have to ride on some of these
> >things to see how truly crummy they are.
> >
> >Where bike paths cross mid-block, it's even worse. You not only have
> >to watch cross-traffic, but parallel traffic turning right, becoming
> >cross-traffic. And fight the dogs, three-abreast walkers,
> >jogger-stroller middle-of-the-path runners, and ridiculously-low path
> >speed limits. Well, for vehicular bicycling, that is. Fine for
> >casual, out-for-a-Sunday-ride riders.
>
> Still nothing in your description that makes me think you'd be safer
> getting off the bike and spending more time in the intersection. I
> haven't walked across any sort of intersection I can think of in many,
> many moons, though I see people doing it occasionally (for no apparent
> reason I can see other than probably lack of confidence on their
> bike).

A pedestrian walking in a crosswalk has the legal right of way. A
cyclist riding in the crosswalk does not. As Ed Pirrero indicates, many
of the "bike path" crossings are set up so the traffic on the street
ALWAYS has the right of way, which makes safe crossing impossible
unless traffic is light. In this case, the only safe way to cross the
street is to use a pedestrian crossing away from the "bike path".

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

Date: 05 Dec 2006 18:51:33
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Zoot Katz wrote:
> On 5 Dec 2006 07:07:13 -0800, "nash" <SMNate@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Where did you get yours ZK? Do you bring it with you when leaving the
> >bike?
>
> It was a gift. I think it originally came from The Bike Doctor.
>
> By the time you've got the clamp mounted and the hose tied down with
> zip-ties, it's kind of hard to remove.

No bicycle accessory mounting is complete unless it involves the use of
ALL of the following:

- inner tube rubber shim
- Jubilee clips (hose clamps)
- cable (zip) ties
- electrical tape
- hooks and loops (aka Velcro [TM])
- rubber bands
- Fabrizio Mazzoleni hyperventilating when he sees it ;-)

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

Date: 05 Dec 2006 09:07:57
From: Jay Beattie
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> Tim McNaa wrote:
> >
> > Cell phones are intended to be used while driving. You can tell this by
> > the fact that coverage in almost all US metropolitan areas is excellent
> > on highways and spotty to poor more than 1/4 away from highways. In the
> > Twin Cities metro are there are many, many coverage holes and my phone
> > (Sprint) is frequently unusable on surface streets and in neighborhoods.
>
> Very interesting - and infuriating - point. I hadn't thought of that.
>
> > Not that talking on a cell phone and driving is a good idea. A dozen
> > times a day or more I see people driving neglectfully while talking on
> > cell phones- all of them probably thinking they are driving fine. NO
> > ONE drives safely while talking on a cell phone, and hands free phones
> > don't help much if at all. If you think you can drive safely while
> > you're talking on your cell phone, you are delusional.
>
> I agree.
>
> Since this is a tech group: I'd love to see a portable device that
> would deactivate or jam every cell phone within, say, 100 feet of my
> bike.

Except that this would result in drivers looking down at their phones,
pressing butttons, shaking the phone and generally not paying attention
to the road. That is the scary part -- drivers looking down to dial
their cell phones. Just yaking away is one thing, looking down at the
phone is another.

> Hmm. Maybe replace the caller's voice with "Watch out for the bike!
> Watch out for the bike!" repeated over and over!

I like this idea. -- Jay Beattie.

Date: 05 Dec 2006 07:07:13
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Zoot Katz wrote:
> On 4 Dec 2006 21:49:23 -0800, "zeez" <UltimaUW@excite.com> wrote:
>
> >> Of course, a good loud horn helps!
> >>
> >
> > Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if you fit one of those freight train
> >air horns to your bike? :)
>
> An AirZound does an adequately comparable job at a fraction of the
> weight and cost.
>
> Pump up the plastic pop-bottle reservoir with your bicycle pump and
> you get 115 attention grabbing decibels.
>
> Mine has stopped a Jeep and a Lexus.
> --
> zk

Where did you get yours ZK? Do you bring it with you when leaving the
bike?

Date: 05 Dec 2006 09:21:38
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On 5 Dec 2006 07:07:13 -0800, "nash" <SMNate@gmail.com > wrote:

>Where did you get yours ZK? Do you bring it with you when leaving the
>bike?

It was a gift. I think it originally came from The Bike Doctor.

By the time you've got the clamp mounted and the hose tied down with
zip-ties, it's kind of hard to remove.
--
zk

Date: 04 Dec 2006 21:49:23
From: zeez
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Don Klipstein wrote:
> In article <j4GdnRidUMc-jenYnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com>, Rich Clark wrote:
> >
> >"Don Klipstein" <don@manx.misty.com> wrote in message
> >news:slrnen6t04.4oq.don@manx.misty.com...
> >
> >> Philadelphia has bike lanes on many of their streets, and the bike lanes
> >> are in the streets.
> >
> >Yes, and a huge number of them are in the door zone. They are worse than
> >useless; they make cycling more dangerous because drivers feel free to
> >squeeze you from the left while parked drivers feel free to emerge from
> >their cars without looking because they don't think there will be any cars
> >near them.
>
> In my experience with Philly's bike lanes, doors do not swing over the
> whole bike lane. The bike lane is wide enough to squeeze by people
> exiting cars.
>
> Of course, a good loud horn helps!
>

Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if you fit one of those freight train
air horns to your bike? :)

Date: 04 Dec 2006 22:55:19
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On 4 Dec 2006 21:49:23 -0800, "zeez" <UltimaUW@excite.com > wrote:

>> Of course, a good loud horn helps!
>>
>
> Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if you fit one of those freight train
>air horns to your bike? :)

An AirZound does an adequately comparable job at a fraction of the
weight and cost.

Pump up the plastic pop-bottle reservoir with your bicycle pump and
you get 115 attention grabbing decibels.

Mine has stopped a Jeep and a Lexus.
--
zk

Date: 04 Dec 2006 19:38:29
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Zoot Katz wrote:
> On 3 Dec 2006 23:31:59 -0800, "Bob" <hunrobe@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >Her insurance is liable up to her the limits of her policy. After that,
> >she's on her own. As for the possibility that she would subsequently
> >not work and live on welfare to avoid paying any damages, that'd be
> >rather like some criminals I've met that committed their crimes with
> >the *intent* of getting arrested and going to prison. Sure, it can be
> >done but its a tough way to make a living. Finally, no. At 19 she's an
> >adult and her parents can't be held liable for any judgement against
> >her. The same can't be said about any future husband she may have so it
> >would seem that in the scenario you imagine- inadequate insurance
> >coverage and a life on welfare- her driving would doom her to a life of
> >unried poverty. Who says there is no justice?
>
> She can't drink or vote at 19 and she still needs a parent's
> permission to buy a firearm. I'm guessing that cars kill more
> teenagers than are killed by guns....

Trust me, plenty of 19-year olds drink in bars in Champaign-Urbana.
Walking down Green Street from 4th to Wright on a Saturday or Sunday
morning is an unpleasant experience due to all the excess alcohol
consumption induced vomit on the sidewalks and in the garbage cans.

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

Date: 04 Dec 2006 13:22:37
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

AustinMN wrote:
> carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> > On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 20:17:33 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net>
> > wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > >Plus I am in the highest brain sex category by a British Study that you can
> > >be. I am meticulous about spelling and gram and am ster than most
> > >male brains and most female brains combined. I work 4X better than you Carl
> > >Fogel
> > >Too bad, you are plonked. DOA
> >

> > Dear Nash,
> >
> > Judging by your increasingly bizarre posts elsewhere, I suppose that
> > your "brain sex study" was on some television show ten years ago.
> >
> > Possibly "The Simpsons"?
>

I already sent this in but please tell everyone how you do. If you can
be honest that is.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/sex/add_user.shtml

If I am bizarre it is from spending too much time on you self important
people.

Date: 04 Dec 2006 16:05:40
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On 4 Dec 2006 13:22:37 -0800, "nash" <SMNate@gmail.com > wrote:

>
>AustinMN wrote:
>> carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
>> > On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 20:17:33 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> > >Plus I am in the highest brain sex category by a British Study that you can
>> > >be. I am meticulous about spelling and gram and am ster than most
>> > >male brains and most female brains combined. I work 4X better than you Carl
>> > >Fogel
>> > >Too bad, you are plonked. DOA
>> >
>
>> > Dear Nash,
>> >
>> > Judging by your increasingly bizarre posts elsewhere, I suppose that
>> > your "brain sex study" was on some television show ten years ago.
>> >
>> > Possibly "The Simpsons"?
>>
>
>
>I already sent this in but please tell everyone how you do. If you can
>be honest that is.
>
>http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/sex/add_user.shtml
>
>If I am bizarre it is from spending too much time on you self important
>people.

Dear Nash,

I'd be astonished if anyone in this thread would do as poorly as
someone who's twice announced that he's plonked me, but still keeps
nattering at me.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Date: 04 Dec 2006 13:01:25
From: AustinMN
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 20:17:33 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net>
> wrote:

<snip >

> >Plus I am in the highest brain sex category by a British Study that you can
> >be. I am meticulous about spelling and gram and am ster than most
> >male brains and most female brains combined. I work 4X better than you Carl
> >Fogel
> >Too bad, you are plonked. DOA
>
> Dear Nash,
>
> Judging by your increasingly bizarre posts elsewhere, I suppose that
> your "brain sex study" was on some television show ten years ago.
>
> Possibly "The Simpsons"?

It also sounds like he's been taking humility lessons from the great
E.D.

Austin

Date: 04 Dec 2006 12:52:42
From: AustinMN
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Robert Coe wrote:
<snip >

> Driving *is* a god given right, but those who do it so dangerously should be
> dealt with harshly. So I both agree with you and think you're full of sh*t.

Try looking up "license" in the dictionary. Driving is a priviledge.

If it were a right, we could not tell those medically incapable of
safely doing so (such as epileptics with uncontrolled seizures) that
they can not drive. We also could not require passing a (rediculously
simple) driving test.

Austin

Date: 04 Dec 2006 12:51:12
From: Vee
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Vee wrote:
> nash wrote:
> > >>?>>> It does seem that the prosecuting attorney made a very poor choice in
> > > her choice of prosecution. Under U.S. law, the driver cannot be tried a
> > > second time for the same crime.
> >
> > Seems to me like they made a very poor choice of careers!
>
> Proving a serious crime (negligent or reckless homicide) is really
> tough in these cases. There was recently a controversial case here in
> Madison that ended in a hung jury:
> http://www.madison.com/archives/read.php?ref=/tct/2006/08/02/0608020434.php
> The driver's eyes were probably off the road for at least 12 seconds.
> The jury deadlocked, and the prosecutor decided not to retry the case.
>
> These are difficult cases because everyone talks on the phone while
> driving, everyone catches himself driving badly on occasion, and
> everyone has "not seen" a cyclist at one time or another. The "it was
> just an accident" defense resounds with drivers/jurors. We cyclists
> are always outraged, but the community at large seems awfully
> ambivalent about these fatalities... I think that's why this prosecutor
> didn't charge higher.
>
> -Vee

By the way, the Madison case I linked to above is interesting in a
couple other ways. First, the prosecutor in the case, John Norsetter,
is highly regarded and very competent. Plus, he rides his bike to work
every day. Second, the jury was split ten to two, with ten in favor of
acquittal. If he can't win one of these cases, I don't know who can.

-Vee

Date: 04 Dec 2006 12:23:03
From: Vee
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

nash wrote:
> >>?>>> It does seem that the prosecuting attorney made a very poor choice in
> > her choice of prosecution. Under U.S. law, the driver cannot be tried a
> > second time for the same crime.
>
> Seems to me like they made a very poor choice of careers!

Proving a serious crime (negligent or reckless homicide) is really
tough in these cases. There was recently a controversial case here in
Madison that ended in a hung jury:
http://www.madison.com/archives/read.php?ref=/tct/2006/08/02/0608020434.php
The driver's eyes were probably off the road for at least 12 seconds.
The jury deadlocked, and the prosecutor decided not to retry the case.

These are difficult cases because everyone talks on the phone while
driving, everyone catches himself driving badly on occasion, and
everyone has "not seen" a cyclist at one time or another. The "it was
just an accident" defense resounds with drivers/jurors. We cyclists
are always outraged, but the community at large seems awfully
ambivalent about these fatalities... I think that's why this prosecutor
didn't charge higher.

-Vee

Date: 03 Dec 2006 23:31:59
From: Bob
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Zoot Katz wrote:
> On 3 Dec 2006 15:46:24 -0800, "Bob" <hunrobe@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >On the positive side- if it can be called "positive"- Ms Stark's age
> >and education mean that presumably she has quite a few years left in
> >the workforce to pay the real and punitive damages a civil jury will
> >most likely grant the decedent's survivors.
>
> Wouldn't her insurance company pay those damages? It's not like she's
> been charged with anything more serious than inappropriate lane use.
> All she'd be faced with is higher insurance premiums in the future.
> That's not going to cause her enough hardship to teach her anything.
>
> If she didn't have sufficient liability insurance to cover the
> damages, what's to stop her from getting a shrink to say she's too
> traumatised to work and have her end up on welfare. Or at 19 yrs. is
> she considered a minor whose parents can be held accountable?
> --

Her insurance is liable up to her the limits of her policy. After that,
she's on her own. As for the possibility that she would subsequently
not work and live on welfare to avoid paying any damages, that'd be
rather like some criminals I've met that committed their crimes with
the *intent* of getting arrested and going to prison. Sure, it can be
done but its a tough way to make a living. Finally, no. At 19 she's an
adult and her parents can't be held liable for any judgement against
her. The same can't be said about any future husband she may have so it
would seem that in the scenario you imagine- inadequate insurance
coverage and a life on welfare- her driving would doom her to a life of
unried poverty. Who says there is no justice?

Regards,
Bob Hunt

Date: 04 Dec 2006 19:07:34
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On 3 Dec 2006 23:31:59 -0800, "Bob" <hunrobe@aol.com > wrote:

>Her insurance is liable up to her the limits of her policy. After that,
>she's on her own. As for the possibility that she would subsequently
>not work and live on welfare to avoid paying any damages, that'd be
>rather like some criminals I've met that committed their crimes with
>the *intent* of getting arrested and going to prison. Sure, it can be
>done but its a tough way to make a living. Finally, no. At 19 she's an
>adult and her parents can't be held liable for any judgement against
>her. The same can't be said about any future husband she may have so it
>would seem that in the scenario you imagine- inadequate insurance
>coverage and a life on welfare- her driving would doom her to a life of
>unried poverty. Who says there is no justice?

She can't drink or vote at 19 and she still needs a parent's
permission to buy a firearm. I'm guessing that cars kill more
teenagers than are killed by guns.

I recall my prenuptial agreement stating that each party was
individually responsible for their own debts that were incurred
before the riage. Nor could either party make a claim on the
other's assets held before the riage. Asserts acquired after the
riage were to be divided evenly. There were clauses stipulating
that both parties were responsible for any children's support and
education in amounts that reflected their individual ability to pay
should the riage dissolve.

Prenuptial agreements are require under French law. We were ried
in France.

Today's Bizzaro had justice nailed.
(Two guys standing in front of a vending machine dispensing
"Justice".)

First guy asks "How much does it cost?". The guy at the machine is
putting in money and answers something the effect, "It depends. You
just keep putting in money until you're broke and hope for the best."
--
zk

Date: 03 Dec 2006 23:16:43
From: Bob
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>
> Er Bob,
>
> The victim was the 25 year old U of I graduate. The driver was 19 years
> old (occupation unstated in the News Gazette article).
>

Oooops, my bad. I withdraw my comment about Champaign County's
domination by the U of I. It's still true but has no connection with
this case. Thanks for correcting me.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

Date: 03 Dec 2006 17:42:54
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Don Klipstein wrote:
> ...
> Philadelphia has bike lanes on many of their streets, and the bike lanes
> are in the streets.
>
> I feel safer with these than without them.

The bicycle/parking lane is often the motor vehicle passing lane for
those going twice the speed limit.

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

Date: 03 Dec 2006 16:17:00
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Bob Hunt wrote:
> ...
> was motivated more by the difficulty of convincing 12 jurors that
> likely own cell phones that using a cell phone while driving, even if
> that use is downloading ringtones or sending text messages, constitutes
> a willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property.
> Making that argument would be especially problematic since the accused
> was
> A- a 25 yr old U of I graduate in a county culturally and economically
> dominated by the University of Illinois,
> B- female (call it sexist if you wish but it *is* a fact that most
> juries find it more difficult to convict women than men regardless of
> the offense),
> C- remorseful and,
> D- employed.
>
> Personally, if I were that State's Attorney I would have been inclined
> to charge Ms Stark with:
> 1-reckless driving,
> 2- aggravated reckless driving, and
> 3- reckless homicide.
>
> I'd offer to drop counts 1 and 3 later in exchange for a guilty plea on
> count 2 but then, I'm not a State's Attorney or even a lawyer.
>
> On the positive side- if it can be called "positive"- Ms Stark's age
> and education mean that presumably she has quite a few years left in
> the workforce to pay the real and punitive damages a civil jury will
> most likely grant the decedent's survivors.

Er Bob,

The victim was the 25 year old U of I graduate. The driver was 19 years
old (occupation unstated in the News Gazette article).

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

Date: 03 Dec 2006 15:46:24
From: Bob
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Zoot Katz wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 23:05:26 GMT, me <me@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> >She was so far off the road she hit the cyclist with the *drivers* side!
> >She wasn't just using the phone, she was *downloading* ringtones!
> >I find it pathetic that the DA didn't recommend a vehicular homicide
> >charge. I agree that the bias towards driving / against cycling is
> >systemic, but in this case I would have expected a more serious charge
> >and would expect a conviction.
>
> This tragedy happened in Illinois where until recently, or perhaps
> still, bicyclist aren't even considered the intended users of the
> road. I'm sure Bob can clarify this. Perhaps it was only one judge's
> ruling after a cyclist disappeared into a pot-hole and tried to sue
> the state.
>
> Yeah it's a systemic bias and one not confined to Illinois or the US
> of A. It happens everywhere the economy feeds on blood and oil. It
> happens everywhere fat-cat legislators are influenced by the
> automotive cartel's fat-cat lobbyists
>
> I sincerely doubt a BC cyclist would get any more justice
> post-humously.
> --
> zk

Wayne vs Boub, the Illinois Supreme Court case that held that
bicyclists are not "intended users of the roadway", is still the law of
the land here but really has nothing to do with this case. It (the
ruling) was basically a way to shield townships/road commissions from
civil damages when a roadway's character is unsuitable for bikes.

I'd guess that Ms Reitz' decision not to charge reckless driving:

(625 ILCS 5/11-503) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 11-503)
Sec. 11-503. Reckless driving; aggravated reckless driving.
(a) A person commits reckless driving if he or she:
(1) drives any vehicle with a willful or wanton
disregard for the safety of persons or property; or

(2) knowingly drives a vehicle and uses an incline in
a roadway, such as a railroad crossing, bridge approach, or hill,
to cause the vehicle to become airborne.

(b) Every person convicted of reckless driving shall be guilty of a
Class A misdemeanor, except as provided under subsection (c) of this
Section.
(c) Every person convicted of committing a violation of subsection
(a) shall be guilty of aggravated reckless driving if the violation
results in great bodily harm or permanent disability or disfigurement
to another. Aggravated reckless driving is a Class 4 felony.

or reckless homicide:

(720 ILCS 5/9-3) (from Ch. 38, par. 9-3)
Sec. 9-3. Involuntary Manslaughter and Reckless Homicide.
(a) A person who unintentionally kills an individual without lawful
justification commits involuntary manslaughter if his acts whether
lawful or unlawful which cause the death are such as are likely to
cause death or great bodily harm to some individual, and he performs
them recklessly, except in cases in which the cause of the death
consists of the driving of a motor vehicle or operating a snowmobile,
all-terrain vehicle, or watercraft, in which case the person commits
reckless homicide. (Note- reckless homicide is a Class 3 felony)

was motivated more by the difficulty of convincing 12 jurors that
likely own cell phones that using a cell phone while driving, even if
that use is downloading ringtones or sending text messages, constitutes
a willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property.
Making that argument would be especially problematic since the accused
was
A- a 25 yr old U of I graduate in a county culturally and economically
dominated by the University of Illinois,
B- female (call it sexist if you wish but it *is* a fact that most
juries find it more difficult to convict women than men regardless of
the offense),
C- remorseful and,
D- employed.

Personally, if I were that State's Attorney I would have been inclined
to charge Ms Stark with:
1-reckless driving,
2- aggravated reckless driving, and
3- reckless homicide.

I'd offer to drop counts 1 and 3 later in exchange for a guilty plea on
count 2 but then, I'm not a State's Attorney or even a lawyer.

On the positive side- if it can be called "positive"- Ms Stark's age
and education mean that presumably she has quite a few years left in
the workforce to pay the real and punitive damages a civil jury will
most likely grant the decedent's survivors.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

Date: 03 Dec 2006 16:48:20
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On 3 Dec 2006 15:46:24 -0800, "Bob" <hunrobe@aol.com > wrote:

>
>On the positive side- if it can be called "positive"- Ms Stark's age
>and education mean that presumably she has quite a few years left in
>the workforce to pay the real and punitive damages a civil jury will
>most likely grant the decedent's survivors.

Wouldn't her insurance company pay those damages? It's not like she's
been charged with anything more serious than inappropriate lane use.
All she'd be faced with is higher insurance premiums in the future.
That's not going to cause her enough hardship to teach her anything.

If she didn't have sufficient liability insurance to cover the
damages, what's to stop her from getting a shrink to say she's too
traumatised to work and have her end up on welfare. Or at 19 yrs. is
she considered a minor whose parents can be held accountable?
--
zk

Date: 03 Dec 2006 16:10:37
From: Notan
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring

Yarper wrote:
>
> John Everett wrote:
>
> > Note that this took place in Illinois, which has a history of
> > discounting the rights of cyclists. Note that the State's Attorney in
> > defending her decision to not press for a more serious charge said,
> > "...the driver could have no reasonable expectation of a bike on the
> > side of the road."
>
> I was myself pretty damn shocked when I read that quote.
> I still can't fathom why this State Attorney, who formerly
> worked for a personal injury law firm, would take a
> bicyclists' unjust death so lightly.
>
> My initial suspicion was that it had to do with what
> corporations put her in office. Could it have been a cell phone
> company? Or an auto manufacturer? If so which?
>
> Unfortunately I haven't had any luck in learning
> who bankrolled her. Any ideas how one might do that?

What's even worse, to me, is that she's only the tip of the iceberg!

Notan

Date: 03 Dec 2006 18:25:22
From: Karen Newton
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Please don't cross-post to the frugal living group.

"Notan" <notan@ddress.thatcanbespammed > wrote in message
news:4573596D.842F493C@ddress.thatcanbespammed...
> Yarper wrote:
>>
>> John Everett wrote:
>>
>> > Note that this took place in Illinois, which has a history of
>> > discounting the rights of cyclists. Note that the State's Attorney in
>> > defending her decision to not press for a more serious charge said,
>> > "...the driver could have no reasonable expectation of a bike on the
>> > side of the road."
>>
>> I was myself pretty damn shocked when I read that quote.
>> I still can't fathom why this State Attorney, who formerly
>> worked for a personal injury law firm, would take a
>> bicyclists' unjust death so lightly.
>>
>> My initial suspicion was that it had to do with what
>> corporations put her in office. Could it have been a cell phone
>> company? Or an auto manufacturer? If so which?
>>
>> Unfortunately I haven't had any luck in learning
>> who bankrolled her. Any ideas how one might do that?
>
> What's even worse, to me, is that she's only the tip of the iceberg!
>
> Notan

Date: 03 Dec 2006 16:29:14
From: Notan
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone

Karen Newton wrote:
>
> Please don't cross-post to the frugal living group.
>
> <snip>

My mistake, although hitting the "Reply to Newsgroup" button includes
misc.consumers.frugal-living, just as it did when you hit the same
(or similar) button.

Notan

Date: 03 Dec 2006 14:32:46
From: Yarper
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

John Everett wrote:

> Note that this took place in Illinois, which has a history of
> discounting the rights of cyclists. Note that the State's Attorney in
> defending her decision to not press for a more serious charge said,
> "...the driver could have no reasonable expectation of a bike on the
> side of the road."

