Atlanta bike fatality

"Rivermist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:TYGXc.69943$Fg5.36535@attbi_s53...

Quoted message said:

Anyone know anything about the bike/car accident that resulted in the

death

Quoted message said:

of a cyclist?

It was at the corner of Peachtree Ind and McGinnis Ferry at 5 or 6 am

(still

Quoted message said:

dark out). The guy who died was a triathlete I think.

http://www.gwinnettdailyonline.com/GDP/archive/articleACDD9B49A821457788919E3D7732E075.asp

psycholist said:

"Rivermist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:TYGXc.69943$Fg5.36535@attbi_s53...

Quoted message said:

Anyone know anything about the bike/car accident that resulted in the

death

Quoted message said:

of a cyclist?

It was at the corner of Peachtree Ind and McGinnis Ferry at 5 or 6 am

(still

Quoted message said:

dark out). The guy who died was a triathlete I think.

http://www.gwinnettdailyonline.com/GDP/archive/articleACDD9B49A821457788919E3D7732E075.asp

Usually I stay out of these exchanges, but the newspaper report above is
infuriating. The guy was traveling NB, and went into the NB lane to avoid
being in a right-turn only lane. He was struck from behind and killed,
but the driver was not cited, quote, "because bicycle riders are supposed
to remain on the right edge of the roadway."

The cop also presumed that the cyclists could not see the car coming since
it was behind them.

This guy was doing precisely what he should have been doing, and was run
down. The driver was, at best, inattentive.

There was nothing about lights in the article.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | And what if you track down these men and kill them, what if you
_`\(,_ | killed all of us? From every corner of Europe, hundreds,
(_)/ (_) | thousands would rise up to take our places. Even Nazis can't
kill that fast. -- Paul Henreid (Casablanca).

psycholist said:

"Rivermist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:TYGXc.69943$Fg5.36535@attbi_s53...

Quoted message said:

Anyone know anything about the bike/car accident that resulted in the

death

Quoted message said:

of a cyclist?

It was at the corner of Peachtree Ind and McGinnis Ferry at 5 or 6 am

(still

Quoted message said:

dark out). The guy who died was a triathlete I think.

http://www.gwinnettdailyonline.com/GDP/archive/articleACDD9B49A821457788919E3D7732E075.asp

Usually I stay out of these exchanges, but the newspaper report above is
infuriating. The guy was traveling NB, and went into the NB lane to avoid
being in a right-turn only lane. He was struck from behind and killed,
but the driver was not cited, quote, "because bicycle riders are supposed
to remain on the right edge of the roadway."

The cop also presumed that the cyclists could not see the car coming since
it was behind them.

This guy was doing precisely what he should have been doing, and was run
down. The driver was, at best, inattentive.

There was nothing about lights in the article.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | And what if you track down these men and kill them, what if you
_`\(,_ | killed all of us? From every corner of Europe, hundreds,
(_)/ (_) | thousands would rise up to take our places. Even Nazis can't
kill that fast. -- Paul Henreid (Casablanca).

In article said:

psycholist said:

"Rivermist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:TYGXc.69943$Fg5.36535@attbi_s53...

Quoted message said:

Anyone know anything about the bike/car accident that resulted in the

death

Quoted message said:

of a cyclist?

It was at the corner of Peachtree Ind and McGinnis Ferry at 5 or 6 am

(still

Quoted message said:

dark out). The guy who died was a triathlete I think.

http://www.gwinnettdailyonline.com/GDP/archive/articleACDD9B49A821457788919E3D7732E075.asp

Usually I stay out of these exchanges, but the newspaper report above is
infuriating. The guy was traveling NB, and went into the NB lane to avoid
being in a right-turn only lane. He was struck from behind and killed,
but the driver was not cited, quote, "because bicycle riders are supposed
to remain on the right edge of the roadway."

The cop also presumed that the cyclists could not see the car coming since
it was behind them.

This guy was doing precisely what he should have been doing, and was run
down. The driver was, at best, inattentive.

There was nothing about lights in the article.

What's 'NB'?

Mike

David L. Johnson said:

psycholist said:

"Rivermist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:TYGXc.69943$Fg5.36535@attbi_s53...