I was myself pretty damn shocked when I read that quote.
I still can't fathom why this State Attorney, who formerly
worked for a personal injury law firm, would take a
bicyclists' unjust death so lightly.

My initial suspicion was that it had to do with what
corporations put her in office. Could it have been a cell phone
company? Or an auto manufacturer? If so which?

Unfortunately I haven't had any luck in learning
who bankrolled her. Any ideas how one might do that?

Date: 03 Dec 2006 10:56:51
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Want to know how to freak out the driver next to you when you are
driving.
Lean your head to the left with the left eye shut like you are asleep
and hands not visible. Right eye open but not visible to them while
you drive. See what kind of reactions you get. ;)

Date: 03 Dec 2006 10:50:00
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Robert Coe wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 15:17:44 -0800, Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com> wrote:
> : On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 07:55:20 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM> wrote:
> :
> : >: Studies of second-generation traffic calming methods have shown
> : >: encouraging reductions in the number of injury crashes, based largely
> : >: on reductions in speed and in the amount of vehicle traffic. The
> : >: Netherlands has noted an injury-crash reduction of more than 80
> : >: percent. In Germany, the number of crashes went up to some degree,
> : >: but the number of casualties decreased 30% - 56%, Great Britain, 24%
> : >: and Austria, 31%.
> : >:
> : >: Do some research
> : >
> : >Yeah, like into whether you and others proposing such madness are (or are
> : >shilling for) personal-injury lawyers.
> : >
> : >What does this have to do with Verizon cell phones? (Other than the obvious
> : >fact that if this method of traffic "calming" becomes widespread, we're all
> : >going to have to have 911 on speed dial.)
> :
> : Granted, the countries where "second generation" traffic calming has
> : proved effective at reducing causalities don't have the outrageous
> : personal injury suits and settlements prevalent in the litigious
> : culture currently infecting your US of A. They also have more
> : stringent rules, better enforcement and more comprehensive drivers'
> : education. In America any fool can drive a car and most of them do.
> :
> : Let me guess, you're one of the 70% who consider themselves above
> : average drivers. And perhaps too you erroneously believe that your
> : fuel costs and other vehicle expenses entitles you to exclusive
> : domain on the streets for which we all pay. I'd further wager that
> : you habitually exceed the speed limit, fail to signal turns and lane
> : changes, disregard pedestrians' right-of-way and neglect to check
> : your mirrors and blind spots while gabbing on your precious cell
> : phone.
> :
> : If you've not yet killed or injured anyone with your inattentive,
> : negligent or just plain incompetent driving, consider yourself lucky.
> : Hopefully when your luck runs out a bridge abutment absorbs the
> : "collateral damage" and it's only your estate being sued.
>
> How the hell do you know all that? You must be a genius. Actually, you got
> most of the details wrong, but it is a fact that I'd be willing to bet, sight
> unseen, that I'm a safer driver than you are. Or are you one of those
> self-styled experts who knows everything it's important to know about cars but
> has never actually driven one?
>
> Come to think of it, you did say you were just guessing. Oh, well ...
>
> Bob

Oh, Good save Bobby

Date: 03 Dec 2006 10:45:44
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

conversations even with passengers is distracting. I was a taxi
driver for 3 years. So I have lived on both sides of this discussion.

Date: 03 Dec 2006 10:38:25
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> nash wrote:
>
> > I was writing to Bicycles.misc the list I did not notice. I do not want to
> > be in those groups it just happened. But now I will cut them out.
> >
> > Plus I am in the highest brain sex category by a British Study that you can
> > be. I am meticulous about spelling and gram and am ster than most
> > male brains and most female brains combined. I work 4X better than you Carl
> > Fogel
>
> :-)
>
> That from the guy who also posted:
>
> "I donot fuccing care wise a$s. that was one article. Do you get the
> jist
> of what I was saying No. Do more reading A$$
> You people are thoroughly disgusting. Do you believe everything read
> NO So
> why are you taking me to task. Get over it already. Would you like to
> bike
> in a Chinese city Monday morning rush hour. A little too dangerous for
> my
> taste. That is alll I am saying about the dave's reck. comment. Would
> you?
> Because that is what you are telling me.
>
> "I did not say I had a source I said I heard it on a TV show.
> Have you answered even one of my questions No "
>
> That's some meticulous spelling and gram, all right! ;-)
>
> - Frank Krygowski

Glad you liked it.

Date: 03 Dec 2006 10:36:16
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

People do all sorts of wrong etiquette in this news group.
Mostly including the previous message.
waste of time

Date: 04 Dec 2006 03:53:56
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article
<1165170976.467834.190100@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >
,
"nash" <SMNate@gmail.com > wrote:

> People do all sorts of wrong etiquette in this news group.
> Mostly including the previous message.
> waste of time

What are you talking about?

--
Michael Press

Date: 03 Dec 2006 16:16:57
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <1165170976.467834.190100@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >,
"nash" <SMNate@gmail.com > wrote:

> People do all sorts of wrong etiquette in this news group.
> Mostly including the previous message.
> waste of time

So you're the newsgroup's resident troll. Figures.

Date: 05 Dec 2006 21:40:13
From: Jasper Janssen
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 16:16:57 -0600, Tim McNaa <timmcn@bitstream.net >
wrote:
>In article <1165170976.467834.190100@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "nash" <SMNate@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> People do all sorts of wrong etiquette in this news group.
>> Mostly including the previous message.
>> waste of time
>
>So you're the newsgroup's resident troll. Figures.

What do you mean, resident? He's new here.
\

Jasper

Date: 03 Dec 2006 10:34:40
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Tim McNaa wrote:
> In article <42lch.409456$R63.64718@pd7urf1no>,
> "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote:
>
> > I donot fuccing care wise a$s. that was one article. Do you get the
> > jist of what I was saying No. Do more reading A$$ You people are
> > thoroughly disgusting. Do you believe everything read NO So why are
> > you taking me to task. Get over it already. Would you like to bike
> > in a Chinese city Monday morning rush hour. A little too dangerous
> > for my taste. That is alll I am saying about the dave's reck.
> > comment. Would you? Because that is what you are telling me.
> >
> > I did not say I had a source I said I heard it on a TV show. Have you
> > answered even one of my questions No
>
> Good grief. Unfortunately your writing makes it appear that you are
> unable to think critically as well.

Good grief. Unfortunately your writing makes it appear that you are
unable to think critically as well.

Date: 05 Dec 2006 21:44:33
From: Jasper Janssen
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On 3 Dec 2006 10:34:40 -0800, "nash" <SMNate@gmail.com > wrote:
>Tim McNaa wrote:
>> In article <42lch.409456$R63.64718@pd7urf1no>,
>> "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote:
>>
>> > I donot fuccing care wise a$s. that was one article. Do you get the
>> > jist of what I was saying No. Do more reading A$$ You people are
>> > thoroughly disgusting. Do you believe everything read NO So why are
>> > you taking me to task. Get over it already. Would you like to bike
>> > in a Chinese city Monday morning rush hour. A little too dangerous
>> > for my taste. That is alll I am saying about the dave's reck.
>> > comment. Would you? Because that is what you are telling me.
>> >
>> > I did not say I had a source I said I heard it on a TV show. Have you
>> > answered even one of my questions No
>>
>> Good grief. Unfortunately your writing makes it appear that you are
>> unable to think critically as well.
>
>Good grief. Unfortunately your writing makes it appear that you are
>unable to think critically as well.

I know you are, but what am I?

Jasper

Date: 05 Dec 2006 16:19:47
From: Notan
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring

Jasper Janssen wrote:
>
> On 3 Dec 2006 10:34:40 -0800, "nash" <SMNate@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Tim McNaa wrote:
> >> In article <42lch.409456$R63.64718@pd7urf1no>,
> >> "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I donot fuccing care wise a$s. that was one article. Do you get the
> >> > jist of what I was saying No. Do more reading A$$ You people are
> >> > thoroughly disgusting. Do you believe everything read NO So why are
> >> > you taking me to task. Get over it already. Would you like to bike
> >> > in a Chinese city Monday morning rush hour. A little too dangerous
> >> > for my taste. That is alll I am saying about the dave's reck.
> >> > comment. Would you? Because that is what you are telling me.
> >> >
> >> > I did not say I had a source I said I heard it on a TV show. Have you
> >> > answered even one of my questions No
> >>
> >> Good grief. Unfortunately your writing makes it appear that you are
> >> unable to think critically as well.
> >
> >Good grief. Unfortunately your writing makes it appear that you are
> >unable to think critically as well.
>
> I know you are, but what am I?

Nice come-back! <g >

Notan

Date: 03 Dec 2006 16:18:03
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <1165170880.256760.23670@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >,
"nash" <SMNate@gmail.com > wrote:

> Tim McNaa wrote:
> > In article <42lch.409456$R63.64718@pd7urf1no>,
> > "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote:
> >
> > > I donot fuccing care wise a$s. that was one article. Do you get
> > > the jist of what I was saying No. Do more reading A$$ You
> > > people are thoroughly disgusting. Do you believe everything read
> > > NO So why are you taking me to task. Get over it already.
> > > Would you like to bike in a Chinese city Monday morning rush
> > > hour. A little too dangerous for my taste. That is alll I am
> > > saying about the dave's reck. comment. Would you? Because that
> > > is what you are telling me.
> > >
> > > I did not say I had a source I said I heard it on a TV show. Have
> > > you answered even one of my questions No
> >
> > Good grief. Unfortunately your writing makes it appear that you
> > are unable to think critically as well.
>
> Good grief. Unfortunately your writing makes it appear that you are
> unable to think critically as well.

<snicker > You can cut and paste. Good for you!

Date: 03 Dec 2006 10:33:02
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

> I can spot them a block away. They're the idiots piddling along and
> not looking where they're going. As a bicyclist I'm more aware of my
> surroundings than a caged scud jockey ever will be. I've learned to
> read a driver's body-language and can most often predict what they're
> going to do before they even have a clue themselves.
> --
> zk

Your right ZK
Drivers around here anyway rarely use traffic signals. I watch behind
and in front frequently and I know they are turning right but they
never use their signals. I then dodge their maneuver so I am in the
best position before they even know what is going on. That is to say I
will go extreme left and they end up going right. Keeps me on my toes
and I do not get caught behind cars much. And if they are piled up on
the right with no signal I will go to the inside lane because I figur'
someone is going to turn right.
You know you cannot report foreign licenses to the police because
they have no jurisdiction. So let them do whatever they want to do and
ignore it. They really have no clue and are usually lost. 2 reports I
would have liked to make came from Washington drivers.

Date: 03 Dec 2006 09:28:12
From: John Kane
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Robert Coe wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 15:17:44 -0800, Zoot Katz
<zootkatz@operamail.com > wrote:

> : Let me guess, you're one of the 70% who consider themselves above
> : average drivers.

> How the hell do you know all that? You must be a genius. Actually, you got
> most of the details wrong, but it is a fact that I'd be willing to bet, sight
> unseen, that I'm a safer driver than you are.

Point to Zoot Cat. !

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada

Date: 03 Dec 2006 09:24:36
From: John Kane
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Robert Coe wrote:
> : >>Sure Dave and that is why any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist head
> : >>injuries everyday of the year. Do not citation me I know it as common
> : >>knowledge. Anyone?
> : >>
> : >
> : > a) you must be new here - claiming such a patently ridiculous
> : > statistic to be true without any proof is only employed by trolls and
> : > pro-helmet zealots; and
> : >
> : > b) "common knowledge" isn't either.
> :
> : here is another from J. Hopkins U.
> : http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1380951

A fascintating paper [1]. "Motor vehicles were involved in 98% of the
police-reported bicycling injuries." Therefore the authors call for
cycling helmets.

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada

1. I would probably give it a C- if it was a first year univeristy
paper. I mean, they tried.

Date: 03 Dec 2006 09:07:01
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Robert Coe wrote:
>
>
> As it happens, I never said I was. I use a cell phone while driving very
> rarely and only in situations when traffic is light and I can do it without
> getting into trouble. I never initiate a call except by voice activation. And
> I'm always ready to drop the call if the road needs my attention. It's really
> no different from talking to a passenger.
>
> Bob

Bob, I think you've made some mistakes in that exchange. The first was
to slam second generation traffic calming without learning about it.

I don't pretend to be an expert in traffic calming, but I'm aware of
serious attempts at re-thinking road priorities and affecting driver
behavior. Some of them really do seem successful, even though they're
counterintutive. Read up on the subject.

About motorcyclists, don't paint with too broad a brush. Judging all
motorcyclists by observing the most conspicuous 18-year-old
crotch-rocket riders is as bad as judging all bicyclists by the bike
messengers engaging in unsanctioned urban races. Motorcycling, on
average, isn't as safe as bicycling or motoring, from what I can tell;
but there's tremendous variation in safety caused by the motorcyclist's
behavior.

And about the cell phone: There _is_ significant danger in using one
while driving, and it's _much_ different than conversing with a
passenger. That applies to one-hand operation, no hands operation,
voice activated dialing or whatever. It's not the number of hands in
use, it's not your supposed willingness to drop the phone. It's the
disconnection from the life-threatening act of moving several thousand
pounds of metal at speed. Again, read up on the subject. The research
has been done, and there's no serious disagreement.

I'm sure you believe you're competent at this. They all do - including
the colleague of mine who spazzed while talking to me, hung up, then
called back while parked and said he'd almost had an "incident."

If you're tempted to use the cell while driving, why not ask yourself:
What on earth about this call is so critical, so important, that if it
happened fifteen years ago, I'd be in serious trouble?

The answer is "Nothing."

Hang up and drive.

- Frank Krygowski

Date: 02 Dec 2006 18:58:42
From: damyth
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Robert Coe wrote:
> On 2 Dec 2006 11:26:09 -0800, frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> :
> : Tim McNaa wrote:
> : >
> : > Cell phones are intended to be used while driving. You can tell this by
> : > the fact that coverage in almost all US metropolitan areas is excellent
> : > on highways and spotty to poor more than 1/4 away from highways. In the
> : > Twin Cities metro are there are many, many coverage holes and my phone
> : > (Sprint) is frequently unusable on surface streets and in neighborhoods.
> :
> : Very interesting - and infuriating - point. I hadn't thought of that.
> :
> : > Not that talking on a cell phone and driving is a good idea. A dozen
> : > times a day or more I see people driving neglectfully while talking on
> : > cell phones- all of them probably thinking they are driving fine. NO
> : > ONE drives safely while talking on a cell phone, and hands free phones
> : > don't help much if at all. If you think you can drive safely while
> : > you're talking on your cell phone, you are delusional.
> :
> : I agree.
>
> I don't. Many activities (eating, smoking, arguing with a passenger, gawking
> at attractive pedestrians, etc.) are more distracting to a driver than talking
> on a cell phone, and it's easy to simply drop the phone if a sudden emergency
> arises (in contrast, say, to what you have to do with a cigarette or a cup of
> hot coffee). Downloading ringtones, the activity that supposedly kicked off
> this thread, is an entirely different matter, of course. If the driver was
> doing that and caused a fatal accident, she should certainly have been held
> accountable. But that's not a reason to jump on the extremist anti-cell-phone
> bandwagon. Many people use cell phones while driving, and most of those do it
> safely.
>
> Should a person with only one arm be prohibited from driving? I'm aware of no
> State that takes that position. Most people would agree that a one-armed
> person can safely drive a car with automatic transmission. Is a driver with a
> cell phone in one hand any more impaired?
>
> Laws against using a cell phone while driving are, in any case, largely
> unenforceable. Absent erratic driving (an offense that stands on its own),
> cell phone use isn't usually noticeable enough to attract a police officer's
> attention.

That last paragraph is a complete cop out. Using that argument, rape
or child molestation shouldn't be prosecuted either because they
occurred out of sight of a police officer. Are open alcohol bottles in
the car also largely unenforceable?

I'm no cop, but I certainly can easily tell which drivers yakking on
the cell phone . They are either driving *very* slowly, slow enough to
disrupt the flow of traffic, or erratically (can tell from their
inattention and delayed reaction times.)

It also is no accident I've been rear-ended 3x by drivers talking on
their cell phone. All 3 happened when I was stopped 3 or 4 cars deep
beneath a red traffic light. I haven't been rear ended by anyone one
else who happened to be eating/drinking while they were driving, for
example.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 16:10:05
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:

> Since this is a tech group: I'd love to see a portable device that
> would deactivate or jam every cell phone within, say, 100 feet of my
> bike.

Oh, I've been tempted...

http://www.globalgadgetuk.com/cell-phone-jammers.htm

Date: 02 Dec 2006 22:25:00
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <1165104605.779250.132460@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com >,
neil0502@yahoo.com wrote:

> frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Since this is a tech group: I'd love to see a portable device that
> > would deactivate or jam every cell phone within, say, 100 feet of
> > my bike.
>
> Oh, I've been tempted...
>
> http://www.globalgadgetuk.com/cell-phone-jammers.htm

The problem is that all those people would be paying even less attention
to what they are doing while they try to figure out what's wrong with
their phone. They'd probably be more likely to run you over.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 15:31:40
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

nash wrote:

> I was writing to Bicycles.misc the list I did not notice. I do not want to
> be in those groups it just happened. But now I will cut them out.
>
> Plus I am in the highest brain sex category by a British Study that you can
> be. I am meticulous about spelling and gram and am ster than most
> male brains and most female brains combined. I work 4X better than you Carl
> Fogel

:-)

That from the guy who also posted:

"I donot fuccing care wise a$s. that was one article. Do you get the
jist
of what I was saying No. Do more reading A$$
You people are thoroughly disgusting. Do you believe everything read
NO So
why are you taking me to task. Get over it already. Would you like to
bike
in a Chinese city Monday morning rush hour. A little too dangerous for
my
taste. That is alll I am saying about the dave's reck. comment. Would
you?
Because that is what you are telling me.

"I did not say I had a source I said I heard it on a TV show.
Have you answered even one of my questions No "

That's some meticulous spelling and gram, all right! ;-)

- Frank Krygowski

Date: 02 Dec 2006 15:01:47
From: Pegleg
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Date: 02 Dec 2006 12:30:30
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

nash WHO? wrote:

LEARN TO ATRIBUTE WHEN QUOTING!

> >>>Come back when you learn how to work a four-function calculator. The
> illiteracy and mis-spelling are acceptable, but you really can't
> expect to post numeric nonsense on a technical group without having
> your errors pointed out.

STOP MESSING UP THE QUOTING HEIRARCHY KERS WHEN QUOTING!

> You wrote the same rhetoric before.
> I was writing to Bicycles.misc the list I did not notice. I do not want to
> be in those groups it just happened. But now I will cut them out.
>
> Plus I am in the highest brain sex category by a British Study that you can
> be.

What is a "brain sex category"?

> I am meticulous about spelling and gram and am ster than most
> male brains and most female brains combined. I work 4X better than you Carl
> Fogel
> Too bad, you are plonked. DOA

"nash" needs to work on his/her punctuation, logic, and Usenet
protocol.

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

Date: 02 Dec 2006 11:59:01
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

RLB wrote:
> "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com:
>
> > Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist,
> > due directly to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz,
> > who ironically is listed as working for a personal-injury law firm.
> >
> > http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_fo
> > r_bicyclists_death
> >
> > What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
> > they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
> >
> This particular stretch of road does have a full-width shoulder.

Where exactly did the accident occur?

> The area is dead flat with excellent visibility.

Not exactly dead flat:
<http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?T=2&S=14&Z=16&X=125&Y=1386&W=2&qs=windsor%7curbana%7cil%7c&Addr=E+Windsor+Rd%2c+Urbana%2c+IL+61802&ALon=-88.1688425&ALat=40.0838838 >.

However, having driven all of Route 130 in the area several times, a
driver should be able to see a cyclist at least 5 and probably more
like 10 to 20 seconds before overtaking, which is plenty of time.

> Which makes the driver's antics and crime all the more
> questionable. Distracted driver laws are inadequate.

Based on Ms. Stark's behavior, she should never be allowed to operate a
motor vehicle again, since she has proven her irresponsibility.

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

Date: 02 Dec 2006 11:55:08
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Date: 02 Dec 2006 11:48:34
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

nash wrote:
> >
> Google search 3rd entry

Ah! Good. Now let's learn to analyze:

> In Beijing, China, bicycle traffic constitutes more than 50% of passenger
> transportation and more than 30% of traffic accident fatalities.

IOW, bicycling is _safer_ than average, w.r.t. fatalities.

> Nearly 70% of the traffic accidents were related to bicycles.

Not surprising. By the same token, I'm sure well over 90% of American
traffic accidents are "related to" automobiles. It's directly related
to the popularity of vehicle type. But "accident" generally does not
mean "injury," let alone "fatality." My guess is the typical Chinese
accident is much, much less costly than the typical American one.

> The rate of fatalities for bicyclists 60 and older is five times greater than the average.

Yes, the elderly are more frail. But that does nothing to quantify the
rate for either group.

> Farmers have the greatest number of bicycle incidents.

Ever notice how these "litany of horrors" abstracts always descend into
the absurdly irrelevant?

> The peak hour for bicycle
> accidents is usually 7:00 to 8:00 a.m., depending on the bicycle and
> motorized vehicle traffic flows.

My gosh! Who'd have thought that??!

> Monday is the peak day for bicycle
> accidents. It was also found that more bicycle accidents happened in July,
> which is Beijing's tourism season.

<nudge > ?? What? Oh - um, fascinating!

> Generally speaking, roads and streets
> with higher speed limits, such as arterials and rural highways, have higher
> rates of bicycle accident fatalities.

Brilliant, I tell you! Brilliant! Who could have guessed?

> Bicycle accidents can be attributed to
> many causes, including road and environmental conditions, traffic safety
> measures, operations of motorized vehicles, and bicyclists' habits and
> skills.

Earthshaking science! Nobel Prize, here we come!

> The most pressing factor contributing to bicycle accidents is the
> inadequate and insufficient facilities provided for bicyclists. To reduce
> the annual toll of bicyclist injuries and fatalities, a number of
> countermeasures, such as improvement of road and environmental conditions,
> education in traffic laws, training in cycling, and use of helmet, are
> recommended.

Of _course_ the "use of helmet"! Bell Sports executives are probably
drooling on their wing tips. And just think, no messy Safe Kids
pass-throughs for their "political action" funds. Just a nice, clean
donation to a Party official. Watch for it!

But, back to the original point: Where, exactly, did it say that "any
[I believe you meant "every"] Chinese city has hundreds of cyclist head
injuries every day of the year"?

The trick with citations is not merely to find one. It's to find one
that's actually relevant to the point you were trying to make.

- Frank Krygowski

Date: 02 Dec 2006 20:07:28
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

>
> nash wrote:
>> >
>> Google search 3rd entry
>
> Ah! Good. Now let's learn to analyze:
>
>> In Beijing, China, bicycle traffic constitutes more than 50% of passenger
>> transportation and more than 30% of traffic accident fatalities.
>
> IOW, bicycling is _safer_ than average, w.r.t. fatalities.
>
>> Nearly 70% of the traffic accidents were related to bicycles.
>
> Not surprising. By the same token, I'm sure well over 90% of American
> traffic accidents are "related to" automobiles. It's directly related
> to the popularity of vehicle type. But "accident" generally does not
> mean "injury," let alone "fatality." My guess is the typical Chinese
> accident is much, much less costly than the typical American one.
>
>> The rate of fatalities for bicyclists 60 and older is five times greater
>> than the average.
>
> Yes, the elderly are more frail. But that does nothing to quantify the
> rate for either group.
>
>> Farmers have the greatest number of bicycle incidents.
>
> Ever notice how these "litany of horrors" abstracts always descend into
> the absurdly irrelevant?
>
>> The peak hour for bicycle
>> accidents is usually 7:00 to 8:00 a.m., depending on the bicycle and
>> motorized vehicle traffic flows.
>
> My gosh! Who'd have thought that??!
>
>> Monday is the peak day for bicycle
>> accidents. It was also found that more bicycle accidents happened in
>> July,
>> which is Beijing's tourism season.
>
> <nudge> ?? What? Oh - um, fascinating!
>
>> Generally speaking, roads and streets
>> with higher speed limits, such as arterials and rural highways, have
>> higher
>> rates of bicycle accident fatalities.
>
> Brilliant, I tell you! Brilliant! Who could have guessed?
>
>> Bicycle accidents can be attributed to
>> many causes, including road and environmental conditions, traffic safety
>> measures, operations of motorized vehicles, and bicyclists' habits and
>> skills.
>
> Earthshaking science! Nobel Prize, here we come!
>
>> The most pressing factor contributing to bicycle accidents is the
>> inadequate and insufficient facilities provided for bicyclists. To reduce
>> the annual toll of bicyclist injuries and fatalities, a number of
>> countermeasures, such as improvement of road and environmental
>> conditions,
>> education in traffic laws, training in cycling, and use of helmet, are
>> recommended.
>
> Of _course_ the "use of helmet"! Bell Sports executives are probably
> drooling on their wing tips. And just think, no messy Safe Kids
> pass-throughs for their "political action" funds. Just a nice, clean
> donation to a Party official. Watch for it!
>
> But, back to the original point: Where, exactly, did it say that "any
> [I believe you meant "every"] Chinese city has hundreds of cyclist head
> injuries every day of the year"?
>
> The trick with citations is not merely to find one. It's to find one
> that's actually relevant to the point you were trying to make.
>
> - Frank Krygowski

I donot fuccing care wise a$s. that was one article. Do you get the jist
of what I was saying No. Do more reading A$$
You people are thoroughly disgusting. Do you believe everything read NO So
why are you taking me to task. Get over it already. Would you like to bike
in a Chinese city Monday morning rush hour. A little too dangerous for my
taste. That is alll I am saying about the dave's reck. comment. Would you?
Because that is what you are telling me.

I did not say I had a source I said I heard it on a TV show.
Have you answered even one of my questions No

Date: 02 Dec 2006 17:13:26
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <42lch.409456$R63.64718@pd7urf1no >,
"nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote:

> I donot fuccing care wise a$s. that was one article. Do you get the
> jist of what I was saying No. Do more reading A$$ You people are
> thoroughly disgusting. Do you believe everything read NO So why are
> you taking me to task. Get over it already. Would you like to bike
> in a Chinese city Monday morning rush hour. A little too dangerous
> for my taste. That is alll I am saying about the dave's reck.
> comment. Would you? Because that is what you are telling me.
>
> I did not say I had a source I said I heard it on a TV show. Have you
> answered even one of my questions No

Good grief. Unfortunately your writing makes it appear that you are
unable to think critically as well.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 11:26:09
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Tim McNaa wrote:
>
> Cell phones are intended to be used while driving. You can tell this by
> the fact that coverage in almost all US metropolitan areas is excellent
> on highways and spotty to poor more than 1/4 away from highways. In the
> Twin Cities metro are there are many, many coverage holes and my phone
> (Sprint) is frequently unusable on surface streets and in neighborhoods.

Very interesting - and infuriating - point. I hadn't thought of that.

> Not that talking on a cell phone and driving is a good idea. A dozen
> times a day or more I see people driving neglectfully while talking on
> cell phones- all of them probably thinking they are driving fine. NO
> ONE drives safely while talking on a cell phone, and hands free phones
> don't help much if at all. If you think you can drive safely while
> you're talking on your cell phone, you are delusional.

I agree.

Since this is a tech group: I'd love to see a portable device that
would deactivate or jam every cell phone within, say, 100 feet of my
bike.

Hmm. Maybe replace the caller's voice with "Watch out for the bike!
Watch out for the bike!" repeated over and over!

- Frank Krygowski

Date: 02 Dec 2006 23:21:40
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article
<1165087569.226835.113850@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com >
,
frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:

> Tim McNaa wrote:
> >
> > Cell phones are intended to be used while driving. You can tell this by
> > the fact that coverage in almost all US metropolitan areas is excellent
> > on highways and spotty to poor more than 1/4 away from highways. In the
> > Twin Cities metro are there are many, many coverage holes and my phone
> > (Sprint) is frequently unusable on surface streets and in neighborhoods.
>
> Very interesting - and infuriating - point. I hadn't thought of that.
>
> > Not that talking on a cell phone and driving is a good idea. A dozen
> > times a day or more I see people driving neglectfully while talking on
> > cell phones- all of them probably thinking they are driving fine. NO
> > ONE drives safely while talking on a cell phone, and hands free phones
> > don't help much if at all. If you think you can drive safely while
> > you're talking on your cell phone, you are delusional.
>
> I agree.
>
> Since this is a tech group: I'd love to see a portable device that
> would deactivate or jam every cell phone within, say, 100 feet of my
> bike.

1. Illegal in the USA.
2. Driver's call is suddenly interrupted, and _all_
her attention and vision goes to the infernal device.

--
Michael Press

Date: 02 Dec 2006 14:58:21
From: di
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

<frkrygow@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1165087569.226835.113850@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Since this is a tech group: I'd love to see a portable device that
> would deactivate or jam every cell phone within, say, 100 feet of my
> bike.

They would probably just start looking at their phone trying to determine
what's wrong with it.

> Hmm. Maybe replace the caller's voice with "Watch out for the bike!
> Watch out for the bike!" repeated over and over!
>
> - Frank Krygowski
>

Date: 02 Dec 2006 15:48:21
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On 2 Dec 2006 11:26:09 -0800, frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
:
: Tim McNaa wrote:
: >
: > Cell phones are intended to be used while driving. You can tell this by
: > the fact that coverage in almost all US metropolitan areas is excellent
: > on highways and spotty to poor more than 1/4 away from highways. In the
: > Twin Cities metro are there are many, many coverage holes and my phone
: > (Sprint) is frequently unusable on surface streets and in neighborhoods.
:
: Very interesting - and infuriating - point. I hadn't thought of that.
:
: > Not that talking on a cell phone and driving is a good idea. A dozen
: > times a day or more I see people driving neglectfully while talking on
: > cell phones- all of them probably thinking they are driving fine. NO
: > ONE drives safely while talking on a cell phone, and hands free phones
: > don't help much if at all. If you think you can drive safely while
: > you're talking on your cell phone, you are delusional.
:
: I agree.

I don't. Many activities (eating, smoking, arguing with a passenger, gawking
at attractive pedestrians, etc.) are more distracting to a driver than talking
on a cell phone, and it's easy to simply drop the phone if a sudden emergency
arises (in contrast, say, to what you have to do with a cigarette or a cup of
hot coffee). Downloading ringtones, the activity that supposedly kicked off
this thread, is an entirely different matter, of course. If the driver was
doing that and caused a fatal accident, she should certainly have been held
accountable. But that's not a reason to jump on the extremist anti-cell-phone
bandwagon. Many people use cell phones while driving, and most of those do it
safely.

Should a person with only one arm be prohibited from driving? I'm aware of no
State that takes that position. Most people would agree that a one-armed
person can safely drive a car with automatic transmission. Is a driver with a
cell phone in one hand any more impaired?

Laws against using a cell phone while driving are, in any case, largely
unenforceable. Absent erratic driving (an offense that stands on its own),
cell phone use isn't usually noticeable enough to attract a police officer's
attention.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 23:23:47
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article
<asn3n29l2165h3f7u99jiitsl184midmd7@4ax.com >,
Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM > wrote:

> On 2 Dec 2006 11:26:09 -0800, frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> :
> : Tim McNaa wrote:
> : >
> : > Cell phones are intended to be used while driving. You can tell this by
> : > the fact that coverage in almost all US metropolitan areas is excellent
> : > on highways and spotty to poor more than 1/4 away from highways. In the
> : > Twin Cities metro are there are many, many coverage holes and my phone
> : > (Sprint) is frequently unusable on surface streets and in neighborhoods.
> :
> : Very interesting - and infuriating - point. I hadn't thought of that.
> :
> : > Not that talking on a cell phone and driving is a good idea. A dozen
> : > times a day or more I see people driving neglectfully while talking on
> : > cell phones- all of them probably thinking they are driving fine. NO
> : > ONE drives safely while talking on a cell phone, and hands free phones
> : > don't help much if at all. If you think you can drive safely while
> : > you're talking on your cell phone, you are delusional.
> :
> : I agree.
>
> I don't. Many activities (eating, smoking, arguing with a passenger, gawking
> at attractive pedestrians, etc.) are more distracting to a driver than talking
> on a cell phone, and it's easy to simply drop the phone if a sudden emergency
> arises (in contrast, say, to what you have to do with a cigarette or a cup of
> hot coffee). Downloading ringtones, the activity that supposedly kicked off
> this thread, is an entirely different matter, of course. If the driver was
> doing that and caused a fatal accident, she should certainly have been held
> accountable. But that's not a reason to jump on the extremist anti-cell-phone
> bandwagon. Many people use cell phones while driving, and most of those do it
> safely.
>
> Should a person with only one arm be prohibited from driving? I'm aware of no
> State that takes that position. Most people would agree that a one-armed
> person can safely drive a car with automatic transmission. Is a driver with a
> cell phone in one hand any more impaired?
>
> Laws against using a cell phone while driving are, in any case, largely
> unenforceable. Absent erratic driving (an offense that stands on its own),
> cell phone use isn't usually noticeable enough to attract a police officer's
> attention.

Talking to someone takes far more attention than
eating. Someone on the other end of a telephone call
does not care how riled up they make the driver,
because they are not in the car with him.

--
Michael Press

Date: 02 Dec 2006 22:21:29
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <jack-B59CA1.15234702122006@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com >,
Michael Press <jack@fake.net > wrote:

> In article <asn3n29l2165h3f7u99jiitsl184midmd7@4ax.com>,
> Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM> wrote:
>
> > On 2 Dec 2006 11:26:09 -0800, frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> > :
> > : Tim McNaa wrote:
> > : >
> > : > Cell phones are intended to be used while driving. You can
> > : > tell this by the fact that coverage in almost all US
> > : > metropolitan areas is excellent on highways and spotty to poor
> > : > more than 1/4 away from highways. In the Twin Cities metro are
> > : > there are many, many coverage holes and my phone (Sprint) is
> > : > frequently unusable on surface streets and in neighborhoods.
> > :
> > : Very interesting - and infuriating - point. I hadn't thought of
> > : that.
> > :
> > : > Not that talking on a cell phone and driving is a good idea. A
> > : > dozen times a day or more I see people driving neglectfully
> > : > while talking on cell phones- all of them probably thinking
> > : > they are driving fine. NO ONE drives safely while talking on a
> > : > cell phone, and hands free phones don't help much if at all.
> > : > If you think you can drive safely while you're talking on your
> > : > cell phone, you are delusional.
> > :
> > : I agree.
> >
> > I don't. Many activities (eating, smoking, arguing with a
> > passenger, gawking at attractive pedestrians, etc.) are more
> > distracting to a driver than talking on a cell phone, and it's easy
> > to simply drop the phone if a sudden emergency arises (in contrast,
> > say, to what you have to do with a cigarette or a cup of hot
> > coffee). Downloading ringtones, the activity that supposedly kicked
> > off this thread, is an entirely different matter, of course. If the
> > driver was doing that and caused a fatal accident, she should
> > certainly have been held accountable. But that's not a reason to
> > jump on the extremist anti-cell-phone bandwagon. Many people use
> > cell phones while driving, and most of those do it safely.
> >
> > Should a person with only one arm be prohibited from driving? I'm
> > aware of no State that takes that position. Most people would agree
> > that a one-armed person can safely drive a car with automatic
> > transmission. Is a driver with a cell phone in one hand any more
> > impaired?

The issue is not how many hands you have on the steering wheel, it is
whether you are paying attention to what you are doing. A car is a
terrestrial semi-guided missile once it is in motion, but many drivers
treat it as a portable living room. The research into this has shown
that hands-free cell phone users drive as poorly as people holding on to
their cell phone and talking. Both drive as well as people whose blood
alcohol content is near the legal limit.

> > Laws against using a cell phone while driving are, in any case,
> > largely unenforceable. Absent erratic driving (an offense that
> > stands on its own), cell phone use isn't usually noticeable enough
> > to attract a police officer's attention.

I can spot lots of people on cell phones from their posture, unless they
are using hands free phones and often even then they can be spotted by
their poor driving. If I can spot them, so can cops. That means the
law is enforceable. However, a law banning cell phones would be no
better enforced than speed limits. Given the "limit plus 15 mph" leeway
given locally, that means practically not at all. Cops face no part of
their job less popular than enforcing speed limits and other traffic
laws unless there an accident has happened.

> Talking to someone takes far more attention than eating. Someone on
> the other end of a telephone call does not care how riled up they
> make the driver, because they are not in the car with him.

Every single workday I see dozens of people talking on cell phones,
eating, reading, sorting through CDs and every one of them is weaving in
and out of their lane, swerving to correct their trajectory around a
corner, making a dash across three lanes of traffic for an exit, etc.
The people driving attentively tend to be in the minority. I hate
driving as a result and do it as little as I can.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 15:17:35
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 15:48:21 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM > wrote:

>: > Not that talking on a cell phone and driving is a good idea. A dozen
>: > times a day or more I see people driving neglectfully while talking on
>: > cell phones- all of them probably thinking they are driving fine. NO
>: > ONE drives safely while talking on a cell phone, and hands free phones
>: > don't help much if at all. If you think you can drive safely while
>: > you're talking on your cell phone, you are delusional.
>:
>: I agree.
>
>I don't. Many activities (eating, smoking, arguing with a passenger, gawking
>at attractive pedestrians, etc.) are more distracting to a driver than talking
>on a cell phone, and it's easy to simply drop the phone if a sudden emergency
>arises (in contrast, say, to what you have to do with a cigarette or a cup of
>hot coffee). Downloading ringtones, the activity that supposedly kicked off
>this thread, is an entirely different matter, of course. If the driver was
>doing that and caused a fatal accident, she should certainly have been held
>accountable. But that's not a reason to jump on the extremist anti-cell-phone
>bandwagon. Many people use cell phones while driving, and most of those do it
>safely.

Only because they're lucky, so far. Do some research. There are many
studies out there showing cell-phone use while driving is comparable
to driving drunk. Drivers on cell-phones have tunnel vision. They
don't scan the road. They don't check their mirrors. They don't check
their blind spots. They fail to notice traffic signals or other
vehicles signalling. They don't read direction or information signs.
They seldom use their own turn signals.They misjudge braking
distances, etc. Basically, they're impaired.
>
>Should a person with only one arm be prohibited from driving? I'm aware of no
>State that takes that position. Most people would agree that a one-armed
>person can safely drive a car with automatic transmission. Is a driver with a
>cell phone in one hand any more impaired?
>
Yes. Hands-free sets make little difference. Blind people aren't
permitted to drive. Unfortunately, stupid self-indulgent people are.

>Laws against using a cell phone while driving are, in any case, largely
>unenforceable. Absent erratic driving (an offense that stands on its own),
>cell phone use isn't usually noticeable enough to attract a police officer's
>attention.

I can spot them a block away. They're the idiots piddling along and
not looking where they're going. As a bicyclist I'm more aware of my
surroundings than a caged scud jockey ever will be. I've learned to
read a driver's body-language and can most often predict what they're
going to do before they even have a clue themselves.
--
zk

Date: 15 Dec 2006 10:51:38
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 15:17:35 -0800, Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com > wrote:
: On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 15:48:21 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM > wrote:
:
: >: > Not that talking on a cell phone and driving is a good idea. A dozen
: >: > times a day or more I see people driving neglectfully while talking on
: >: > cell phones- all of them probably thinking they are driving fine. NO
: >: > ONE drives safely while talking on a cell phone, and hands free phones
: >: > don't help much if at all. If you think you can drive safely while
: >: > you're talking on your cell phone, you are delusional.
: >:
: >: I agree.
: >
: >I don't. Many activities (eating, smoking, arguing with a passenger, gawking
: >at attractive pedestrians, etc.) are more distracting to a driver than talking
: >on a cell phone, and it's easy to simply drop the phone if a sudden emergency
: >arises (in contrast, say, to what you have to do with a cigarette or a cup of
: >hot coffee). Downloading ringtones, the activity that supposedly kicked off
: >this thread, is an entirely different matter, of course. If the driver was
: >doing that and caused a fatal accident, she should certainly have been held
: >accountable. But that's not a reason to jump on the extremist anti-cell-phone
: >bandwagon. Many people use cell phones while driving, and most of those do it
: >safely.
:
: Only because they're lucky, so far. Do some research. There are many
: studies out there showing cell-phone use while driving is comparable
: to driving drunk. Drivers on cell-phones have tunnel vision. They
: don't scan the road. They don't check their mirrors. They don't check
: their blind spots. They fail to notice traffic signals or other
: vehicles signalling. They don't read direction or information signs.
: They seldom use their own turn signals.They misjudge braking
: distances, etc. Basically, they're impaired.
: >
: >Should a person with only one arm be prohibited from driving? I'm aware of no
: >State that takes that position. Most people would agree that a one-armed
: >person can safely drive a car with automatic transmission. Is a driver with a
: >cell phone in one hand any more impaired?
: >
: Yes. Hands-free sets make little difference. Blind people aren't
: permitted to drive. Unfortunately, stupid self-indulgent people are.
:
: >Laws against using a cell phone while driving are, in any case, largely
: >unenforceable. Absent erratic driving (an offense that stands on its own),
: >cell phone use isn't usually noticeable enough to attract a police officer's
: >attention.
:
: I can spot them a block away. They're the idiots piddling along and
: not looking where they're going. As a bicyclist I'm more aware of my
: surroundings than a caged scud jockey ever will be. I've learned to
: read a driver's body-language and can most often predict what they're
: going to do before they even have a clue themselves.

So who did I (a pedestrian) have to dodge while crossing the street yesterday
evening? A woman riding a bicycle while talking on a (hand-held) cell phone!
;^)

Bob

Date: 15 Dec 2006 12:11:53
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 10:51:38 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM > wrote:

>
>So who did I (a pedestrian) have to dodge while crossing the street yesterday
>evening? A woman riding a bicycle while talking on a (hand-held) cell phone!

You probably didn't even see her before jumping out into the street.
You were only looking for cars maybe?
Were you in a cross-walk or were you jay-walking? I've found that
jaywalkers are usually drivers who've just left their cars.
--
zk

Date: 16 Dec 2006 07:32:39
From: Mark Hickey
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com > wrote:

>On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 10:51:38 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM> wrote:

>>So who did I (a pedestrian) have to dodge while crossing the street yesterday
>>evening? A woman riding a bicycle while talking on a (hand-held) cell phone!
>
>You probably didn't even see her before jumping out into the street.
>You were only looking for cars maybe?
>Were you in a cross-walk or were you jay-walking? I've found that
>jaywalkers are usually drivers who've just left their cars.

Careful Zoot - you'll pull a muscle trying to jump to so many
conclusions (entirely without any suggestion that they're right) at
once.

It appears that you're just as willing to blindly believe that all
cyclists are innocent of stupidity, just as you do assuming all
drivers are guilty.

FWIW, I very often ride through the ASU (Arizona State University) and
I find that cellphone induced stupidity affects all modes of
transportaion - pedestrian, cyclist and drivers. In each case, they
are paying almost no attention to their surroundings, are are likely
to do (literally) anything without notice. This is annoying with
pedestrians, but more dangerous with cyclists (since they're moving
faster and thus provide less gin for avoiding them safely).

k Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

Date: 16 Dec 2006 11:48:44
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 07:32:39 -0700, k Hickey <k@habcycles.com >
wrote:

>>>So who did I (a pedestrian) have to dodge while crossing the street yesterday
>>>evening? A woman riding a bicycle while talking on a (hand-held) cell phone!
>>
>>You probably didn't even see her before jumping out into the street.
>>You were only looking for cars maybe?
>>Were you in a cross-walk or were you jay-walking? I've found that
>>jaywalkers are usually drivers who've just left their cars.
>
>Careful Zoot - you'll pull a muscle trying to jump to so many
>conclusions (entirely without any suggestion that they're right) at
>once.
>
>It appears that you're just as willing to blindly believe that all
>cyclists are innocent of stupidity, just as you do assuming all
>drivers are guilty.

I'd no more step in front of an approaching bicycle than I'd step in
front of an approaching bus.

Something about the story doesn't make sense.
I'm guessing he didn't notice the bike or misjudged its speed.

Typical scenario: park mid-block, get out on the street side and dash
across it after glancing to see that there are no _cars_ coming.

Granted, there also exists the possibility that the cyclist didn't
yield to his right-of-way in a crosswalk. But, I'd put money on his
not noticing the approaching bicycle. They're hard to see when you're
only looking for something larger as non-cyclists are wont to do.
--
zk

Date: 17 Dec 2006 01:00:00
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 11:48:44 -0800, Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com > wrote:

I don't know why I'm bothering to answer you, Zoot. I hope I'll have enough
sense not to do it again.

: On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 07:32:39 -0700, k Hickey <k@habcycles.com >
: wrote:
:
: >>>So who did I (a pedestrian) have to dodge while crossing the street yesterday
: >>>evening? A woman riding a bicycle while talking on a (hand-held) cell phone!
: >>
: >>You probably didn't even see her before jumping out into the street.
: >>You were only looking for cars maybe?
: >>Were you in a cross-walk or were you jay-walking? I've found that
: >>jaywalkers are usually drivers who've just left their cars.
: >
: >Careful Zoot - you'll pull a muscle trying to jump to so many
: >conclusions (entirely without any suggestion that they're right) at
: >once.
: >
: >It appears that you're just as willing to blindly believe that all
: >cyclists are innocent of stupidity, just as you do assuming all
: >drivers are guilty.
:
: I'd no more step in front of an approaching bicycle than I'd step in
: front of an approaching bus.

Neither would I. Busses usually stop where the traffic laws require it.
Bicycles, in my experience, seldom do.

: Something about the story doesn't make sense.
: I'm guessing he didn't notice the bike or misjudged its speed.

Wrong on both counts.

: Typical scenario: park mid-block, get out on the street side and dash
: across it after glancing to see that there are no _cars_ coming.

Actual scenario: Walked out of the back door of my office building, preparing
to cross a quiet one-way street. Saw the bicycle plainly, travelling uphill on
the far side. Started to cross, since she'd have plenty of time to pass me
before I got to her side of the street. But as I reached the middle, she
suddenly veered towards me (with one hand in the middle of the handlebars, the
other holding a cell phone), so I backed off. It was no big deal, and I posted
the incident only as a counterpoint to your previous pompous pronouncements. I
included a smiley face, which I notice you omitted when you quoted my article.

I was headed for the subway. My car was parked at a commuter train station
twenty miles away.

: Granted, there also exists the possibility that the cyclist didn't
: yield to his right-of-way in a crosswalk. But, I'd put money on his
: not noticing the approaching bicycle. They're hard to see when you're
: only looking for something larger as non-cyclists are wont to do.

I hope you don't risk your money so foolishly in real life.

Bob

Date: 18 Dec 2006 18:09:40
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 01:00:00 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM > wrote:

>: I'd no more step in front of an approaching bicycle than I'd step in
>: front of an approaching bus.
>
>Neither would I. Busses usually stop where the traffic laws require it.
>Bicycles, in my experience, seldom do.
>

While bus drivers are better at following rules, scud scum and
bicyclists are about par. You worthless caged asswipes speed
everywhere while breaking all the other traffic regulations as well.
Then you've got the gall to whine about the traffic jams you've
created. I've no respect for habitual drivers because their brains
turn to shit as soon as they get behind the wheel.

>Actual scenario: Walked out of the back door of my office building, preparing
>to cross a quiet one-way street. Saw the bicycle plainly, travelling uphill on
>the far side. Started to cross, since she'd have plenty of time to pass me
>before I got to her side of the street. But as I reached the middle, she
>suddenly veered towards me (with one hand in the middle of the handlebars, the
>other holding a cell phone), so I backed off. It was no big deal, and I posted
>the incident only as a counterpoint to your previous pompous pronouncements. I
>included a smiley face, which I notice you omitted when you quoted my article.