Quoted message said:

Anyone know anything about the bike/car accident that resulted in the

death

Quoted message said:

of a cyclist?
It was at the corner of Peachtree Ind and McGinnis Ferry at 5 or 6 am

(still

Quoted message said:

dark out). The guy who died was a triathlete I think.

http://www.gwinnettdailyonline.com/GDP/archive/articleACDD9B49A821457788919E3D7732E075.asp

Usually I stay out of these exchanges, but the newspaper report above is
infuriating. The guy was traveling NB, and went into the NB lane to avoid
being in a right-turn only lane. He was struck from behind and killed,
but the driver was not cited, quote, "because bicycle riders are supposed
to remain on the right edge of the roadway."

The cop also presumed that the cyclists could not see the car coming since
it was behind them.

This guy was doing precisely what he should have been doing, and was run
down. The driver was, at best, inattentive.

There was nothing about lights in the article.

I usually have better sense than to get pulled into these threads, too,
but the lights thing bothers me. If the car had headlights on at 5:00,
I'd think the cyclist could have seen it. If the cyclist had any sort
of half-decent tail light, I'd think the cager could have seen it.
Sounds like somebody did something stupid, but the news article doesn't
give enough information to place the blame.

Pat

David L. Johnson said:

psycholist said:

"Rivermist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:TYGXc.69943$Fg5.36535@attbi_s53...

Quoted message said:

Anyone know anything about the bike/car accident that resulted in the

death

Quoted message said:

of a cyclist?
It was at the corner of Peachtree Ind and McGinnis Ferry at 5 or 6 am

(still

Quoted message said:

dark out). The guy who died was a triathlete I think.

http://www.gwinnettdailyonline.com/GDP/archive/articleACDD9B49A821457788919E3D7732E075.asp

Usually I stay out of these exchanges, but the newspaper report above is
infuriating. The guy was traveling NB, and went into the NB lane to avoid
being in a right-turn only lane. He was struck from behind and killed,
but the driver was not cited, quote, "because bicycle riders are supposed
to remain on the right edge of the roadway."

The cop also presumed that the cyclists could not see the car coming since
it was behind them.

This guy was doing precisely what he should have been doing, and was run
down. The driver was, at best, inattentive.

There was nothing about lights in the article.

I usually have better sense than to get pulled into these threads, too,
but the lights thing bothers me. If the car had headlights on at 5:00,
I'd think the cyclist could have seen it. If the cyclist had any sort
of half-decent tail light, I'd think the cager could have seen it.
Sounds like somebody did something stupid, but the news article doesn't
give enough information to place the blame.

Pat

"David L. Johnson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

This guy was doing precisely what he should have been doing, and was run
down. The driver was, at best, inattentive.

There was nothing about lights in the article.

I'm upset to see the misstatement about using the through lane, but
the officer did say that the cyclist was not visible to the overtaking
driver. I do hope that statement was supported by some investigation
on their part.

That early in the morning, with so little traffic, on a road that is
apparently away from street lights, a cyclist using a rear light would
be very conspicuous to a sober driver, and a collision extremely
unlikely. If the driver were not sober it would have been mentioned in
the article. I've seen a lot of racing cyclists do training rides in
darkness with inadequate lighting. So I'm inclined to think he wasn't
using a rear light.

I've seen cyclists who use just the toy CPSC reflectors that come with
most bikes on the back, and these reflectors are either so dim or so
badly out of alignment that they aren't much use. Compared to an LED
lamp they are virtually invisible from a couple hundred feet back,
making them a poor choice for arterial cycling at night.

I have recently revised my article on night cycling at:

http://humantransport.org/bicycledriving/library/lights/lights.htm

My own setup for night riding is two automotive reflectors (one red,
one amber) plus a NiteRider tail lamp in the back, and a NiteRider 15
Watt lamp just below the handlebars in front.

In any event, I drive my car slowly enought to see unlighted
pedestrians, cyclists, deer, etc. that may be in the roadway ahead. I
think hitting an unreflectored and unlit cyclist is still negligent,
but probably not quite as negligent as failing to use lawfully
required visibility equipment.