Stuff your smileys. It sounds to me like she changing her course so
as to go behind you in case you made a dash for the curb. Instead you
froze like a dumfuk in the middle of the road. I don't like dancing
with pedestrians while riding with only one hand that's nowhere near
a brake.

I can't count the number of times I've been forced to avoid the
stunned cell-yakking scud scum. It's not a big deal for me either.
They're the most common type of filth on the road.
--
zk

Date: 19 Dec 2006 06:03:07
From: Mark Hickey
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com > wrote:

>On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 01:00:00 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM> wrote:

>>Actual scenario: Walked out of the back door of my office building, preparing
>>to cross a quiet one-way street. Saw the bicycle plainly, travelling uphill on
>>the far side. Started to cross, since she'd have plenty of time to pass me
>>before I got to her side of the street. But as I reached the middle, she
>>suddenly veered towards me (with one hand in the middle of the handlebars, the
>>other holding a cell phone), so I backed off. It was no big deal, and I posted
>>the incident only as a counterpoint to your previous pompous pronouncements. I
>>included a smiley face, which I notice you omitted when you quoted my article.
>
>Stuff your smileys. It sounds to me like she changing her course so
>as to go behind you in case you made a dash for the curb. Instead you
>froze like a dumfuk in the middle of the road. I don't like dancing
>with pedestrians while riding with only one hand that's nowhere near
>a brake.
>
>I can't count the number of times I've been forced to avoid the
>stunned cell-yakking scud scum. It's not a big deal for me either.
>They're the most common type of filth on the road.

Seems like now Zoot's got two kinds of personal demons to deal with in
his scary universe. Drivers and pedestrians. At least he'll no
longer have to consider the viewpoint of about 99% of the population
this way. Pretty soon it'll be up to everyone who doesn't ride the
same kind of bike he does, I predict (and he'll move into a cave and
we'll never hear from him again).

k Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

Date: 19 Dec 2006 11:05:16
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 06:03:07 -0700, k Hickey
<k@habcycles.com > wrote:

>
>Seems like now Zoot's got two kinds of personal demons to deal with in
>his scary universe. Drivers and pedestrians.

It's the whole of car culture that is detestable for the destruction
that it has caused. Beginning with environmental degradation all the
way through to its corruption of people's souls, cars are destroying
human society.

I've no problem with pedestrians though they often do pull some dumb
stunts.
--
zk

Date: 24 Dec 2006 21:46:29
From: Solvang Cyclist
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com > wrote in
news:1udgo2918rc8g8nct13sv77k7a6a778cd1@4ax.com:

> On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 06:03:07 -0700, k Hickey
> <k@habcycles.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>Seems like now Zoot's got two kinds of personal demons to deal with in
>>his scary universe. Drivers and pedestrians.
>
> It's the whole of car culture that is detestable for the destruction
> that it has caused. Beginning with environmental degradation all the
> way through to its corruption of people's souls, cars are destroying
> human society.
>
> I've no problem with pedestrians though they often do pull some dumb
> stunts.

As do everyone - including cyclists.

I live in a very rural area that is used by many pro race teams for their
winter training camps. Most of the locals have a "love/hate" relationship
with cycling here. While they appreciate the revenue brought to the area
by cycling (we also have an extremely popular century ride and the Tour
of California is having their individual time trial in town next year)
friends often tell me how rude some cyclists can be about not sharing the
road. Many riders - both the pros on their training rides and
recreational riders alike - will ride two and three abreast on roads wide
enough that cars could safely pass individual riders, but not wide enough
to allow the cars to pass riders chatting away side-by-side. I have even
called out to riders "car back" only to have them acknowledge me, but
ignore the car.

Cheers,
David

Date: 25 Dec 2006 09:33:32
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Solvang Cyclist" <news@NOshierSPAM.com > wrote in message
news:Xns98A3C92A8395BnewsNOshierSPAMcom@216.196.97.136...
> Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com> wrote in
> news:1udgo2918rc8g8nct13sv77k7a6a778cd1@4ax.com:
>
>> On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 06:03:07 -0700, k Hickey
>> <k@habcycles.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Seems like now Zoot's got two kinds of personal demons to deal with in
>>>his scary universe. Drivers and pedestrians.
>>
>> It's the whole of car culture that is detestable for the destruction
>> that it has caused. Beginning with environmental degradation all the
>> way through to its corruption of people's souls, cars are destroying
>> human society.
>>
>> I've no problem with pedestrians though they often do pull some dumb
>> stunts.
>
> As do everyone - including cyclists.
>
> I live in a very rural area that is used by many pro race teams for their
> winter training camps. Most of the locals have a "love/hate" relationship
> with cycling here. While they appreciate the revenue brought to the area
> by cycling (we also have an extremely popular century ride and the Tour
> of California is having their individual time trial in town next year)
> friends often tell me how rude some cyclists can be about not sharing the
> road. Many riders - both the pros on their training rides and
> recreational riders alike - will ride two and three abreast on roads wide
> enough that cars could safely pass individual riders, but not wide enough
> to allow the cars to pass riders chatting away side-by-side. I have even
> called out to riders "car back" only to have them acknowledge me, but
> ignore the car.
>
> Cheers,
> David

That is 3 against one. Majority rules I guess. One person in a car taking
up the whole road 364 days of the year. Not going to kill them is it for
training day.

Date: 19 Dec 2006 08:41:01
From: Notan
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring

k Hickey wrote:
>
> Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 01:00:00 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM> wrote:
>
> >>Actual scenario: Walked out of the back door of my office building, preparing
> >>to cross a quiet one-way street. Saw the bicycle plainly, travelling uphill on
> >>the far side. Started to cross, since she'd have plenty of time to pass me
> >>before I got to her side of the street. But as I reached the middle, she
> >>suddenly veered towards me (with one hand in the middle of the handlebars, the
> >>other holding a cell phone), so I backed off. It was no big deal, and I posted
> >>the incident only as a counterpoint to your previous pompous pronouncements. I
> >>included a smiley face, which I notice you omitted when you quoted my article.
> >
> >Stuff your smileys. It sounds to me like she changing her course so
> >as to go behind you in case you made a dash for the curb. Instead you
> >froze like a dumfuk in the middle of the road. I don't like dancing
> >with pedestrians while riding with only one hand that's nowhere near
> >a brake.
> >
> >I can't count the number of times I've been forced to avoid the
> >stunned cell-yakking scud scum. It's not a big deal for me either.
> >They're the most common type of filth on the road.
>
> Seems like now Zoot's got two kinds of personal demons to deal with in
> his scary universe. Drivers and pedestrians. At least he'll no
> longer have to consider the viewpoint of about 99% of the population
> this way. Pretty soon it'll be up to everyone who doesn't ride the
> same kind of bike he does, I predict (and he'll move into a cave and
> we'll never hear from him again).

I disagree.

People like Zoot will make sure they're a thorn is as many butts as possible.

Notan

Date: 16 Dec 2006 15:54:29
From: dgk
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 07:32:39 -0700, k Hickey <k@habcycles.com >
wrote:

>Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 10:51:38 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM> wrote:
>
>>>So who did I (a pedestrian) have to dodge while crossing the street yesterday
>>>evening? A woman riding a bicycle while talking on a (hand-held) cell phone!
>>
>>You probably didn't even see her before jumping out into the street.
>>You were only looking for cars maybe?
>>Were you in a cross-walk or were you jay-walking? I've found that
>>jaywalkers are usually drivers who've just left their cars.
>
>Careful Zoot - you'll pull a muscle trying to jump to so many
>conclusions (entirely without any suggestion that they're right) at
>once.
>
>It appears that you're just as willing to blindly believe that all
>cyclists are innocent of stupidity, just as you do assuming all
>drivers are guilty.
>
>FWIW, I very often ride through the ASU (Arizona State University) and
>I find that cellphone induced stupidity affects all modes of
>transportaion - pedestrian, cyclist and drivers. In each case, they
>are paying almost no attention to their surroundings, are are likely
>to do (literally) anything without notice. This is annoying with
>pedestrians, but more dangerous with cyclists (since they're moving
>faster and thus provide less gin for avoiding them safely).
>
>k Hickey
>Habanero Cycles
>http://www.habcycles.com
>Home of the $795 ti frame

k's right. I don't know what it is, but talking on a cell phone,
even hands free, is much more detrimental to driving than should be
the case. There have been many times when I'm wondering why a car is
behaving in an unusual manner and I see that the driver is talking and
no one is in the car.

Now, it is still possible that the driver is just plain crazy, but we
can safely assume that the driver is talking on the phone. Often they
are holding one, but sometimes there is just something dangling from
their ear.

Someone once told me that the problem is a lack of visual cues that
you normally get from talking with someone in person that you don't
get on the phone. It seems to be the case. When talking to someone in
person, I can often do something else at the same time. That isn't the
case even talking on a regular phone.

Whatever it is, cell phones in cars are just bad ideas. I'm guilty of
it also and I do try to pull over if I need to make a call, or at
least do it at a red light and end it as quickly as I can.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 19:06:41
From: RLB
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com > wrote in
news:1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com:

> Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist,
> due directly to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz,
> who ironically is listed as working for a personal-injury law firm.
>
> http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_fo
> r_bicyclists_death
>
> What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
> they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
>
This particular stretch of road does have a full-width shoulder.
The area is dead flat with excellent visibility.
Which makes the driver's antics and crime all the more
questionable. Distracted driver laws are inadequate.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 11:06:24
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Johnny Sunset wrote:
>
>
> The prevalence of the automatic transmission is one of the reasons why
> US society is in decline.

As we all know, it's also why the Roman Empire fell.

;-)

- Frank Krygowski

Date: 02 Dec 2006 09:19:32
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <4va2n29s3uf64k1l38bnamnffs5f6fr4ps@4ax.com >,
carlfogel@comcast.net writes:
> On Fri, 1 Dec 2006 20:12:33 -0800, tkeats2005@hotmail.com (Tom Keats)
> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>Subscribing to a newsgroup is cheaper than subscribing
>>to Mother Earth News.
>>
>>cheers,
>> Tom
>
> Dear Tom,
>
> Mother Earth News costs $10 per year:
>
> http://www.motherearthnews.com
>
> The cost of a computer, a telephone/dsl/cable connection to the
> internet, and the electric bill for running it all is an order of
> magnitude greater.

Not necessarily.
Heat, electricity & phone are all included in my $350/month rent
($325 in the summer, when the heat is off.) My current computer
was given to me by my SIL; my peripherals range from 9 to 13
years old. I have a dialup account with my local FreeNet. It's
adequate for UseNet access, email and occasional WWW research.

> Of course, you can use the public library computers, but the library
> usually has Mother Earth News for free, too.

One can also read MEN articles online, as well as other online
info (admittedly of varying verity and usefulness.)

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Date: 02 Dec 2006 17:15:20
From: John Everett
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On 1 Dec 2006 12:55:12 -0800, "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com > wrote:

>Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
>to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
>working for a personal-injury law firm.
>
>http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death

Note that this took place in Illinois, which has a history of
discounting the rights of cyclists. Note that the State's Attorney in
defending her decision to not press for a more serious charge said,
"...the driver could have no reasonable expectation of a bike on the
side of the road."

If you want another prime example of Illinois' official attitude with
respect to cyclists, do a Google search for "Boub Decision".

John Everett - Aurora, Illinois

jeverett3<AT >earthlink<DOT>net http://home.earthlink.net/~jeverett3

Date: 02 Dec 2006 11:20:48
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <70d3n2hiuipfo4euupqit680iaa1noe9aj@4ax.com >,
John Everett <jeverett3@earthlink.DEFEAT.UCE.BOTS.net > wrote:

> On 1 Dec 2006 12:55:12 -0800, "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
> >to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed
> >as working for a personal-injury law firm.
> >
> >http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_
> >for_bicy clists_death
>
> Note that this took place in Illinois, which has a history of
> discounting the rights of cyclists. Note that the State's Attorney in
> defending her decision to not press for a more serious charge said,
> "...the driver could have no reasonable expectation of a bike on the
> side of the road."
>
> If you want another prime example of Illinois' official attitude with
> respect to cyclists, do a Google search for "Boub Decision".

You mean the one that could be read as saying that bicyclists don't have
the right to ride on the roads?

Date: 02 Dec 2006 17:32:03
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Boub Decision".

Sure is!

Date: 02 Dec 2006 06:47:54
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Jasper Janssen wrote:
> \On 1 Dec 2006 12:55:12 -0800, "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
> >to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
> >working for a personal-injury law firm.
> >
> >http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death
> >
> >What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
> >they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
>
> All of the Netherlands, and no you don't.
>
> Jasper

The solution-

http://www.speedbandits.dk/

Date: 02 Dec 2006 06:45:38
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Jasper Janssen wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Dec 2006 20:12:33 -0800, tkeats2005@hotmail.com (Tom Keats)
> wrote:
>
> >Maintaining a Simplified Lifestyle can be difficult in practice,
> >and there's nothing wrong with some mutual support and shared
> >experiences & knowledge, like where to obtain a washboard and
> >mangle,
>
> I'm not entirely convinced that washboard and mangle comes under frugal.
> If you spent those hours working at a McD you'd probably make the cost of
> the washing machine back ten times.

Frugal is living in an apartment building with common use washing
machines and dryers [1], since the machines stand idle much less than
privately owned ones.

[1] Dryers are necessary for a couple of reasons. Most apartments (in
the US) prohibit hanging clothes to dry on balconies, and there is
little space inside frugally priced apartments for clotheslines.

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

Date: 02 Dec 2006 06:40:06
From: Johnny Sunset
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

bdbafh wrote:
> val189 wrote:
> > Yarper wrote:
> > > Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
> > > to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
> > > working for a personal-injury law firm.
> > >
> > > http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death
> > >
> > > What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
> > > they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
> >
> > What we REALLY need are some heavy duty sentences for this type of
> > happening. I can't wait for the day they outlaw cell phone usage of
> > any kind while driving and some stiff penalties for noncompliance.
> > Almost got creamed today in a parking lot by two drivers screwin around
> > with their cellphones. Two hands on the wheel is becoming a rarity.
>
> "Two hands on the wheel is becoming a rarity."
>
> ever hear of driving a car with a standard (non-automatic)
> transmission?

In the US, the slushbox, er automatic transmission IS the standard
transmission. Almost all models of cars and light trucks have automatic
transmissions either available or as standard equipment, while the
majority of models do not even offer a manual transmission as an option
(try to find a minivan with a manual transmission).

The prevalence of the automatic transmission is one of the reasons why
US society is in decline. If cars were built to reasonable size and
weight, we could also get rid of power steering and brakes.

--
Tom Sherman - Post Free or Die!

Date: 02 Dec 2006 14:11:33
From: Jasper Janssen
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

\On 1 Dec 2006 12:55:12 -0800, "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com > wrote:

>Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
>to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
>working for a personal-injury law firm.
>
>http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death
>
>What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
>they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.

All of the Netherlands, and no you don't.

Jasper

Date: 01 Dec 2006 23:31:25
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <timmcn-93813D.00181702122006@news.iphouse.com >,
Tim McNaa <timmcn@bitstream.net > writes:
> In article <hfuqke.r43.ln@bud.garden.local>,
> tkeats2005@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) wrote:
>
>> In article <timmcn-7CCE56.21395601122006@news.iphouse.com>, Tim
>> McNaa <timmcn@bitstream.net> writes:
l >>
>> > And since when do you need a newsgroup to talk about not buying
>> > crap you don't need? Frugality is hardly a difficult concept.)
>>
>> Maintaining a Simplified Lifestyle can be difficult in practice, and
>> there's nothing wrong with some mutual support and shared experiences
>> & knowledge, like where to obtain a washboard and mangle, or how to
>> make a smokehouse out of an old Frigidaire, or what to feed your
>> mule, or how to split your own cedar shakes, or what kinds of
>> packaging can be re-used to grow bean sprouts in.
>>
>> Subscribing to a newsgroup is cheaper than subscribing to Mother
>> Earth News.
>
> So is subscribing to reality.

Who's reality? Yours? A Massai herdswomman? Or perhaps
an Innuit or Saami or Mauri?
\
> "Simplified Lifestyle" in Capital Letters? None of those things are a
> "simpler" life. Well, maybe growing your own bean sprouts. But that
> confusion is not uncommon in the "voluntary simplicity" folks
> hereabouts.

Mother Earth News subscribers?

> "Rustic" and "simple" are not the same thing. But whatever
> turns your crank- it's your life. I can understand doing those things
> because they are enjoyable in their own right, but as a Simplified
> Lifestyle...

There's stuff we need, stuff we want, stuff that's
foisted upon us, and stuff we have to discard.

That puts us in the position of having to make decisions
considering our effects on our friends and neighbours and
fellow citizens. Like how much electricity or fresh water
or health care or other resources we abusively consume at
the expense of others.

What I call "Lifestyle Simplification" is the diametric
opposite of "Conspicuous Consumersism".

Actually I regret applying these labels, because it boils
down to saying we're all either self-centred, self-interested
pigs, or we care enough about one another to not hog all the
goods for ourselves because we care about other people.
I guess the truth, as usual, lies somewhere in between.

I lean toward the caring about other people side.

I think you do, too.

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Date: 02 Dec 2006 22:41:18
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <d4arke.nh3.ln@bud.garden.local >,
tkeats@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) wrote:

> What I call "Lifestyle Simplification" is the diametric
> opposite of "Conspicuous Consumersism".

Trapped in duality.

--
Michael Press

Date: 01 Dec 2006 20:12:33
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <timmcn-7CCE56.21395601122006@news.iphouse.com >,
Tim McNaa <timmcn@bitstream.net > writes:

> And since when do you need a newsgroup to talk about not buying
> crap you don't need? Frugality is hardly a difficult concept.)

Maintaining a Simplified Lifestyle can be difficult in practice,
and there's nothing wrong with some mutual support and shared
experiences & knowledge, like where to obtain a washboard and
mangle, or how to make a smokehouse out of an old Frigidaire, or
what to feed your mule, or how to split your own cedar shakes,
or what kinds of packaging can be re-used to grow bean sprouts in.

Subscribing to a newsgroup is cheaper than subscribing
to Mother Earth News.

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Date: 02 Dec 2006 14:34:57
From: Jasper Janssen
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Fri, 1 Dec 2006 20:12:33 -0800, tkeats2005@hotmail.com (Tom Keats)
wrote:

>Maintaining a Simplified Lifestyle can be difficult in practice,
>and there's nothing wrong with some mutual support and shared
>experiences & knowledge, like where to obtain a washboard and
>mangle,

I'm not entirely convinced that washboard and mangle comes under frugal.
If you spent those hours working at a McD you'd probably make the cost of
the washing machine back ten times.

Jasper

Date: 02 Dec 2006 00:47:23
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Fri, 1 Dec 2006 20:12:33 -0800, tkeats2005@hotmail.com (Tom Keats)
wrote:

[snip]

>Subscribing to a newsgroup is cheaper than subscribing
>to Mother Earth News.
>
>cheers,
> Tom

Dear Tom,

Mother Earth News costs $10 per year:

http://www.motherearthnews.com

The cost of a computer, a telephone/dsl/cable connection to the
internet, and the electric bill for running it all is an order of
magnitude greater.

Of course, you can use the public library computers, but the library
usually has Mother Earth News for free, too.

Off to Ralph Waldo's house now for some decent grub in civilized
surroundings. Beans are gawdawful boring outside of a book. I ate a
groundhog once, and that was enough for me. I like to listen to Ralph
re-hash "Self-Reliance" while I help myself to more chicken and
dumplings.

Cheers,

H.D. Thoreau

Date: 02 Dec 2006 22:44:24
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article
<4va2n29s3uf64k1l38bnamnffs5f6fr4ps@4ax.com >,
carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:

> On Fri, 1 Dec 2006 20:12:33 -0800, tkeats2005@hotmail.com (Tom Keats)
> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >Subscribing to a newsgroup is cheaper than subscribing
> >to Mother Earth News.
> >
> >cheers,
> > Tom
>
> Dear Tom,
>
> Mother Earth News costs $10 per year:
>
> http://www.motherearthnews.com
>
> The cost of a computer, a telephone/dsl/cable connection to the
> internet, and the electric bill for running it all is an order of
> magnitude greater.
>
> Of course, you can use the public library computers, but the library
> usually has Mother Earth News for free, too.
>
> Off to Ralph Waldo's house now for some decent grub in civilized
> surroundings. Beans are gawdawful boring outside of a book. I ate a
> groundhog once, and that was enough for me. I like to listen to Ralph
> re-hash "Self-Reliance" while I help myself to more chicken and
> dumplings.
>
> Cheers,
>
> H.D. Thoreau

Burrrrrrrrrrrrrp!

--
Michael Press

Date: 02 Dec 2006 14:36:59
From: Jasper Janssen
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 00:47:23 -0700, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:

>Mother Earth News costs $10 per year:
>
>http://www.motherearthnews.com
>
>The cost of a computer, a telephone/dsl/cable connection to the
>internet, and the electric bill for running it all is an order of
>magnitude greater.

Two orders of magnitude, really, to not be working with decrepit old
machines failing at random times.

Jasper

Date: 02 Dec 2006 09:58:25
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <q343n2l3ovu4rmal9fq3frb0eh1rvd24hf@4ax.com >,
Jasper Janssen <jasper@jjanssen.org > wrote:

> On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 00:47:23 -0700, carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
>
> >Mother Earth News costs $10 per year:
> >
> >http://www.motherearthnews.com
> >
> >The cost of a computer, a telephone/dsl/cable connection to the
> >internet, and the electric bill for running it all is an order of
> >magnitude greater.
>
> Two orders of magnitude, really, to not be working with decrepit old
> machines failing at random times.

Oh, I dunno. I've got a Rev B iMac that is 8 years old and works very
reliably, having served for years as a Web server and as a print server
on my home LAN. It could easily be my only computer if I didn't need a
laptop for work.

Date: 05 Dec 2006 02:35:51
From: Jasper Janssen
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 09:58:25 -0600, Tim McNaa <timmcn@bitstream.net >
wrote:
>In article <q343n2l3ovu4rmal9fq3frb0eh1rvd24hf@4ax.com>,
> Jasper Janssen <jasper@jjanssen.org> wrote:

>> Two orders of magnitude, really, to not be working with decrepit old
>> machines failing at random times.
>
>Oh, I dunno. I've got a Rev B iMac that is 8 years old and works very
>reliably, having served for years as a Web server and as a print server
>on my home LAN. It could easily be my only computer if I didn't need a
>laptop for work.

If you really know what you're doing, the occasional sturdy machine can
still be found.. but unless you buy it new, which is (like buying a new
car) a lot like lighting your cigarettes with $100 bills (only one or two
for a new computer, admittedly), you tend to end up with crappy castoffs.

Jasper

Date: 02 Dec 2006 00:18:17
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <hfuqke.r43.ln@bud.garden.local >,
tkeats2005@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) wrote:

> In article <timmcn-7CCE56.21395601122006@news.iphouse.com>, Tim
> McNaa <timmcn@bitstream.net> writes:
>
> > And since when do you need a newsgroup to talk about not buying
> > crap you don't need? Frugality is hardly a difficult concept.)
>
> Maintaining a Simplified Lifestyle can be difficult in practice, and
> there's nothing wrong with some mutual support and shared experiences
> & knowledge, like where to obtain a washboard and mangle, or how to
> make a smokehouse out of an old Frigidaire, or what to feed your
> mule, or how to split your own cedar shakes, or what kinds of
> packaging can be re-used to grow bean sprouts in.
>
> Subscribing to a newsgroup is cheaper than subscribing to Mother
> Earth News.

So is subscribing to reality.

"Simplified Lifestyle" in Capital Letters? None of those things are a
"simpler" life. Well, maybe growing your own bean sprouts. But that
confusion is not uncommon in the "voluntary simplicity" folks
hereabouts. "Rustic" and "simple" are not the same thing. But whatever
turns your crank- it's your life. I can understand doing those things
because they are enjoyable in their own right, but as a Simplified
Lifestyle...

Date: 02 Dec 2006 08:38:15
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article
<timmcn-93813D.00181702122006@news.iphouse.com >,
Tim McNaa <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote:

> In article <hfuqke.r43.ln@bud.garden.local>,
> tkeats2005@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) wrote:
>
> > In article <timmcn-7CCE56.21395601122006@news.iphouse.com>, Tim
> > McNaa <timmcn@bitstream.net> writes:
> >
> > > And since when do you need a newsgroup to talk about not buying
> > > crap you don't need? Frugality is hardly a difficult concept.)
> >
> > Maintaining a Simplified Lifestyle can be difficult in practice, and
> > there's nothing wrong with some mutual support and shared experiences
> > & knowledge, like where to obtain a washboard and mangle, or how to
> > make a smokehouse out of an old Frigidaire, or what to feed your
> > mule, or how to split your own cedar shakes, or what kinds of
> > packaging can be re-used to grow bean sprouts in.
> >
> > Subscribing to a newsgroup is cheaper than subscribing to Mother
> > Earth News.
>
> So is subscribing to reality.
>
> "Simplified Lifestyle" in Capital Letters? None of those things are a
> "simpler" life. Well, maybe growing your own bean sprouts. But that
> confusion is not uncommon in the "voluntary simplicity" folks
> hereabouts. "Rustic" and "simple" are not the same thing. But whatever
> turns your crank- it's your life. I can understand doing those things
> because they are enjoyable in their own right, but as a Simplified
> Lifestyle...

B
It takes dynamite to get me up,

E7
Too much of everything is just enough.

B
One more thing I just got to say,

E7
I need a miracle every day.

G7
I need a miracle every day...

-- Barlow, Weir

<http://www.guitaretab.com/g/grateful-dead/7271.html >

--
Michael Press

Date: 01 Dec 2006 18:29:28
From: bdbafh
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Zoot Katz wrote:
> On 1 Dec 2006 12:55:12 -0800, "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
> >to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
> >working for a personal-injury law firm.
> >
> >http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death
> >
> >What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
> >they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
>
> What we need is to bring back the guillotine for careless,
> inattentive driving causing death.
>
> I hope this four-time loser does the right thing and commits suicide.
>
> BTW, shove your attempt at a political troll. Every DA's hands are
> tied by the systemic bias that continues to perceive driving as a god
> given right and victims as expendable.
> --
> zk

That apparently doesn't apply to running over motorcyclists:

http://www.postgazette.com/pg/06334/742434-54.stm

"John Cartwright, 54, is charged with vehicular homicide, three counts
of aggravated assault, three counts of recklessly endangering another
person and traffic violations."

How could the driver not be charged with at least aggravated assault?
IANAL, but IMHO she most certainly should have been charged with
vehiclar homicide.

-bdbafh

Date: 01 Dec 2006 17:34:42
From: bdbafh
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

val189 wrote:
> Yarper wrote:
> > Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
> > to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
> > working for a personal-injury law firm.
> >
> > http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death
> >
> > What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
> > they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
>
> What we REALLY need are some heavy duty sentences for this type of
> happening. I can't wait for the day they outlaw cell phone usage of
> any kind while driving and some stiff penalties for noncompliance.
> Almost got creamed today in a parking lot by two drivers screwin around
> with their cellphones. Two hands on the wheel is becoming a rarity.

"Two hands on the wheel is becoming a rarity."

ever hear of driving a car with a standard (non-automatic)
transmission?

-bdbafh

Date: 01 Dec 2006 17:15:29
From: val189
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Date: 01 Dec 2006 21:48:10
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <1165022129.626158.129780@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com >,
"val189" <gwehrenb@bellsouth.net > wrote:

> Yarper wrote:
> > Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
> > to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed
> > as working for a personal-injury law firm.
> >
> > http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced
> > _for_bic yclists_death
> >
> > What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like they have
> > throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
>
> What we REALLY need are some heavy duty sentences for this type of
> happening. I can't wait for the day they outlaw cell phone usage of
> any kind while driving and some stiff penalties for noncompliance.
> Almost got creamed today in a parking lot by two drivers screwin
> around with their cellphones. Two hands on the wheel is becoming a
> rarity.

Cell phones are intended to be used while driving. You can tell this by
the fact that coverage in almost all US metropolitan areas is excellent
on highways and spotty to poor more than 1/4 away from highways. In the
Twin Cities metro are there are many, many coverage holes and my phone
(Sprint) is frequently unusable on surface streets and in neighborhoods.

Not that talking on a cell phone and driving is a good idea. A dozen
times a day or more I see people driving neglectfully while talking on
cell phones- all of them probably thinking they are driving fine. NO
ONE drives safely while talking on a cell phone, and hands free phones
don't help much if at all. If you think you can drive safely while
you're talking on your cell phone, you are delusional.

Date: 01 Dec 2006 19:03:53
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com >,
"Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com > wrote:

> Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly to
> Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
> working for a personal-injury law firm.

Is her political affiliation somehow relevant?

> What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like they have
> throughout Denk and parts of Holland.

What Denk and Holland have is a population that uses bikes in large
numbers. That's what makes the difference. Separate bikes lanes are
frequently more dangerous than riding on the roads.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 09:48:09
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 19:03:53 -0600, Tim McNaa <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote:
: In article <1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com >,
: "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com > wrote:
:
: > Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly to
: > Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
: > working for a personal-injury law firm.
:
: Is her political affiliation somehow relevant?

It depends on your point of view. Is Jack Abramoff's political affiliation
relevant?

Date: 02 Dec 2006 09:52:53
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <5d43n216jpgtk227lohi9omn8kj094dufq@4ax.com >,
Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM > wrote:

> On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 19:03:53 -0600, Tim McNaa
> <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
> : In article <1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,
> : "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote:
> :
> : > Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due
> : > directly to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically
> : > is listed as working for a personal-injury law firm.
> :
> : Is her political affiliation somehow relevant?
>
> It depends on your point of view. Is Jack Abramoff's political
> affiliation relevant?

No.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 11:30:12
From: Martin Borsje
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

> In article <1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,
> "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly to
>> Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
>> working for a personal-injury law firm.
>
> Is her political affiliation somehow relevant?
>
>> What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like they have
>> throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
>
> What Denk and Holland have is a population that uses bikes in large
> numbers. That's what makes the difference. Separate bikes lanes are
> frequently more dangerous than riding on the roads.

the issue in the Netherlands is that you really have a problem when you
kill a cyclist by ignorance

--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu

Date: 02 Dec 2006 10:14:23
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <mn.12b27d6cc15d3178.64226@planet.nl >,
tin Borsje <geenspam@planet.nl > wrote:

> > In article <1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
> >> to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed
> >> as working for a personal-injury law firm.
> >
> > Is her political affiliation somehow relevant?
> >
> >> What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like they have
> >> throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
> >
> > What Denk and Holland have is a population that uses bikes in
> > large numbers. That's what makes the difference. Separate bikes
> > lanes are frequently more dangerous than riding on the roads.
>
> the issue in the Netherlands is that you really have a problem when
> you kill a cyclist by ignorance

And in many other places as well. The theory in the U.S. is that
everyone is treated equally in courts of law (of course it's really not
the case), so that negligently killing a cyclist is no different from
negligently killing a pedestrian or driver. U.S. courts also recognize
the possibility of contributory negligence on the part of the victim,
such as riding a bike at night in dark clothing with no lights or
reflectors. From what little I know of the case here, there was no
contributory negligence on the part of the cyclist who was killed.

It does seem that the prosecuting attorney made a very poor choice in
her choice of prosecution. Under U.S. law, the driver cannot be tried a
second time for the same crime.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 16:59:08
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

>>?>>> It does seem that the prosecuting attorney made a very poor choice in
> her choice of prosecution. Under U.S. law, the driver cannot be tried a
> second time for the same crime.

Seems to me like they made a very poor choice of careers!

Date: 02 Dec 2006 14:38:51
From: Jasper Janssen
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 11:30:12 +0100, tin Borsje <geenspam@planet.nl >
wrote:
>> In article <1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,
>> "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> What Denk and Holland have is a population that uses bikes in large
>> numbers. That's what makes the difference. Separate bikes lanes are
>> frequently more dangerous than riding on the roads.
>
>the issue in the Netherlands is that you really have a problem when you
>kill a cyclist by ignorance

Not as much of a problem as you should, and conversely, if a cyclist kills
himself by driving under your wheels, you have way too much problems.

Jasper

Date: 02 Dec 2006 04:51:14
From: Grappletech
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Here locally, a woman on a cell phone driving a Navigator SUV failed to
stop at an intersection (red light) and ran into the back of a smaller car
that was stopped at the light, killing the 2 kids who were in the back
(seatbelted). The mother of the 2 dead kids is "lucky" to be alive, but
she's got massive back pain daily.

It's time we stop coddling these murderers. That's what they are --
murderers. They think their time is more valuable than other peoples'
lives. And talking on a cell phone impairs driving as much as being drunk.
When someone chooses to talk on a cell phone and drive, they are
deliberately putting others in jeapordy of life and limb. You may say
"well there was no INTENT to kill or maim", but because they know it
impairs their driving but continue to drive anyway, this to me is as good
as "intent".

When I first got a cellphone, I made a couple of calls to people while
driving and IMMEDIATELY recognized how much of a distraction it is. ANd I
quit doing it asap. Everytime I see someone not signaling, or fail to
drive away when the light turns green, or make other driving mistakes, 9
times out of 10 it's because they're on a damn cell phone, probably
blathering away about nothing important.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Date: 01 Dec 2006 20:55:40
From: Dave Reckoning
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Tim McNaa" <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote in message
news:timmcn-E892C9.19035301122006@news.iphouse.com...
> In article <1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,
> "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly to
>> Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
>> working for a personal-injury law firm.
>
> Is her political affiliation somehow relevant?
>
>> What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like they have
>> throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
>
> What Denk and Holland have is a population that uses bikes in large
> numbers. That's what makes the difference. Separate bikes lanes are
> frequently more dangerous than riding on the roads.

This is definatly the case. Bike lanes are the MOST dangerous. They make the
drivers think that they don't have to worry about the bikes because they are
off in their seperate lanes. The problem is that the drivers have to cross
those lanes to make turns and enter the street. Alas, sometimes the drivers
don't stay in their own lanes and drive over the bikes anyway. The worst of
them are the ones that are seperate sidewalk affairs. Also this gives the
car drivers the illusion that the street belongs to them alone. Then theye
make the bikes cross all of the streets at the worst possible place and put
the bikes in the position of having to enter the private domain of the cars
with every crossing of a side street.

The best idea I have seen is counter-intuitive, take down all of the traffic
signs and street king and make people rely on common sense!!! Street
kings and bike lanes just give the cars the false sense that they can
drive over anything that gets in their way.

Dave Reckoning

Noblesville, Indiana

Date: 01 Dec 2006 22:22:51
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Fri, 1 Dec 2006 20:55:40 -0500, "Dave Reckoning"
<Dave_Reckoning@notmail.com > wrote:
: The best idea I have seen is counter-intuitive, take down all of the traffic
: signs and street king and make people rely on common sense!!! Street
: kings and bike lanes just give the cars the false sense that they can
: drive over anything that gets in their way.

If that's the best idea you've seen, you should find a better optometrist.

Date: 01 Dec 2006 20:43:24
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 22:22:51 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM > replied
>"Dave Reckoning" wrote:
>
>: The best idea I have seen is counter-intuitive, take down all of the traffic
>: signs and street king and make people rely on common sense!!! Street
>: kings and bike lanes just give the cars the false sense that they can
>: drive over anything that gets in their way.
>
>If that's the best idea you've seen, you should find a better optometrist.

It's called "second generation" traffic calming, a combination of
traffic engineering and urban design that also draws heavily on the
fields of behavioural psychology and evolutionary biology.

One of the characteristics of a shared environment is that it appears
chaotic and demands a strong level of having your wits about you.

It is anarchy without malice.

It challenges one of the fundamental tenets of American urban
planning: that to create safe communities, you have to control them.

For the past 50 years, the American approach to traffic safety has
been dominated by the "triple E" paradigm: engineering, enforcement
and education. The history of traffic engineering is the effort to
rationalise what appeared to be chaos.

Studies of second-generation traffic calming methods have shown
encouraging reductions in the number of injury crashes, based largely
on reductions in speed and in the amount of vehicle traffic. The
Netherlands has noted an injury-crash reduction of more than 80
percent. In Germany, the number of crashes went up to some degree,
but the number of casualties decreased 30% - 56%, Great Britain, 24%
and Austria, 31%.

Do some research
--
zk

Date: 02 Dec 2006 16:48:37
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

And to think if everybody did the speed limit we would not need engineers,
behavioural psychologists and evolutionary botanists.

Basically, I believe if everyone did the speed limit and followed the rules
there would be 99% less accidents except those that you caused by yourself
to yourself.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 07:55:20
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 20:43:24 -0800, Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com > wrote:
: On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 22:22:51 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM > replied
: >"Dave Reckoning" wrote:
: >
: >: The best idea I have seen is counter-intuitive, take down all of the traffic
: >: signs and street king and make people rely on common sense!!! Street
: >: kings and bike lanes just give the cars the false sense that they can
: >: drive over anything that gets in their way.
: >
: >If that's the best idea you've seen, you should find a better optometrist.
:
: It's called "second generation" traffic calming, a combination of
: traffic engineering and urban design that also draws heavily on the
: fields of behavioural psychology and evolutionary biology.
:
: One of the characteristics of a shared environment is that it appears
: chaotic and demands a strong level of having your wits about you.
:
: It is anarchy without malice.
:
: It challenges one of the fundamental tenets of American urban
: planning: that to create safe communities, you have to control them.

Ah! I think I get it. This is the system that's now being tested in Baghdad,
right?

: For the past 50 years, the American approach to traffic safety has
: been dominated by the "triple E" paradigm: engineering, enforcement
: and education. The history of traffic engineering is the effort to
: rationalise what appeared to be chaos.
:
: Studies of second-generation traffic calming methods have shown
: encouraging reductions in the number of injury crashes, based largely
: on reductions in speed and in the amount of vehicle traffic. The
: Netherlands has noted an injury-crash reduction of more than 80
: percent. In Germany, the number of crashes went up to some degree,
: but the number of casualties decreased 30% - 56%, Great Britain, 24%
: and Austria, 31%.
:
: Do some research

Yeah, like into whether you and others proposing such madness are (or are
shilling for) personal-injury lawyers.

What does this have to do with Verizon cell phones? (Other than the obvious
fact that if this method of traffic "calming" becomes widespread, we're all
going to have to have 911 on speed dial.)

Date: 02 Dec 2006 15:17:44
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 07:55:20 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM > wrote:

>: Studies of second-generation traffic calming methods have shown
>: encouraging reductions in the number of injury crashes, based largely
>: on reductions in speed and in the amount of vehicle traffic. The
>: Netherlands has noted an injury-crash reduction of more than 80
>: percent. In Germany, the number of crashes went up to some degree,
>: but the number of casualties decreased 30% - 56%, Great Britain, 24%
>: and Austria, 31%.
>:
>: Do some research
>
>Yeah, like into whether you and others proposing such madness are (or are
>shilling for) personal-injury lawyers.
>
>What does this have to do with Verizon cell phones? (Other than the obvious
>fact that if this method of traffic "calming" becomes widespread, we're all
>going to have to have 911 on speed dial.)

Granted, the countries where "second generation" traffic calming has
proved effective at reducing causalities don't have the outrageous
personal injury suits and settlements prevalent in the litigious
culture currently infecting your US of A. They also have more
stringent rules, better enforcement and more comprehensive drivers'
education. In America any fool can drive a car and most of them do.

Let me guess, you're one of the 70% who consider themselves above
average drivers. And perhaps too you erroneously believe that your
fuel costs and other vehicle expenses entitles you to exclusive
domain on the streets for which we all pay. I'd further wager that
you habitually exceed the speed limit, fail to signal turns and lane
changes, disregard pedestrians' right-of-way and neglect to check
your mirrors and blind spots while gabbing on your precious cell
phone.

If you've not yet killed or injured anyone with your inattentive,
negligent or just plain incompetent driving, consider yourself lucky.
Hopefully when your luck runs out a bridge abutment absorbs the
"collateral damage" and it's only your estate being sued.
--
zk

Date: 02 Dec 2006 23:07:19
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 15:17:44 -0800, Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com > wrote:
: On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 07:55:20 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM > wrote:
:
: >: Studies of second-generation traffic calming methods have shown
: >: encouraging reductions in the number of injury crashes, based largely
: >: on reductions in speed and in the amount of vehicle traffic. The
: >: Netherlands has noted an injury-crash reduction of more than 80
: >: percent. In Germany, the number of crashes went up to some degree,
: >: but the number of casualties decreased 30% - 56%, Great Britain, 24%
: >: and Austria, 31%.
: >:
: >: Do some research
: >
: >Yeah, like into whether you and others proposing such madness are (or are
: >shilling for) personal-injury lawyers.
: >
: >What does this have to do with Verizon cell phones? (Other than the obvious
: >fact that if this method of traffic "calming" becomes widespread, we're all
: >going to have to have 911 on speed dial.)
:
: Granted, the countries where "second generation" traffic calming has
: proved effective at reducing causalities don't have the outrageous
: personal injury suits and settlements prevalent in the litigious
: culture currently infecting your US of A. They also have more
: stringent rules, better enforcement and more comprehensive drivers'
: education. In America any fool can drive a car and most of them do.
:
: Let me guess, you're one of the 70% who consider themselves above
: average drivers. And perhaps too you erroneously believe that your
: fuel costs and other vehicle expenses entitles you to exclusive
: domain on the streets for which we all pay. I'd further wager that
: you habitually exceed the speed limit, fail to signal turns and lane
: changes, disregard pedestrians' right-of-way and neglect to check
: your mirrors and blind spots while gabbing on your precious cell
: phone.
:
: If you've not yet killed or injured anyone with your inattentive,
: negligent or just plain incompetent driving, consider yourself lucky.
: Hopefully when your luck runs out a bridge abutment absorbs the
: "collateral damage" and it's only your estate being sued.

How the hell do you know all that? You must be a genius. Actually, you got
most of the details wrong, but it is a fact that I'd be willing to bet, sight
unseen, that I'm a safer driver than you are. Or are you one of those
self-styled experts who knows everything it's important to know about cars but
has never actually driven one?

Come to think of it, you did say you were just guessing. Oh, well ...

Bob

Date: 02 Dec 2006 23:16:40
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 23:07:19 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM > wrote:

>How the hell do you know all that? You must be a genius.

Not quite a genius the last time that was checked. But I can tell
from your posturing that you believe you're exceptional. That's
subject to question since you appear stupid enough to think you can
drive as safely while you're yapping into your beloved brain-frying
cell phone.

>Or are you one of those
>self-styled experts who knows everything it's important to know about cars but
>has never actually driven one?

I won't boast about my driving capabilities but I've held a valid
drivers license for forty years. I have a clean driving record and
receive the biggest insurance discounts. I enrolled in an evasive
driving course that was required for a temporary job I took in 1986.
There I learned that the average driver is basically inept.
Experience leads me to believe you're nothing special.

Before and after that I was mostly a motorcyclist. I hate being caged
and hope to never need owning another scud. But I drove about 50 feet
today when I was asked to get an incompetent driver's car out of the
rutted and hard frozen slush where they were stuck. I'm a bicyclist
first and foremost. It's long been my preferred mode of
transportation.

From your spouting I can judge that you're a scud addicted egoist who
disregards the laws and probably disintegrates into a raging whack
job when another road user gets "in your way". You probably don't
have the skill or disposition to safely negotiate a city where
"second generation" traffic calming has been adopted.

The main jist of this "discussion", and the one that is topical to
your newsgroup, is that you, me, nor anyone is capable of driving
with their complete attention while engaged in a cell-phone
conversation or manipulating the damned contraption.

Go park and change your ring tone. That old one has become as
annoyingly monotonous as you.
--
zk

Date: 03 Dec 2006 08:07:05
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 23:16:40 -0800, Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com > wrote:
: On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 23:07:19 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM > wrote:
:
: >How the hell do you know all that? You must be a genius.
:
: Not quite a genius the last time that was checked. But I can tell
: from your posturing that you believe you're exceptional. That's
: subject to question since you appear stupid enough to think you can
: drive as safely while you're yapping into your beloved brain-frying
: cell phone.
:
: >Or are you one of those
: >self-styled experts who knows everything it's important to know about cars but
: >has never actually driven one?
:
: I won't boast about my driving capabilities but I've held a valid
: drivers license for forty years. I have a clean driving record and
: receive the biggest insurance discounts. I enrolled in an evasive
: driving course that was required for a temporary job I took in 1986.
: There I learned that the average driver is basically inept.
: Experience leads me to believe you're nothing special.

I don't know how "experience" tells you that, but you're right: I'm not. I've
been driving a little longer than you (54 years), and I've never ridden a
motorcycle. And while I've encountered my share of inept drivers, I'm not sure
the average driver is inept. As long as I can stay out of his way, maybe I
won't have to find out. But like you, I get the biggest insurance discounts,
including the one for riding public transportation to work every day.

: Before and after that I was mostly a motorcyclist. I hate being caged
: and hope to never need owning another scud. But I drove about 50 feet
: today when I was asked to get an incompetent driver's car out of the
: rutted and hard frozen slush where they were stuck. I'm a bicyclist
: first and foremost. It's long been my preferred mode of
: transportation.

I hope you're a safer than average motorcyclist. A shocking percentage of the
ones I see on U.S. highways appear to be nuts. Of all the times I've been
passed on high-speed roads by vehicles going two or more times the speed
limit, only a handful of those vehicles have been automobiles. The rest were
motorcycles.

: From your spouting I can judge that you're a scud addicted egoist who
: disregards the laws and probably disintegrates into a raging whack
: job when another road user gets "in your way". You probably don't
: have the skill or disposition to safely negotiate a city where
: "second generation" traffic calming has been adopted.

Thank you for your constructive criticism. I don't know how you think you know
me so well, but again I guess I don't care.

: The main jist of this "discussion", and the one that is topical to
: your newsgroup, is that you, me, nor anyone is capable of driving
: with their complete attention while engaged in a cell-phone
: conversation or manipulating the damned contraption.

As it happens, I never said I was. I use a cell phone while driving very
rarely and only in situations when traffic is light and I can do it without
getting into trouble. I never initiate a call except by voice activation. And
I'm always ready to drop the call if the road needs my attention. It's really
no different from talking to a passenger.

: Go park and change your ring tone. That old one has become as
: annoyingly monotonous as you.

If you don't like what I say, you don't have to read it. I think I will shut
up, though; I'm starting to get the feeling that arguing with you is just
feeding the troll.

Actually, you and I have something in common: it appears that we both post to
Usenet using the same antiquated version of Forte Agent. I haven't upgraded
because I'm too lazy. What's your excuse?

Bob

Date: 03 Dec 2006 16:50:23
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 08:07:05 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM > wrote:
>: The main jist of this "discussion", and the one that is topical to
>: your newsgroup, is that you, me, nor anyone is capable of driving
>: with their complete attention while engaged in a cell-phone
>: conversation or manipulating the damned contraption.
>
>As it happens, I never said I was. I use a cell phone while driving very
>rarely and only in situations when traffic is light and I can do it without
>getting into trouble. I never initiate a call except by voice activation. And
>I'm always ready to drop the call if the road needs my attention.

The road always needs your attention. Other road users deserve all of
it. It's their road too. With second generation traffic calming you'd
be giving the road and its occupants more of your attention. Driving
would no longer be a simple matter of keeping your scud between the
white lines while your brain goes on auto pilot.

Many times you've heard people say they don't remember how they got
to their destination. There are parts of the regular commute when
they're not really there. They're navigating by rote. This is more
true of highway or freeway driving involving longer distances with
commuters travelling wide, straight, boring roads. Driving is boring
hence the popularity of in car diversions and distractions, aka
entertainment units. The first thing I usually have to do when
starting to drive someone else's car is turn off the radio.

Afternoon commuters even doze off frequently. They're tired. They're
comfortably tucked into their couch on wheels with all the amenities
of home at their fingertips. The surroundings are boring and their
brain goes into a micro sleep. That's all it takes. Drivers are
stunned and lolled into complacency. They regard safety in terms of
their own post crash survival. They feel safe in a controlled
environment.

A more challenging or uncertain environment would demand more of
their attention. They may even be forced slow down a bit.

>It's really
>no different from talking to a passenger.

A passenger is an extra set of eyes. I don't like to be a "back seat
driver" but I can't help but do shoulder checks or hit the
nonexistent brake pedal when riding as a passenger. I've often warned
the driver "this one's coming", "there's a bicycle", "that one's
going to turn", etc.

A disembodied voice is a distraction. Your brain is working harder to
get the message. Less than 40% of the message is comprised of the
actual words. The rest is gestures, subtle nuances, tone, inflection,
facial expressions, etc. It's so ingrained that people unconsciously
use their hands for gesturing while engaged in phone conversations.
--
zk

Date: 02 Dec 2006 02:34:56
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Sorry Karen forgot

"Dave Reckoning" <Dave_Reckoning@notmail.com > wrote in message
news:qJqdnVlWYJWBQO3YnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@insightbb.com...
> "Tim McNaa" <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote in message
> news:timmcn-E892C9.19035301122006@news.iphouse.com...
>> In article <1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,
>> "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly to
>>> Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
>>> working for a personal-injury law firm.
>>
>> Is her political affiliation somehow relevant?
>>
>>> What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like they have
>>> throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
>>
>> What Denk and Holland have is a population that uses bikes in large
>> numbers. That's what makes the difference. Separate bikes lanes are
>> frequently more dangerous than riding on the roads.
>
> This is definatly the case. Bike lanes are the MOST dangerous. They make
> the drivers think that they don't have to worry about the bikes because
> they are off in their seperate lanes. The problem is that the drivers have
> to cross those lanes to make turns and enter the street. Alas, sometimes
> the drivers don't stay in their own lanes and drive over the bikes anyway.
> The worst of them are the ones that are seperate sidewalk affairs. Also
> this gives the car drivers the illusion that the street belongs to them
> alone. Then theye make the bikes cross all of the streets at the worst
> possible place and put the bikes in the position of having to enter the
> private domain of the cars with every crossing of a side street.
>
> The best idea I have seen is counter-intuitive, take down all of the
> traffic signs and street king and make people rely on common sense!!!
> Street kings and bike lanes just give the cars the false sense that
> they can drive over anything that gets in their way.
>
> Dave Reckoning
>
> Noblesville, Indiana
>

Date: 04 Dec 2006 01:04:04
From: Don Klipstein
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <kD5ch.403837$5R2.135719@pd7urf3no >, nash wrote:
>Sorry Karen forgot
>
>"Dave Reckoning" <Dave_Reckoning@notmail.com> wrote in message
>news:qJqdnVlWYJWBQO3YnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@insightbb.com...
>> "Tim McNaa" <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote in message
>> news:timmcn-E892C9.19035301122006@news.iphouse.com...
>>> In article <1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,
>>> "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly to
>>>> Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
>>>> working for a personal-injury law firm.
>>>
>>> Is her political affiliation somehow relevant?
>>>
>>>> What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like they have
>>>> throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
>>>
>>> What Denk and Holland have is a population that uses bikes in large
>>> numbers. That's what makes the difference. Separate bikes lanes are
>>> frequently more dangerous than riding on the roads.
>>
>> This is definatly the case. Bike lanes are the MOST dangerous. They make
>> the drivers think that they don't have to worry about the bikes because
>> they are off in their seperate lanes. The problem is that the drivers have
>> to cross those lanes to make turns and enter the street. Alas, sometimes
>> the drivers don't stay in their own lanes and drive over the bikes anyway.
>> The worst of them are the ones that are seperate sidewalk affairs. Also
>> this gives the car drivers the illusion that the street belongs to them
>> alone. Then theye make the bikes cross all of the streets at the worst
>> possible place and put the bikes in the position of having to enter the
>> private domain of the cars with every crossing of a side street.
>>
>> The best idea I have seen is counter-intuitive, take down all of the
>> traffic signs and street king and make people rely on common sense!!!
>> Street kings and bike lanes just give the cars the false sense that
>> they can drive over anything that gets in their way.

Philadelphia has bike lanes on many of their streets, and the bike lanes
are in the streets.

I feel safer with these than without them. However, Philadelphia has
two big issues to fix, which don't appear too related to bike lanes since
the offenses also occur on streets that don't have them:

1. Double parking. In Philadelphia and nearby parts of Upper Darby, it
is common, even routine to see cars double-parked, even within a block of,
often even within half a block of an empty legal parking space.
Occaisionally cars will even double park against and not pull into a
parking space. Drivers waiting for a passenger often wait out of the
parking lane, even 20 feet from an empty parking space or loading zone
space. Drivers often think that waiting for a passenger in an occupied
car is better done in a traffic lane (bike or otherwise) than in an empty
curb lane where parking is not permitted but where stopping is.

2. In Philadelphia, all too many drivers:

a) Do not signal turns
b) Too many of those that do signal turns wait until turning to signal
c) Too many of those that do signal turns do not signal a right turn
until after encroaching onto a bike lane
d) Too many of those that signal turns do not signal lane changes
e) Too many of those that signal lane changes do not signal if the lane
change is into or out of the parking lane.
f) Some even feel the need to pass to the left of a cyclist 10-20 yards
before turning right or lane-shifting rightward to the parking lane
(or the bike lane to double-park on).

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

Date: 04 Dec 2006 07:12:19
From: Rich Clark
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Don Klipstein" <don@manx.misty.com > wrote in message
news:slrnen6t04.4oq.don@manx.misty.com...

> Philadelphia has bike lanes on many of their streets, and the bike lanes
> are in the streets.

Yes, and a huge number of them are in the door zone. They are worse than
useless; they make cycling more dangerous because drivers feel free to
squeeze you from the left while parked drivers feel free to emerge from
their cars without looking because they don't think there will be any cars
near them.

> I feel safer with these than without them.

Just goes to show how you can feel safe without being safe.

> However, Philadelphia has
> two big issues to fix, which don't appear too related to bike lanes since
> the offenses also occur on streets that don't have them:

You go on to list problems common to urban cycling in any city. Philadelphia
is no worse than most of the cities I've ridden in, and better than many.
The solution is always the same: take the lane, hold your line, obey the
rules, be predictable, ignore assholes. Assert your rights and be visible in
doing so, and don't catch the drivers by surprise. They don't improvise
well.

RichC

Date: 05 Dec 2006 07:32:53
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article
<j4GdnRidUMc-jenYnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com >,
"Rich Clark" <rdclark2SPAM@TRAPcomcast.net > wrote:
> You go on to list problems common to urban cycling in any city. Philadelphia
> is no worse than most of the cities I've ridden in, and better than many.
> The solution is always the same: take the lane, hold your line, obey the
> rules, be predictable, ignore assholes. Assert your rights and be visible in
> doing so, and don't catch the drivers by surprise. They don't improvise
> well.

Pellucid, succinct, precise, and accurate.

--
Michael Press

Date: 05 Dec 2006 06:29:53
From: Notan
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring

Michael Press wrote:
>
> In article
> <j4GdnRidUMc-jenYnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> "Rich Clark" <rdclark2SPAM@TRAPcomcast.net> wrote:
> > You go on to list problems common to urban cycling in any city. Philadelphia
> > is no worse than most of the cities I've ridden in, and better than many.
> > The solution is always the same: take the lane, hold your line, obey the
> > rules, be predictable, ignore assholes. Assert your rights and be visible in
> > doing so, and don't catch the drivers by surprise. They don't improvise
> > well.
>
> Pellucid, succinct, precise, and accurate.

And sometimes fatal.

Notan

Date: 05 Dec 2006 09:37:18
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 06:29:53 -0700, Notan <notan@ddress.thatcanbespammed >
wrote:
: Michael Press wrote:
: >
: > In article
: > <j4GdnRidUMc-jenYnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com>,
: > "Rich Clark" <rdclark2SPAM@TRAPcomcast.net> wrote:
: > > You go on to list problems common to urban cycling in any city. Philadelphia
: > > is no worse than most of the cities I've ridden in, and better than many.
: > > The solution is always the same: take the lane, hold your line, obey the
: > > rules, be predictable, ignore assholes. Assert your rights and be visible in
: > > doing so, and don't catch the drivers by surprise. They don't improvise
: > > well.
: >
: > Pellucid, succinct, precise, and accurate.
:
: And sometimes fatal.

Yes, possibly. Bad things sometimes happen, and riding a bicycle isn't the
safest of activities. But how would you improve on Rich's advice?

Bob

Date: 05 Dec 2006 14:41:20
From: Claire Petersky
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Robert Coe" <bob@1776.COM > wrote in message
news:iq0bn2hvitr3ni77tf0qkef2q5pauvhipc@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 06:29:53 -0700, Notan <notan@ddress.thatcanbespammed>
> wrote:
> : Michael Press wrote:
> : >
> : > In article
> : > <j4GdnRidUMc-jenYnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> : > "Rich Clark" <rdclark2SPAM@TRAPcomcast.net> wrote:
> : > > You go on to list problems common to urban cycling in any city.
> Philadelphia
> : > > is no worse than most of the cities I've ridden in, and better than
> many.
> : > > The solution is always the same: take the lane, hold your line, obey
> the
> : > > rules, be predictable, ignore assholes. Assert your rights and be
> visible in
> : > > doing so, and don't catch the drivers by surprise. They don't
> improvise
> : > > well.
> : >
> : > Pellucid, succinct, precise, and accurate.
> :
> : And sometimes fatal.
>
> Yes, possibly. Bad things sometimes happen, and riding a bicycle isn't the
> safest of activities. But how would you improve on Rich's advice?

I'd add, maintain a sense of humor.

--
Warm Regards,

Claire Petersky
http://www.bicyclemeditations.org/
See the books I've set free at: http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky

Date: 06 Dec 2006 03:53:58
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article
<kyfdh.7700$1s6.6226@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net >,
"Claire Petersky" <cpetersky@mouse-potato.com > wrote:

> "Robert Coe" <bob@1776.COM> wrote in message
> news:iq0bn2hvitr3ni77tf0qkef2q5pauvhipc@4ax.com...
> > On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 06:29:53 -0700, Notan <notan@ddress.thatcanbespammed>
> > wrote:
> > : Michael Press wrote:
> > : >
> > : > In article
> > : > <j4GdnRidUMc-jenYnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> > : > "Rich Clark" <rdclark2SPAM@TRAPcomcast.net> wrote:
> > : > > You go on to list problems common to urban cycling in any city.
> > Philadelphia
> > : > > is no worse than most of the cities I've ridden in, and better than
> > many.
> > : > > The solution is always the same: take the lane, hold your line, obey
> > the
> > : > > rules, be predictable, ignore assholes. Assert your rights and be
> > visible in
> > : > > doing so, and don't catch the drivers by surprise. They don't
> > improvise
> > : > > well.
> > : >
> > : > Pellucid, succinct, precise, and accurate.
> > :
> > : And sometimes fatal.
> >
> > Yes, possibly. Bad things sometimes happen, and riding a bicycle isn't the
> > safest of activities. But how would you improve on Rich's advice?
>
>
> I'd add, maintain a sense of humor.

He said `ignore assholes.'

--
Michael Press

Date: 05 Dec 2006 08:43:46
From: Notan
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone

Claire Petersky wrote:
>
> "Robert Coe" <bob@1776.COM> wrote in message
> news:iq0bn2hvitr3ni77tf0qkef2q5pauvhipc@4ax.com...
> > On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 06:29:53 -0700, Notan <notan@ddress.thatcanbespammed>
> > wrote:
> > : Michael Press wrote:
> > : >
> > : > In article
> > : > <j4GdnRidUMc-jenYnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> > : > "Rich Clark" <rdclark2SPAM@TRAPcomcast.net> wrote:
> > : > > You go on to list problems common to urban cycling in any city.
> > Philadelphia
> > : > > is no worse than most of the cities I've ridden in, and better than
> > many.
> > : > > The solution is always the same: take the lane, hold your line, obey
> > the
> > : > > rules, be predictable, ignore assholes. Assert your rights and be
> > visible in
> > : > > doing so, and don't catch the drivers by surprise. They don't
> > improvise
> > : > > well.
> > : >
> > : > Pellucid, succinct, precise, and accurate.
> > :
> > : And sometimes fatal.
> >
> > Yes, possibly. Bad things sometimes happen, and riding a bicycle isn't the
> > safest of activities. But how would you improve on Rich's advice?
>
> I'd add, maintain a sense of humor.

Thank you! <g >

Notan

Date: 04 Dec 2006 17:08:50
From: Don Klipstein
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <j4GdnRidUMc-jenYnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com >, Rich Clark wrote:
>
>"Don Klipstein" <don@manx.misty.com> wrote in message
>news:slrnen6t04.4oq.don@manx.misty.com...
>
>> Philadelphia has bike lanes on many of their streets, and the bike lanes
>> are in the streets.
>
>Yes, and a huge number of them are in the door zone. They are worse than
>useless; they make cycling more dangerous because drivers feel free to
>squeeze you from the left while parked drivers feel free to emerge from
>their cars without looking because they don't think there will be any cars
>near them.

In my experience with Philly's bike lanes, doors do not swing over the
whole bike lane. The bike lane is wide enough to squeeze by people
exiting cars.

Of course, a good loud horn helps!

The one main hazard I see from bike lanes is cars suddenly shifting onto
the lane to make a right turn. As a result, I usually do not outrun
moving cars by a speed gin greater than that which I feel I can
rear-end one without too much injury and bike damage. My only crash in a
bike lane was rear-ending someone who suddenly swerved rightward
ahead of making a right turn without signaling.

Meanwhile, I have been doored a few times in the past, never in a bike
lane. I have been rear-ended once, not in a bike lane. I have had
passing cars hit me with their side view mirrors 3 times, all of them on a
street without a bike lane. I have been clipped by a sudden-right-turner
on a street without a bike lane, although bike lanes don't solve that
particular hazard. I would say I have good reason to feel safer with bike
lanes than without them.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

Date: 02 Dec 2006 02:32:46
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Dave Reckoning" <Dave_Reckoning@notmail.com > wrote in message
news:qJqdnVlWYJWBQO3YnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@insightbb.com...
> "Tim McNaa" <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote in message
> news:timmcn-E892C9.19035301122006@news.iphouse.com...
>> In article <1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,
>> "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly to
>>> Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
>>> working for a personal-injury law firm.
>>
>> Is her political affiliation somehow relevant?
>>
>>> What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like they have
>>> throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
>>
>> What Denk and Holland have is a population that uses bikes in large
>> numbers. That's what makes the difference. Separate bikes lanes are
>> frequently more dangerous than riding on the roads.
>
> This is definatly the case. Bike lanes are the MOST dangerous. They make
> the drivers think that they don't have to worry about the bikes because
> they are off in their seperate lanes. The problem is that the drivers have
> to cross those lanes to make turns and enter the street. Alas, sometimes
> the drivers don't stay in their own lanes and drive over the bikes anyway.
> The worst of them are the ones that are seperate sidewalk affairs. Also
> this gives the car drivers the illusion that the street belongs to them
> alone. Then theye make the bikes cross all of the streets at the worst
> possible place and put the bikes in the position of having to enter the
> private domain of the cars with every crossing of a side street.
>
> The best idea I have seen is counter-intuitive, take down all of the
> traffic signs and street king and make people rely on common sense!!!
> Street kings and bike lanes just give the cars the false sense that
> they can drive over anything that gets in their way.
>
> Dave Reckoning
>
> Noblesville, Indiana
Sure Dave and that is why any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist head
injuries everyday of the year. Do not citation me I know it as common
knowledge. Anyone?

Date: 02 Dec 2006 11:12:19
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 02:32:46 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net >
wrote:

>Sure Dave and that is why any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist head
>injuries everyday of the year. Do not citation me I know it as common
>knowledge. Anyone?
>

a) you must be new here - claiming such a patently ridiculous
statistic to be true without any proof is only employed by trolls and
pro-helmet zealots; and

b) "common knowledge" isn't either.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 17:09:35
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Date: 02 Dec 2006 14:37:03
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

: >>Sure Dave and that is why any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist head
: >>injuries everyday of the year. Do not citation me I know it as common
: >>knowledge. Anyone?
: >>
: >
: > a) you must be new here - claiming such a patently ridiculous
: > statistic to be true without any proof is only employed by trolls and
: > pro-helmet zealots; and
: >
: > b) "common knowledge" isn't either.
:
: here is another from J. Hopkins U.
: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1380951
:
: I could go on.

We'll forgive you if you don't.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 19:54:29
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Because you know I am right.
Again you expect me to dig up stuff I saw on TV maybe 10 years ago. I give
up. Roughly what I said is true.
Per city I only rationalized. 100/ day easy.
Plus I was only answering to Dave's Reckoning. The jist of what I was
saying or the idea, reaction, does not have to be footnoted.
I disagreed, you disagree with me, therefore you agree with Dave. Tell
us why you agree with dave's reckoning. We are waiting patiently for a well
thought out, footnoted, master's thesis on this.

"Robert Coe" <bob@1776.COM > wrote in message
news:ccl3n2ltmpme5cae6pk495nshg617g6g8o@4ax.com...
>: >>Sure Dave and that is why any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist head
> : >>injuries everyday of the year. Do not citation me I know it as common
> : >>knowledge. Anyone?
> : >>
> : >
> : > a) you must be new here - claiming such a patently ridiculous
> : > statistic to be true without any proof is only employed by trolls and
> : > pro-helmet zealots; and
> : >
> : > b) "common knowledge" isn't either.
> :
> : here is another from J. Hopkins U.
> : http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1380951
> :
> : I could go on.
>
> We'll forgive you if you don't.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 15:16:30
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 19:54:29 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote:
: Because you know I am right.
: Again you expect me to dig up stuff I saw on TV maybe 10 years ago. I give
: up. Roughly what I said is true.
: Per city I only rationalized. 100/ day easy.
: Plus I was only answering to Dave's Reckoning. The jist of what I was
: saying or the idea, reaction, does not have to be footnoted.
: I disagreed, you disagree with me, therefore you agree with Dave.

I do? How did that happen? Just yesterday I posted the following:

- > On Fri, 1 Dec 2006 20:55:40 -0500, "Dave Reckoning"
- > <Dave_Reckoning@notmail.com> wrote:
- > : The best idea I have seen is counter-intuitive, take down all of the
- > : traffic signs and street king and make people rely on common sense!!!
- > : Street kings and bike lanes just give the cars the false sense that
- > : they can drive over anything that gets in their way.
- > :
- > If that's the best idea you've seen, you should find a better optometrist.

: Tell us why you agree with dave's reckoning. We are waiting patiently for
: a well thought out, footnoted, master's thesis on this.

I guess you're in for a long wait.

: "Robert Coe" <bob@1776.COM > wrote in message
: news:ccl3n2ltmpme5cae6pk495nshg617g6g8o@4ax.com...
: >: >>Sure Dave and that is why any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist head
: > : >>injuries everyday of the year. Do not citation me I know it as common
: > : >>knowledge. Anyone?
: > : >>
: > : >
: > : > a) you must be new here - claiming such a patently ridiculous
: > : > statistic to be true without any proof is only employed by trolls and
: > : > pro-helmet zealots; and
: > : >
: > : > b) "common knowledge" isn't either.
: > :
: > : here is another from J. Hopkins U.
: > : http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1380951
: > :
: > : I could go on.
: >
: > We'll forgive you if you don't.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 20:32:05
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Robert I was trying to disagree with Dave, maybe the timing was mixed up.
I understand your comment and thought it was hilarious.
Cheers

"Robert Coe" <bob@1776.COM > wrote in message
news:22n3n2hulp9o7dt8shbqk52496vgvpbct5@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 19:54:29 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net>
> wrote:
> : Because you know I am right.
> : Again you expect me to dig up stuff I saw on TV maybe 10 years ago. I
> give
> : up. Roughly what I said is true.
> : Per city I only rationalized. 100/ day easy.
> : Plus I was only answering to Dave's Reckoning. The jist of what I was
> : saying or the idea, reaction, does not have to be footnoted.
> : I disagreed, you disagree with me, therefore you agree with Dave.
>
> I do? How did that happen? Just yesterday I posted the following:
>
> -> On Fri, 1 Dec 2006 20:55:40 -0500, "Dave Reckoning"
> -> <Dave_Reckoning@notmail.com> wrote:
> -> : The best idea I have seen is counter-intuitive, take down all of the
> -> : traffic signs and street king and make people rely on common
> sense!!!
> -> : Street kings and bike lanes just give the cars the false sense
> that
> -> : they can drive over anything that gets in their way.
> -> :
> -> If that's the best idea you've seen, you should find a better
> optometrist.
>
> : Tell us why you agree with dave's reckoning. We are waiting patiently
> for
> : a well thought out, footnoted, master's thesis on this.
>
> I guess you're in for a long wait.
>
> : "Robert Coe" <bob@1776.COM> wrote in message
> : news:ccl3n2ltmpme5cae6pk495nshg617g6g8o@4ax.com...
> : >: >>Sure Dave and that is why any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist
> head
> : > : >>injuries everyday of the year. Do not citation me I know it as
> common
> : > : >>knowledge. Anyone?
> : > : >>
> : > : >
> : > : > a) you must be new here - claiming such a patently ridiculous
> : > : > statistic to be true without any proof is only employed by trolls
> and
> : > : > pro-helmet zealots; and
> : > : >
> : > : > b) "common knowledge" isn't either.
> : > :
> : > : here is another from J. Hopkins U.
> : > : http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1380951
> : > :
> : > : I could go on.
> : >
> : > We'll forgive you if you don't.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 17:04:01
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

>
>
>>Sure Dave and that is why any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist head
>>injuries everyday of the year. Do not citation me I know it as common
>>knowledge. Anyone?
>>
>
> a) you must be new here - claiming such a patently ridiculous
> statistic to be true without any proof is only employed by trolls and
> pro-helmet zealots; and
>
> b) "common knowledge" isn't either.

Google search 3rd entry
In Beijing, China, bicycle traffic constitutes more than 50% of passenger
transportation and more than 30% of traffic accident fatalities. Nearly 70%
of the traffic accidents were related to bicycles. The rate of fatalities
for bicyclists 60 and older is five times greater than the average. Farmers
have the greatest number of bicycle incidents. The peak hour for bicycle
accidents is usually 7:00 to 8:00 a.m., depending on the bicycle and
motorized vehicle traffic flows. Monday is the peak day for bicycle
accidents. It was also found that more bicycle accidents happened in July,
which is Beijing's tourism season. Generally speaking, roads and streets
with higher speed limits, such as arterials and rural highways, have higher
rates of bicycle accident fatalities. Bicycle accidents can be attributed to
many causes, including road and environmental conditions, traffic safety
measures, operations of motorized vehicles, and bicyclists' habits and
skills. The most pressing factor contributing to bicycle accidents is the
inadequate and insufficient facilities provided for bicyclists. To reduce
the annual toll of bicyclist injuries and fatalities, a number of
countermeasures, such as improvement of road and environmental conditions,
education in traffic laws, training in cycling, and use of helmet, are
recommended.

whole document here
http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=451894

50% of population ride to work in Beijing
that enough for you citers.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 14:35:20
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 17:04:01 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote:
: whole document here
: http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=451894
:
: 50% of population ride to work in Beijing
: that enough for you citers.

Damn! I actually learned something in this, er, discussion. Who knew that the
disparaging term for people who ask for proof of a windy assertion is
"citers"? :^)

Date: 02 Dec 2006 11:14:23
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 17:04:01 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net >
wrote:

>
>>
>>
>>>Sure Dave and that is why any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist head
>>>injuries everyday of the year. Do not citation me I know it as common
>>>knowledge. Anyone?
>>>
>>
>> a) you must be new here - claiming such a patently ridiculous
>> statistic to be true without any proof is only employed by trolls and
>> pro-helmet zealots; and
>>
>> b) "common knowledge" isn't either.
>
>Google search 3rd entry
>In Beijing, China, bicycle traffic constitutes more than 50% of passenger
>transportation and more than 30% of traffic accident fatalities. Nearly 70%
>of the traffic accidents were related to bicycles. The rate of fatalities
>for bicyclists 60 and older is five times greater than the average. Farmers
>have the greatest number of bicycle incidents. The peak hour for bicycle
>accidents is usually 7:00 to 8:00 a.m., depending on the bicycle and
>motorized vehicle traffic flows. Monday is the peak day for bicycle
>accidents. It was also found that more bicycle accidents happened in July,
>which is Beijing's tourism season. Generally speaking, roads and streets
>with higher speed limits, such as arterials and rural highways, have higher
>rates of bicycle accident fatalities. Bicycle accidents can be attributed to
>many causes, including road and environmental conditions, traffic safety
>measures, operations of motorized vehicles, and bicyclists' habits and
>skills. The most pressing factor contributing to bicycle accidents is the
>inadequate and insufficient facilities provided for bicyclists. To reduce
>the annual toll of bicyclist injuries and fatalities, a number of
>countermeasures, such as improvement of road and environmental conditions,
>education in traffic laws, training in cycling, and use of helmet, are
>recommended.
>
>whole document here
>http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=451894
>
>50% of population ride to work in Beijing
>that enough for you citers.
>
Dear Nash,

Er, no.

No number in your citation addresses your "100's of head injuries
everyday in any Chinese city" claim. Those are all percentages of some
unknown number of accidents.

But it's good to see that you've changed your mind about citations and
started looking at reality to see if it corresponds to what you claim.
It isn't so much whether you're right or wrong about a particular
matter--it's getting into the habit of looking into things.

I'd be pleased if you find evidence that I'm mistaken in thinking that
you're off by an order of magnitude or so and that hundreds of
bicyclists suffer head injuries every day in any Chinese city.

But a quick google doesn't suggest that's the case:

"We are fortunate to have an in-depth report for China where bicycle
related deaths kill 22 per 1,000,000 per year [18]."

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1379660

So in a Chinese city with a million people, there would be only 22
deaths per 365 x 100 = 36,500 head injuries. (Of course, those are 22
"bicycle-related" deaths and thus include a fair number of pedestrians
struck and killed by bicycles.)

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Date: 02 Dec 2006 19:47:40
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

I did not say deaths. grow up

<carlfogel@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:cse3n2dl4a0q7fpqbj7h5do0jdrh9trf9a@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 17:04:01 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Sure Dave and that is why any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist head
>>>>injuries everyday of the year. Do not citation me I know it as common
>>>>knowledge. Anyone?
>>>>
>>>
>>> a) you must be new here - claiming such a patently ridiculous
>>> statistic to be true without any proof is only employed by trolls and
>>> pro-helmet zealots; and
>>>
>>> b) "common knowledge" isn't either.
>>
>>Google search 3rd entry
>>In Beijing, China, bicycle traffic constitutes more than 50% of passenger
>>transportation and more than 30% of traffic accident fatalities. Nearly
>>70%
>>of the traffic accidents were related to bicycles. The rate of fatalities
>>for bicyclists 60 and older is five times greater than the average.
>>Farmers
>>have the greatest number of bicycle incidents. The peak hour for bicycle
>>accidents is usually 7:00 to 8:00 a.m., depending on the bicycle and
>>motorized vehicle traffic flows. Monday is the peak day for bicycle
>>accidents. It was also found that more bicycle accidents happened in July,
>>which is Beijing's tourism season. Generally speaking, roads and streets
>>with higher speed limits, such as arterials and rural highways, have
>>higher
>>rates of bicycle accident fatalities. Bicycle accidents can be attributed
>>to
>>many causes, including road and environmental conditions, traffic safety
>>measures, operations of motorized vehicles, and bicyclists' habits and
>>skills. The most pressing factor contributing to bicycle accidents is the
>>inadequate and insufficient facilities provided for bicyclists. To reduce
>>the annual toll of bicyclist injuries and fatalities, a number of
>>countermeasures, such as improvement of road and environmental conditions,
>>education in traffic laws, training in cycling, and use of helmet, are
>>recommended.
>>
>>whole document here
>>http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=451894
>>
>>50% of population ride to work in Beijing
>>that enough for you citers.
>>
> Dear Nash,
>
> Er, no.
>
> No number in your citation addresses your "100's of head injuries
> everyday in any Chinese city" claim. Those are all percentages of some
> unknown number of accidents.
>
> But it's good to see that you've changed your mind about citations and
> started looking at reality to see if it corresponds to what you claim.
> It isn't so much whether you're right or wrong about a particular
> matter--it's getting into the habit of looking into things.
>
> I'd be pleased if you find evidence that I'm mistaken in thinking that
> you're off by an order of magnitude or so and that hundreds of
> bicyclists suffer head injuries every day in any Chinese city.
>
> But a quick google doesn't suggest that's the case:
>
> "We are fortunate to have an in-depth report for China where bicycle
> related deaths kill 22 per 1,000,000 per year [18]."
>
> http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1379660
>
> So in a Chinese city with a million people, there would be only 22
> deaths per 365 x 100 = 36,500 head injuries. (Of course, those are 22
> "bicycle-related" deaths and thus include a fair number of pedestrians
> struck and killed by bicycles.)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

Date: 03 Dec 2006 01:34:40
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 19:47:40 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net >
wrote:

>I did not say deaths. grow up
>
><carlfogel@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:cse3n2dl4a0q7fpqbj7h5do0jdrh9trf9a@4ax.com...

>> No number in your citation addresses your "100's of head injuries
>> everyday in any Chinese city" claim. Those are all percentages of some
>> unknown number of accidents.
>>
>> But it's good to see that you've changed your mind about citations and
>> started looking at reality to see if it corresponds to what you claim.
>> It isn't so much whether you're right or wrong about a particular
>> matter--it's getting into the habit of looking into things.
>>
>> I'd be pleased if you find evidence that I'm mistaken in thinking that
>> you're off by an order of magnitude or so and that hundreds of
>> bicyclists suffer head injuries every day in any Chinese city.
>>
>> But a quick google doesn't suggest that's the case:
>>
>> "We are fortunate to have an in-depth report for China where bicycle
>> related deaths kill 22 per 1,000,000 per year [18]."
>>
>> http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1379660
>>
>> So in a Chinese city with a million people, there would be only 22
>> deaths per 365 x 100 = 36,500 head injuries. (Of course, those are 22
>> "bicycle-related" deaths and thus include a fair number of pedestrians
>> struck and killed by bicycles.)
>>

No, but you did say there were "100's" of head injuries per day. Carl
has done some sums that show that if you are right, only 22 of more
than 35 thousand head injuries result in deaths; a figure that is
wildly at odds with other typical cycling death/injury ratios.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 12:12:54
From: G.T.
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone

nash wrote:
> I did not say deaths. grow up
>

Get a brain.

#1, what does fatalities (from your cite) mean?

#2, you cited percentages, not numbers.

Greg

> <carlfogel@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:cse3n2dl4a0q7fpqbj7h5do0jdrh9trf9a@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 17:04:01 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>> Sure Dave and that is why any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist head
>>>>> injuries everyday of the year. Do not citation me I know it as common
>>>>> knowledge. Anyone?
>>>>>
>>>> a) you must be new here - claiming such a patently ridiculous
>>>> statistic to be true without any proof is only employed by trolls and
>>>> pro-helmet zealots; and
>>>>
>>>> b) "common knowledge" isn't either.
>>> Google search 3rd entry
>>> In Beijing, China, bicycle traffic constitutes more than 50% of passenger
>>> transportation and more than 30% of traffic accident fatalities. Nearly
>>> 70%
>>> of the traffic accidents were related to bicycles. The rate of fatalities
>>> for bicyclists 60 and older is five times greater than the average.
>>> Farmers
>>> have the greatest number of bicycle incidents. The peak hour for bicycle
>>> accidents is usually 7:00 to 8:00 a.m., depending on the bicycle and
>>> motorized vehicle traffic flows. Monday is the peak day for bicycle
>>> accidents. It was also found that more bicycle accidents happened in July,
>>> which is Beijing's tourism season. Generally speaking, roads and streets
>>> with higher speed limits, such as arterials and rural highways, have
>>> higher
>>> rates of bicycle accident fatalities. Bicycle accidents can be attributed
>>> to
>>> many causes, including road and environmental conditions, traffic safety
>>> measures, operations of motorized vehicles, and bicyclists' habits and
>>> skills. The most pressing factor contributing to bicycle accidents is the
>>> inadequate and insufficient facilities provided for bicyclists. To reduce
>>> the annual toll of bicyclist injuries and fatalities, a number of
>>> countermeasures, such as improvement of road and environmental conditions,
>>> education in traffic laws, training in cycling, and use of helmet, are
>>> recommended.
>>>
>>> whole document here
>>> http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=451894
>>>
>>> 50% of population ride to work in Beijing
>>> that enough for you citers.
>>>
>> Dear Nash,
>>
>> Er, no.
>>
>> No number in your citation addresses your "100's of head injuries
>> everyday in any Chinese city" claim. Those are all percentages of some
>> unknown number of accidents.
>>
>> But it's good to see that you've changed your mind about citations and
>> started looking at reality to see if it corresponds to what you claim.
>> It isn't so much whether you're right or wrong about a particular
>> matter--it's getting into the habit of looking into things.
>>
>> I'd be pleased if you find evidence that I'm mistaken in thinking that
>> you're off by an order of magnitude or so and that hundreds of
>> bicyclists suffer head injuries every day in any Chinese city.
>>
>> But a quick google doesn't suggest that's the case:
>>
>> "We are fortunate to have an in-depth report for China where bicycle
>> related deaths kill 22 per 1,000,000 per year [18]."
>>
>> http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1379660
>>
>> So in a Chinese city with a million people, there would be only 22
>> deaths per 365 x 100 = 36,500 head injuries. (Of course, those are 22
>> "bicycle-related" deaths and thus include a fair number of pedestrians
>> struck and killed by bicycles.)
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carl Fogel
>
>

--
"All my time I spent in heaven
Revelries of dance and wine
Waking to the sound of laughter
Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons

Date: 02 Dec 2006 20:25:42
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/sex/add_user.shtml

Date: 01 Dec 2006 19:56:35
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 02:32:46 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net >
wrote:

>
>"Dave Reckoning" <Dave_Reckoning@notmail.com> wrote in message
>news:qJqdnVlWYJWBQO3YnZ2dnUVZ_oidnZ2d@insightbb.com...
>> "Tim McNaa" <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote in message
>> news:timmcn-E892C9.19035301122006@news.iphouse.com...
>>> In article <1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,
>>> "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly to
>>>> Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
>>>> working for a personal-injury law firm.
>>>
>>> Is her political affiliation somehow relevant?
>>>
>>>> What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like they have
>>>> throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
>>>
>>> What Denk and Holland have is a population that uses bikes in large
>>> numbers. That's what makes the difference. Separate bikes lanes are
>>> frequently more dangerous than riding on the roads.
>>
>> This is definatly the case. Bike lanes are the MOST dangerous. They make
>> the drivers think that they don't have to worry about the bikes because
>> they are off in their seperate lanes. The problem is that the drivers have
>> to cross those lanes to make turns and enter the street. Alas, sometimes
>> the drivers don't stay in their own lanes and drive over the bikes anyway.
>> The worst of them are the ones that are seperate sidewalk affairs. Also
>> this gives the car drivers the illusion that the street belongs to them
>> alone. Then theye make the bikes cross all of the streets at the worst
>> possible place and put the bikes in the position of having to enter the
>> private domain of the cars with every crossing of a side street.
>>
>> The best idea I have seen is counter-intuitive, take down all of the
>> traffic signs and street king and make people rely on common sense!!!
>> Street kings and bike lanes just give the cars the false sense that
>> they can drive over anything that gets in their way.
>>
>> Dave Reckoning
>>
>> Noblesville, Indiana
>Sure Dave and that is why any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist head
>injuries everyday of the year. Do not citation me I know it as common
>knowledge. Anyone?

Dear Nash,

No citation needed--the back of an envelope will do to check the claim
that "any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist head injuries everyday of
the year."

Since "100's" is plural, it must mean 200 or more head injuries.

A rate of 200 cyclist head injuries every day would mean 73,000
injuries per year in "any Chinese city."

So in ten years every bicyclist in "any Chinese city" with 730,000
riders would suffer a head injury.

"Common knowledge" suggests that there is no such carnage.

As Frank Krygowski keeps pointing out, bicycling is a rekably safe
activity for the general population.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Date: 02 Dec 2006 03:11:14
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

>>>>>As Frank Krygowski keeps pointing out, bicycling is a rekably safe
activity for the general population.

Carl,
I was talking about Dave's Reckoning and comparing it to China which I still
think is true. no laws or signs just common sense

Date: 01 Dec 2006 21:32:43
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 03:11:14 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net >
wrote:

>>>>>>As Frank Krygowski keeps pointing out, bicycling is a rekably safe
>activity for the general population.
>
>Carl,
>I was talking about Dave's Reckoning and comparing it to China which I still
>think is true. no laws or signs just common sense

Dear Nash,

To jog your memory, here's your entire post:

"Sure Dave and that is why any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist head
injuries everyday of the year. Do not citation me I know it as common
knowledge. Anyone?"

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Date: 02 Dec 2006 16:43:53
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

SO
<carlfogel@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:o902n2dfn21sv7l4j22phjog7uos6l5dge@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 03:11:14 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net>
> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>As Frank Krygowski keeps pointing out, bicycling is a rekably safe
>>activity for the general population.
>>
>>Carl,
>>I was talking about Dave's Reckoning and comparing it to China which I
>>still
>>think is true. no laws or signs just common sense
>
> Dear Nash,
>
> To jog your memory, here's your entire post:
>
> "Sure Dave and that is why any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist head
> injuries everyday of the year. Do not citation me I know it as common
> knowledge. Anyone?"
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel

Date: 02 Dec 2006 23:13:50
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <d3ich.401482$1T2.388044@pd7urf2no >,
"nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > top posted a
scathing retort:

[retort moved below]

> <carlfogel@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:o902n2dfn21sv7l4j22phjog7uos6l5dge@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 03:11:14 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>>>>>>As Frank Krygowski keeps pointing out, bicycling is a rekably safe
> >>activity for the general population.
> >>
> >>Carl,
> >>I was talking about Dave's Reckoning and comparing it to China which I
> >>still
> >>think is true. no laws or signs just common sense
> >
> > Dear Nash,
> >
> > To jog your memory, here's your entire post:
> >
> > "Sure Dave and that is why any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist head
> > injuries everyday of the year. Do not citation me I know it as common
> > knowledge. Anyone?"
>
> SO

Well, art is art, isn't it? Still, on the other hand,
water is water. And east is east and west is west, and
if you take cranberries and stew them like applesauce,
they taste much more like prunes than rhubarb does.
Now, uh... Now you tell me what you know.

Learn the reasons for not top-posting here:
<http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm >

--
Michael Press

Date: 02 Dec 2006 10:43:43
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 16:43:53 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net >
wrote:

>SO
><carlfogel@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:o902n2dfn21sv7l4j22phjog7uos6l5dge@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 03:11:14 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>As Frank Krygowski keeps pointing out, bicycling is a rekably safe
>>>activity for the general population.
>>>
>>>Carl,
>>>I was talking about Dave's Reckoning and comparing it to China which I
>>>still
>>>think is true. no laws or signs just common sense
>>
>> Dear Nash,
>>
>> To jog your memory, here's your entire post:
>>
>> "Sure Dave and that is why any Chinese city has 100's of cyclist head
>> injuries everyday of the year. Do not citation me I know it as common
>> knowledge. Anyone?"
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carl Fogel

Dear Nash,

A fairly predictable descent from arrogant ignorance to silly evasions
and self-contradictions and finally to the bottom of a childish
barrel.

Amusingly, much of the audience won't even know what your "SO" meant.

Come back when you learn how to work a four-function calculator. The
illiteracy and mis-spelling are acceptable, but you really can't
expect to post numeric nonsense on a technical group without having
your errors pointed out.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Date: 02 Dec 2006 20:17:33
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

>>>Come back when you learn how to work a four-function calculator. The
illiteracy and mis-spelling are acceptable, but you really can't
expect to post numeric nonsense on a technical group without having
your errors pointed out.

You wrote the same rhetoric before.
I was writing to Bicycles.misc the list I did not notice. I do not want to
be in those groups it just happened. But now I will cut them out.

Plus I am in the highest brain sex category by a British Study that you can
be. I am meticulous about spelling and gram and am ster than most
male brains and most female brains combined. I work 4X better than you Carl
Fogel
Too bad, you are plonked. DOA

Date: 02 Dec 2006 17:17:44
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <xblch.404969$5R2.276341@pd7urf3no >,
"nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote:

>>Come back when you learn how to work a four-function calculator. The
>> illiteracy and mis-spelling are acceptable, but you really can't
>> expect to post numeric nonsense on a technical group without having
>> your errors pointed out.
>
> You wrote the same rhetoric before. I was writing to Bicycles.misc
> the list I did not notice. I do not want to be in those groups it
> just happened. But now I will cut them out.

Thank you.

> Plus I am in the highest brain sex category by a British Study that
> you can be. I am meticulous about spelling and gram and am
> ster than most male brains and most female brains combined. I
> work 4X better than you Carl Fogel

You forgot to mention that you are grandiose and deluded.

> Too bad, you are plonked. DOA

It would appear that you are the one who has been at the plonk.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 14:01:11
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 20:17:33 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net >
wrote:

>>>>Come back when you learn how to work a four-function calculator. The
>illiteracy and mis-spelling are acceptable, but you really can't
>expect to post numeric nonsense on a technical group without having
>your errors pointed out.
>
>You wrote the same rhetoric before.
>I was writing to Bicycles.misc the list I did not notice. I do not want to
>be in those groups it just happened. But now I will cut them out.
>
>Plus I am in the highest brain sex category by a British Study that you can
>be. I am meticulous about spelling and gram and am ster than most
>male brains and most female brains combined. I work 4X better than you Carl
>Fogel
>Too bad, you are plonked. DOA

Dear Nash,

Judging by your increasingly bizarre posts elsewhere, I suppose that
your "brain sex study" was on some television show ten years ago.

Possibly "The Simpsons"?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Date: 02 Dec 2006 03:07:36
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Sorry that was suppose to 100/ day.
no need to go postal now

peace

Date: 01 Dec 2006 20:17:21
From:
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 03:07:36 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net >
wrote:

>Sorry that was suppose to 100/ day.
>no need to go postal now
>
>peace

Dear Nash,

Nothing postal, just basic arithmetic.

There are not 100 bicyclists with head injuries every day in "any
Chinese city."

365 x 100 = 36,500 head injuries per year in "any Chinese city."

It's unlikely that there is any such carnage.

I suppose that a citation would prove otherwise.

:)

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Date: 01 Dec 2006 21:40:01
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <qkr1n21jel4mqdhu3fq8n1tl1f4blo1p5m@4ax.com >,
carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:

> On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 03:07:36 GMT, "nash"
> <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote:
>
> >Sorry that was suppose to 100/ day. no need to go postal now
> >
> >peace
>
> Dear Nash,
>
> Nothing postal, just basic arithmetic.
>
> There are not 100 bicyclists with head injuries every day in "any
> Chinese city."
>
> 365 x 100 = 36,500 head injuries per year in "any Chinese city."

Not to mention that there are hundreds of Chinese cities, if not
thousands (depending on how one defines "city"). Goiing with "hundred"
and "thousand" we get a national incidence of:

36,500 x 100 = 3,650,000 per year.

36,500 x 1,000 = 36,500,000 per year.

If this was the case, then the Chinese population would be decimated
annually by bicycling-related head injuries. I would think that such
injury rates would provoke some sort of governmental or societal
response to reduce the risk.

(misc.consumers.frugal-living snipped per Karen's request, whomever she
may be. And since when do you need a newsgroup to talk about not buying
crap you don't need? Frugality is hardly a difficult concept.)

Date: 02 Dec 2006 08:08:53
From: Mark Hickey
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Tim McNaa <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote:

> carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:

>> There are not 100 bicyclists with head injuries every day in "any
>> Chinese city."
>>
>> 365 x 100 = 36,500 head injuries per year in "any Chinese city."
>
>Not to mention that there are hundreds of Chinese cities, if not
>thousands (depending on how one defines "city"). Goiing with "hundred"
>and "thousand" we get a national incidence of:
>
>36,500 x 100 = 3,650,000 per year.
>
>36,500 x 1,000 = 36,500,000 per year.
>
>If this was the case, then the Chinese population would be decimated
>annually by bicycling-related head injuries. I would think that such
>injury rates would provoke some sort of governmental or societal
>response to reduce the risk.

FWIW, Chinese maps tend not to include any "city" with a population of
less than 1,000,000. If a map of China was produced with the same
rules as a map of the US, the eastern seaboard would be solid ink.

Having ridden in Beijing while I lived there, I can say with absolute
certainty that there ARE a fair number of cyclists injured, but the
vast majority are injured by motor vehicles (just because you're in
the separated northbound bicycle lane doesn't mean there's not a
southbound bus coming at you). The cycling speed of commuters in
China is not much above a slow jogging speed - a necessity due to the
fact that a) they don't want to arrive at work sweaty, b) the density
of the bike traffic makes it difficult to ride a lot faster than the
"typical rider" and c) a very large percentage of the bikes don't have
working brakes of any type (other than the Fred Flinstone version).

k Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

Date: 02 Dec 2006 17:25:08
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

The J Hopkins document shows autos caused 63% of the accidents and bicyclist
the rest.
Most were farmers on bikes
Just read it for your own sake. Ignore the helmut and environmental
conditions sumy prescribed by JHopkins

Date: 02 Dec 2006 09:37:38
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 21:40:01 -0600, Tim McNaa <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote:
: In article <qkr1n21jel4mqdhu3fq8n1tl1f4blo1p5m@4ax.com >,
: carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
:
: > On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 03:07:36 GMT, "nash"
: > <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote:
: >
: > >Sorry that was suppose to 100/ day. no need to go postal now
: > >
: > >peace
: >
: > Dear Nash,
: >
: > Nothing postal, just basic arithmetic.
: >
: > There are not 100 bicyclists with head injuries every day in "any
: > Chinese city."
: >
: > 365 x 100 = 36,500 head injuries per year in "any Chinese city."
:
: Not to mention that there are hundreds of Chinese cities, if not
: thousands (depending on how one defines "city"). Goiing with "hundred"
: and "thousand" we get a national incidence of:
:
: 36,500 x 100 = 3,650,000 per year.
:
: 36,500 x 1,000 = 36,500,000 per year.
:
: If this was the case, then the Chinese population would be decimated
: annually by bicycling-related head injuries. I would think that such
: injury rates would provoke some sort of governmental or societal
: response to reduce the risk.

Well, "decimated" may be a bit too strong a term. It means "reduced by 90%".
The carnage you describe, even using the more lurid of your calculations,
amounts to approximately .03%. The Chinese population is pretty large.

: (misc.consumers.frugal-living snipped per Karen's request, whomever she
: may be. And since when do you need a newsgroup to talk about not buying
: crap you don't need? Frugality is hardly a difficult concept.)

Who cares? Nobody says you have to read it. Hasn't this thread wandered far
enough off-topic already?

Date: 05 Dec 2006 21:34:47
From: Jasper Janssen
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 09:37:38 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM > wrote:
>
>Well, "decimated" may be a bit too strong a term. It means "reduced by 90%".

No, no. Not only no, but *fuck* no.

Decimated means taking each tenth away, not leaving each tenth, or in
other words -10%.

Jasper

Date: 02 Dec 2006 10:18:34
From: Tim McNamara
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <9d33n29ssq8qvknkfsde1c4f1t073u134p@4ax.com >,
Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM > wrote:

> On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 21:40:01 -0600, Tim McNaa
> <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
> : In article <qkr1n21jel4mqdhu3fq8n1tl1f4blo1p5m@4ax.com>,
> : carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> :
> : > On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 03:07:36 GMT, "nash"
> : > <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote:
> : >
> : > >Sorry that was suppose to 100/ day. no need to go postal now
> : > >
> : > >peace
> : >
> : > Dear Nash,
> : >
> : > Nothing postal, just basic arithmetic.
> : >
> : > There are not 100 bicyclists with head injuries every day in "any
> : > Chinese city."
> : >
> : > 365 x 100 = 36,500 head injuries per year in "any Chinese city."
> :
> : Not to mention that there are hundreds of Chinese cities, if not
> : thousands (depending on how one defines "city"). Goiing with
> : "hundred" and "thousand" we get a national incidence of:
> :
> : 36,500 x 100 = 3,650,000 per year.
> :
> : 36,500 x 1,000 = 36,500,000 per year.
> :
> : If this was the case, then the Chinese population would be
> : decimated annually by bicycling-related head injuries. I would
> : think that such injury rates would provoke some sort of
> : governmental or societal response to reduce the risk.
>
> Well, "decimated" may be a bit too strong a term. It means "reduced
> by 90%". The carnage you describe, even using the more lurid of your
> calculations, amounts to approximately .03%. The Chinese population
> is pretty large.

Erm, no. It means to reduce by 10% in its original usage:

"ORIGIN late Middle English : from Latin decimat- 'taken as a tenth,'
from the verb decie, from decimus 'tenth.' In Middle English the
term decimation denoted the levying of a tithe, and later the tax
imposed in England by Cromwell on the Royalists (1655). The verb
decimate originally alluded to the Roman punishment of executing one
man in ten of a mutinous legion.

"USAGE Historically, the meaning of the word decimate is 'kill one in
every ten of (a group of people).' This sense has been superseded by
the later, more general sense 'kill or destroy a large percentage or
part of,' as in: the virus has decimated the population. Some
traditionalists argue that this and other later senses are incorrect,
but it is clear that these extended senses are now part of standard
English. It is sometimes also argued that decimate should refer to
people and not to things or animals such as weeds or insects. It is
generally agreed that decimate should not be used to mean 'defeat
utterly.'"

Date: 02 Dec 2006 08:28:10
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article
<timmcn-7CCE56.21395601122006@news.iphouse.com >,
Tim McNaa <timmcn@bitstream.net > wrote:

> In article <qkr1n21jel4mqdhu3fq8n1tl1f4blo1p5m@4ax.com>,
> carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 03:07:36 GMT, "nash"
> > <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote:
> >
> > >Sorry that was suppose to 100/ day. no need to go postal now
> > >
> > >peace
> >
> > Dear Nash,
> >
> > Nothing postal, just basic arithmetic.
> >
> > There are not 100 bicyclists with head injuries every day in "any
> > Chinese city."
> >
> > 365 x 100 = 36,500 head injuries per year in "any Chinese city."
>
> Not to mention that there are hundreds of Chinese cities, if not
> thousands (depending on how one defines "city"). Goiing with "hundred"
> and "thousand" we get a national incidence of:
>
> 36,500 x 100 = 3,650,000 per year.
>
> 36,500 x 1,000 = 36,500,000 per year.
>
> If this was the case, then the Chinese population would be decimated
> annually by bicycling-related head injuries. I would think that such
> injury rates would provoke some sort of governmental or societal
> response to reduce the risk.
>
> (misc.consumers.frugal-living snipped per Karen's request, whomever she
> may be. And since when do you need a newsgroup to talk about not buying
> crap you don't need? Frugality is hardly a difficult concept.)

Amusing how immoderate people can be in pursuit of
moderation.

--
Michael Press

Date: 02 Dec 2006 00:27:32
From: me
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone

On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 18:58:23 -0500, Robert Coe wrote:

> Driving *is* a god given right,

!!!

Date: 01 Dec 2006 23:05:26
From: me
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone

On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 14:45:01 -0800, Zoot Katz wrote:

> On 1 Dec 2006 12:55:12 -0800, "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> BTW, shove your attempt at a political troll. Every DA's hands are
> tied by the systemic bias that continues to perceive driving as a god
> given right and victims as expendable.

I respectfully disagree, from the victims mother's statement..

"Julia Rietz said it would be hard to prosecute 'willful and
wanton behavior and the driver could have 'no reasonable expectation of a
bike on the side of the road,' yet every single time we visited the
accident site we saw bikers and joggers in the area. The driver took this
path to and from work and had to see others out there. Disregarding the
obvious is a total lack of responsibility."
....

She was so far off the road she hit the cyclist with the *drivers* side!
She wasn't just using the phone, she was *downloading* ringtones!
I find it pathetic that the DA didn't recommend a vehicular homicide
charge. I agree that the bias towards driving / against cycling is
systemic, but in this case I would have expected a more serious charge
and would expect a conviction.

Date: 01 Dec 2006 15:58:44
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 23:05:26 GMT, me <me@nowhere.com > wrote:

>She was so far off the road she hit the cyclist with the *drivers* side!
>She wasn't just using the phone, she was *downloading* ringtones!
>I find it pathetic that the DA didn't recommend a vehicular homicide
>charge. I agree that the bias towards driving / against cycling is
>systemic, but in this case I would have expected a more serious charge
>and would expect a conviction.

This tragedy happened in Illinois where until recently, or perhaps
still, bicyclist aren't even considered the intended users of the
road. I'm sure Bob can clarify this. Perhaps it was only one judge's
ruling after a cyclist disappeared into a pot-hole and tried to sue
the state.

Yeah it's a systemic bias and one not confined to Illinois or the US
of A. It happens everywhere the economy feeds on blood and oil. It
happens everywhere fat-cat legislators are influenced by the
automotive cartel's fat-cat lobbyists

I sincerely doubt a BC cyclist would get any more justice
post-humously.
--
zk

Date: 02 Dec 2006 02:24:24
From: Kristian M Zoerhoff
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <u9f1n25gdel7geh4ki0gc52do61db8absd@4ax.com >, zootkatz@operamail.com
says...
>
> This tragedy happened in Illinois where until recently, or perhaps
> still, bicyclist aren't even considered the intended users of the
> road. I'm sure Bob can clarify this. Perhaps it was only one judge's
> ruling after a cyclist disappeared into a pot-hole and tried to sue
> the state.

Close. Boub v. Wayne Township involved road work on a bridge that was unked.
Boub hit it in the dark, went endo, got hurt, so he sued the township road
district, as any injured motorist would do. The RD got the IL courts to agree
that roads just aren't designed for bikes -- cars only -- so they shouldn't be
liable for what happens to a cyclist. It only affects civil liability for road
districts and other gov't agencies, leaving cyclists stuck where a motorist
could file a claim and collect. It really has no effect on the vehicle code
itself, thank God. The main side effect is that almost no road district wants
to build bicycle-specific facilities, as those would induce liability, so it's
held up construction of bike lanes and trails across the state. My county
(Kane) has gotten around it by adding wide paved shoulders, but not king
them as bike lanes.

> Yeah it's a systemic bias and one not confined to Illinois or the US
> of A. It happens everywhere the economy feeds on blood and oil. It
> happens everywhere fat-cat legislators are influenced by the
> automotive cartel's fat-cat lobbyists

It happens because our auto-centric culture has decided that traffic offenses
should be petty offenses, rather than misdemeanors and/or felonies in all but
the most egregious cases -- egregious meaning "drunk", for the most part.

> I sincerely doubt a BC cyclist would get any more justice
> post-humously.

Probably not, unless the DA had some serious cajones and a halfway-intelligent
jury.

--

__o Kristian Zoerhoff
_'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com
(_)/ (_)

Date: 02 Dec 2006 00:31:16
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

>>I sincerely doubt a BC cyclist would get any more justice
post-humously.

And that is why we have to speak for those that cannot.

Date: 01 Dec 2006 23:09:16
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"me" <me@nowhere.com > wrote in message news:Wy2ch.13302$hn.10266@edtnps82...
> On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 14:45:01 -0800, Zoot Katz wrote:
>
>> On 1 Dec 2006 12:55:12 -0800, "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> BTW, shove your attempt at a political troll. Every DA's hands are
>> tied by the systemic bias that continues to perceive driving as a god
>> given right and victims as expendable.
>
> I respectfully disagree, from the victims mother's statement..
>
> "Julia Rietz said it would be hard to prosecute 'willful and
> wanton behavior and the driver could have 'no reasonable expectation of a
> bike on the side of the road,' yet every single time we visited the
> accident site we saw bikers and joggers in the area. The driver took this
> path to and from work and had to see others out there. Disregarding the
> obvious is a total lack of responsibility."
> ....
>
> She was so far off the road she hit the cyclist with the *drivers* side!
> She wasn't just using the phone, she was *downloading* ringtones!
> I find it pathetic that the DA didn't recommend a vehicular homicide
> charge. I agree that the bias towards driving / against cycling is
> systemic, but in this case I would have expected a more serious charge
> and would expect a conviction.

It is so unbelievable like it is a dream. or make that daye eh

Date: 01 Dec 2006 14:45:48
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Yarper wrote:
> Karen Newton wrote:
> > Please don't cross-post to the frugal living group.
>
> You're right, riding a bicycle has nothing to do
> with frugality. Frugal people drive SUVs.

"Frugal" people drive *hybrid* SUVs, the ultimate "I don't have a
brain" vehicle.

Date: 01 Dec 2006 14:45:01
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On 1 Dec 2006 12:55:12 -0800, "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com > wrote:

>Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
>to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
>working for a personal-injury law firm.
>
>http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death
>
>What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
>they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.

What we need is to bring back the guillotine for careless,
inattentive driving causing death.

I hope this four-time loser does the right thing and commits suicide.

BTW, shove your attempt at a political troll. Every DA's hands are
tied by the systemic bias that continues to perceive driving as a god
given right and victims as expendable.
--
zk

Date: 01 Dec 2006 18:58:23
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 14:45:01 -0800, Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com > wrote:
: On 1 Dec 2006 12:55:12 -0800, "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com > wrote:
:
: >Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
: >to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
: >working for a personal-injury law firm.
: >
: >http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death
: >
: >What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
: >they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
:
: What we need is to bring back the guillotine for careless,
: inattentive driving causing death.
:
: I hope this four-time loser does the right thing and commits suicide.
:
: BTW, shove your attempt at a political troll. Every DA's hands are
: tied by the systemic bias that continues to perceive driving as a god
: given right and victims as expendable.

Driving *is* a god given right, but those who do it so dangerously should be
dealt with harshly. So I both agree with you and think you're full of sh*t.

Date: 01 Dec 2006 16:38:19
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 18:58:23 -0500, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM > wrote:
>
>:
>: BTW, shove your attempt at a political troll. Every DA's hands are
>: tied by the systemic bias that continues to perceive driving as a god
>: given right and victims as expendable.
>
>Driving *is* a god given right, but those who do it so dangerously should be
>dealt with harshly. So I both agree with you and think you're full of sh*t.

Driving is a "privilege". Were it a "right" a driver's license
couldn't be suspended or revoked.

Unfortunately, that option isn't exercised nearly enough when dealing
with repeat offenders who's cars should be shredded with them in it.
--
zk

Date: 02 Dec 2006 00:29:30
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Driving *is* a god given right, but those who do it so dangerously should
be
> dealt with harshly. So I both agree with you and think you're full of
> sh*t.<<

No, You are wrong, it is a privilege. Ask any auto insurance agent or
police person. Rules are there to protect the innocent and everyones
safety. They were not made for hotshot drivers who think they know better.
They are for everyone with generally accepted driving skill.

Date: 01 Dec 2006 20:14:29
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 00:29:30 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote:
: Driving *is* a god given right, but those who do it so dangerously should
: be
: > dealt with harshly. So I both agree with you and think you're full of
: > sh*t.<<
:
: No, You are wrong, it is a privilege. Ask any auto insurance agent or
: police person. Rules are there to protect the innocent and everyones
: safety. They were not made for hotshot drivers who think they know better.
: They are for everyone with generally accepted driving skill.

The US constitution and the laws implementing it were not written by auto
insurance agents and police persons.

Governments restrict rights. (One hopes they do it only when, and to the
degree, necessary.) They have no "privileges" to grant.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 01:35:36
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

>>>The US constitution and the laws implementing it were not written by auto
insurance agents and police persons.
<<<

The US constitution does not say you have a right to drive either.

Date: 01 Dec 2006 20:52:58
From: Robert Coe
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 01:35:36 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote:
: >>>The US constitution and the laws implementing it were not written by auto
: insurance agents and police persons.
: <<<

"nash" did not write that. I did.

: The US constitution does not say you have a right to drive either.

The Constitution does not enumerate the rights you have. It enumerates the
rights you *don't* have.

Date: 01 Dec 2006 17:06:38
From: Notan
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring

Robert Coe wrote:
>
> On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 14:45:01 -0800, Zoot Katz <zootkatz@operamail.com> wrote:
> : On 1 Dec 2006 12:55:12 -0800, "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote:
> :
> : >Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
> : >to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
> : >working for a personal-injury law firm.
> : >
> : >http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death
> : >
> : >What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
> : >they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
> :
> : What we need is to bring back the guillotine for careless,
> : inattentive driving causing death.
> :
> : I hope this four-time loser does the right thing and commits suicide.
> :
> : BTW, shove your attempt at a political troll. Every DA's hands are
> : tied by the systemic bias that continues to perceive driving as a god
> : given right and victims as expendable.
>
> Driving *is* a god given right, but those who do it so dangerously should be
> dealt with harshly. So I both agree with you and think you're full of sh*t.

http://lexrex.com/informed/foundingdocuments/ConstBillAmend.htm#bill_of_rights

I must've missed the one on driving.

Notan

Date: 01 Dec 2006 15:00:08
From: richard
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
> Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
> to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
> working for a personal-injury law firm.
>
> http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death
>
> What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
> they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.

<quotes >
Stark was so far off the road that she hit Mr. Wilhelm from behind with the
driver's side of her car. He was wearing a helmet.

Stark, who had three prior convictions since May 2005 one for disregarding a
traffic light and two for speeding. The last speeding conviction came about
five weeks before she hit Mr. Wilhelm.
<end quotes >

The man on the bicycle was doing nothing wrong. if Ms Stark had not hit him,
she would have been easily off the road entirely. There is no alarm for
improving bike paths. As one of these cases even rarely happens, even rarer
with a death of the biker.

But I do not feel that an improper lane usage charge is not adequate as
there was a human life involved, which is a test for reckless operation, and
that test was met with flying colors.
I have a sneaking hunch this will not be the last time we will hear about
Ms. Stark and her cell phone.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 01:09:27
From: Dave
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone

richard wrote:

>
> But I do not feel that an improper lane usage charge is not adequate as
> there was a human life involved, which is a test for reckless operation,
> and that test was met with flying colors.
> I have a sneaking hunch this will not be the last time we will hear
> about Ms. Stark and her cell phone.
>
>

Actually Ms. Stark should be prohibited from owning/using a cell phone
for the rest of her life!

Date: 06 Dec 2006 12:38:03
From: Ange1o DePa1ma
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Dave" <daves1955@verizon.net > wrote in message
news:bn4ch.54$QC.34@trnddc02...
> richard wrote:
>
>>
>> But I do not feel that an improper lane usage charge is not adequate as
>> there was a human life involved, which is a test for reckless operation,
>> and that test was met with flying colors.
>> I have a sneaking hunch this will not be the last time we will hear about
>> Ms. Stark and her cell phone.
>>
>>
>
> Actually Ms. Stark should be prohibited from owning/using a cell phone for
> the rest of her life!

And a car as well. If you kill someone while driving and you're at fault you
should lose your driving priviledges permanently.

Date: 02 Dec 2006 11:28:03
From: Martin Borsje
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

> richard wrote:
>
>>
>> But I do not feel that an improper lane usage charge is not adequate as
>> there was a human life involved, which is a test for reckless operation,
>> and that test was met with flying colors.
>> I have a sneaking hunch this will not be the last time we will hear about
>> Ms. Stark and her cell phone.
>>
>>
>
> Actually Ms. Stark should be prohibited from owning/using a cell phone for
> the rest of her life!

<q >
... All for a self-indulged driver who has her priorities ridiculously
out of order."
</q >
In my opinion she should be prohibited to drive a car for the rest of
her miserable life!

--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu

Date: 02 Dec 2006 13:33:29
From: Bellsouth Ijit 2.0
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"tin Borsje" <geenspam@planet.nl > wrote in message
news:mn.12b07d6c78140dbe.64226@planet.nl...
>> richard wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> But I do not feel that an improper lane usage charge is not adequate as
>>> there was a human life involved, which is a test for reckless operation,
>>> and that test was met with flying colors.
>>> I have a sneaking hunch this will not be the last time we will hear
>>> about Ms. Stark and her cell phone.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Actually Ms. Stark should be prohibited from owning/using a cell phone
>> for the rest of her life!
>
> <q>
> ... All for a self-indulged driver who has her priorities ridiculously out
> of order."
> </q>
> In my opinion she should be prohibited to drive a car for the rest of her
> miserable life!
>
>
> --
> Posted by news://news.nb.nu

She should be court-ordered to ride a bicycle as the only mode of
transportation for the rest of her life, which would, of course, be doing
her a favor in more ways than one.

Date: 01 Dec 2006 14:18:58
From: Yarper
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Karen Newton wrote:
> Please don't cross-post to the frugal living group.

You're right, riding a bicycle has nothing to do
with frugality. Frugal people drive SUVs.

Date: 01 Dec 2006 22:44:19
From: Bellsouth Ijit 2.0
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

"Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1165011538.293994.60370@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Karen Newton wrote:
>> Please don't cross-post to the frugal living group.
>
> You're right, riding a bicycle has nothing to do
> with frugality. Frugal people drive SUVs.
>

And download ringtones on Verizon cellphones.

Date: 01 Dec 2006 17:03:46
From: Butch Haynes
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Date: 01 Dec 2006 18:01:21
From: james g. keegan jr.
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

In article <QM-dnVzunbxdO-3YnZ2dnUVZ_tKdnZ2d@comcast.com >,
"Butch Haynes" <butch@huntsville.prz > wrote:

> "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...

> > What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
> > they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
> >
>
> Yes, yes-- and have the bike lanes lead directly to places like Amsterdam's
> legal brothels and famous red light district with girls in the windows ;-)

nice thought.

Date: 01 Dec 2006 17:17:15
From: Karen Newton
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Please don't cross-post to the frugal living group.

"Butch Haynes" <butch@huntsville.prz > wrote in message
news:QM-dnVzunbxdO-3YnZ2dnUVZ_tKdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> "Yarper" <yubbers9@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1165006512.331700.178580@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
>> Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
>> to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
>> working for a personal-injury law firm.
>>
>> http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death
>>
>> What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
>> they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
>>
>
> Yes, yes-- and have the bike lanes lead directly to places like
> Amsterdam's legal brothels and famous red light district with girls in the
> windows ;-)
>
> Butch
>

Date: 01 Dec 2006 13:59:32
From: damyth
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Yarper wrote:
> Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
> to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
> working for a personal-injury law firm.
>
> http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death
>
> What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
> they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.

I don't know if I agree with your sentiment regarding separate bicycle
lanes. (Seperate) If by bicycle "lanes" you mean "paths" I'd strongly
disagree with you. Bicycle paths in the US are severely neglected.
1. Bike paths don't benefit from regular "street cleaning"
2. Bike paths generally do not present good visibility (narrow, blind
corners, etc.)
3. Bike paths are not maintained as well/often as motor roadways.
(Repaving/re-surfacing)
4. Bike paths (or bicycle riders) become ghetto-ized. "Why don't you
use the bike path!"
5. The likelihood of injuries and accidents increases because bike
paths get used by joggers, baby strollers, roller-bladers, etc., all of
which have a present a a multitude of large speed differentials
compared to bicyclists, making accidents more likely.

If anything, this case demonstrates that we need more stringent laws
and penalties regarding reckless driving. I don't know the details of
this case, but in my mind, use of a cell phone while driving in any
fashion constitutes reckless driving. I know the person wasn't charged
with reckless driving in this case, but she certainly should have been.

Date: 01 Dec 2006 17:03:19
From: Karen Newton
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Please don't cross-post to the frugal living group.

"damyth" <mdk.10.damyth@spamgourmet.com > wrote in message
news:1165010371.758011.152660@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
>
> Yarper wrote:
>> Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
>> to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
>> working for a personal-injury law firm.
>>
>> http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death
>>
>> What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
>> they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
>
> I don't know if I agree with your sentiment regarding separate bicycle
> lanes. (Seperate) If by bicycle "lanes" you mean "paths" I'd strongly
> disagree with you. Bicycle paths in the US are severely neglected.
> 1. Bike paths don't benefit from regular "street cleaning"
> 2. Bike paths generally do not present good visibility (narrow, blind
> corners, etc.)
> 3. Bike paths are not maintained as well/often as motor roadways.
> (Repaving/re-surfacing)
> 4. Bike paths (or bicycle riders) become ghetto-ized. "Why don't you
> use the bike path!"
> 5. The likelihood of injuries and accidents increases because bike
> paths get used by joggers, baby strollers, roller-bladers, etc., all of
> which have a present a a multitude of large speed differentials
> compared to bicyclists, making accidents more likely.
>
> If anything, this case demonstrates that we need more stringent laws
> and penalties regarding reckless driving. I don't know the details of
> this case, but in my mind, use of a cell phone while driving in any
> fashion constitutes reckless driving. I know the person wasn't charged
> with reckless driving in this case, but she certainly should have been.
>

Date: 01 Dec 2006 22:57:04
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Karen I do not see frugal living in the addresses

"Karen Newton" <karen.newton@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:jE1ch.3053$Ka4.710@newsfe14.lga...
> Please don't cross-post to the frugal living group.
>
>
> "damyth" <mdk.10.damyth@spamgourmet.com> wrote in message
> news:1165010371.758011.152660@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Yarper wrote:
>>> Clear and obvious guilt. Result? A slap on the wrist, due directly
>>> to Democratic State Attorney Julia Reitz, who ironically is listed as
>>> working for a personal-injury law firm.
>>>
>>> http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2006/11/30/woman_is_sentenced_for_bicyclists_death
>>>
>>> What we need in the USA is separate bicycle lanes, like
>>> they have throughout Denk and parts of Holland.
>>
>> I don't know if I agree with your sentiment regarding separate bicycle
>> lanes. (Seperate) If by bicycle "lanes" you mean "paths" I'd strongly
>> disagree with you. Bicycle paths in the US are severely neglected.
>> 1. Bike paths don't benefit from regular "street cleaning"
>> 2. Bike paths generally do not present good visibility (narrow, blind
>> corners, etc.)
>> 3. Bike paths are not maintained as well/often as motor roadways.
>> (Repaving/re-surfacing)
>> 4. Bike paths (or bicycle riders) become ghetto-ized. "Why don't you
>> use the bike path!"
>> 5. The likelihood of injuries and accidents increases because bike
>> paths get used by joggers, baby strollers, roller-bladers, etc., all of
>> which have a present a a multitude of large speed differentials
>> compared to bicyclists, making accidents more likely.
>>
>> If anything, this case demonstrates that we need more stringent laws
>> and penalties regarding reckless driving. I don't know the details of
>> this case, but in my mind, use of a cell phone while driving in any
>> fashion constitutes reckless driving. I know the person wasn't charged
>> with reckless driving in this case, but she certainly should have been.
>>
>
>

Date: 02 Dec 2006 14:45:06
From: Jasper Janssen
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 22:57:04 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net >
wrote:

>Karen I do not see frugal living in the addresses

She cut it from her response, it's there in the post she replied to.

Jasper

Date: 01 Dec 2006 16:00:44
From: Notan
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring

nash wrote:
>
> Karen I do not see frugal living in the addresses
>
> <snip>

She removed it before posting to the above groups.

Notan

Date: 01 Dec 2006 21:19:57
From: nash
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Doesn't Sweden also have miles of highway set aside for cyclists?

Date: 01 Dec 2006 16:28:31
From: Karen Newton
Subject: Re: Bicyclist killed by woman driver who was downloading cell phone ring tones

Please don't cross-post to the frugal living group.

"nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote in message
news:101ch.403162$5R2.165149@pd7urf3no...
> Doesn't Sweden also have miles of highway set aside for cyclists?
>
>