-Steve Goodridge

Sure hate reading these things but they happen. May he RIP. God bless his
family in the tough time dealing with this.

Ken

"Rivermist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:TYGXc.69943$Fg5.36535@attbi_s53...

Quoted message said:

Anyone know anything about the bike/car accident that resulted in the

death

Quoted message said:

of a cyclist?

It was at the corner of Peachtree Ind and McGinnis Ferry at 5 or 6 am

(still

Quoted message said:

dark out). The guy who died was a triathlete I think.

Rivermist said:

Anyone know anything about the bike/car accident that resulted in the
death of a cyclist?

It was at the corner of Peachtree Ind and McGinnis Ferry at 5 or 6 am
(still dark out). The guy who died was a triathlete I think.

I'm familiar with this area since my running route sometimes takes me right
by this point on Peacthree Ind Blvd. I agree that the article leaves out a
lot of pertinent information that would be helpful in figuring out what
really happened. Georgia state law says that cyclists are supposed to ride
"as far as practically possible to the right hand side of the road." So
that is open to intepretation. Nonetheless, cyclists should not have to
ride on the shoulder or in the gutter as stated by the police officer.

Phil M.

--
"Learn from the mistakes of others. You can't live long enough to make
them all yourself." ­Martin Vanbee

Phil M. said:

Georgia state law says that cyclists are supposed to ride
"as far as practically possible to the right hand side of the road." So
that is open to intepretation. Nonetheless, cyclists should not have to
ride on the shoulder or in the gutter as stated by the police officer.

Does Georgia law permit riding two abreast?

Most states use phrasing similar to what you gave (although more use the
word "practicable" in place of "practically possible"😉, but most states
also say "Cyclists may not ride more than two abreast."

Seems to me this gives tacit permission to riding two abreast, which
forms an interesting conflict with the "far right" provision you quoted.

--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]

"David L. Johnson" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

psycholist said:

"Rivermist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:TYGXc.69943$Fg5.36535@attbi_s53...

Quoted message said:

Anyone know anything about the bike/car accident that resulted in
the

death

Quoted message said:

of a cyclist?

It was at the corner of Peachtree Ind and McGinnis Ferry at 5 or 6
am

(still

Quoted message said:

dark out). The guy who died was a triathlete I think.

http://www.gwinnettdailyonline.com/GDP/archive/articleACDD9B49A8214577
88919E3D7732E075.asp

Usually I stay out of these exchanges, but the newspaper report above
is infuriating. The guy was traveling NB, and went into the NB lane
to avoid being in a right-turn only lane. He was struck from behind
and killed, but the driver was not cited, quote, "because bicycle
riders are supposed to remain on the right edge of the roadway."

The cop also presumed that the cyclists could not see the car coming
since it was behind them.

This guy was doing precisely what he should have been doing, and was
run down. The driver was, at best, inattentive.

There was nothing about lights in the article.

I agree with the officer's assesment, but only if:

1) The cyclist was about to make a right turn. In that case, he should
have been in the right turn lane. Otherwise, the right side of the
straight through lane is exactly where he belonged.

2) The cyclist was riding at night with no lighting. Sorry if this sounds
cruel, but the poor guy had no business on the roads at night without
proper lighting.

3) The motorist wasn't speeding, and because of lack of lighting and a
course change by the cyclist, was unable to see him until too late.

Tom Henderson <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

I agree with the officer's assesment, but only if:

I should qualify all this with the statement that I'm using Florida traffic
law. not Georgia. I can't imagine requiring a cyclist riding straight
through an intersection to ride on the far right of a turn-only lane, then
cut accross turning traffic. Surely even GA law isn't that backwards?

Tom

Tom Henderson wrote:
|| "David L. Johnson" <[email hidden]> wrote in
|| news:[email hidden]:
||
||| On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 10:05:58 -0400, psycholist wrote:
|||
||||
|||| "Rivermist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
|||| news:TYGXc.69943$Fg5.36535@attbi_s53...
||||| Anyone know anything about the bike/car accident that resulted in
||||| the
|||| death
||||| of a cyclist?
|||||
||||| It was at the corner of Peachtree Ind and McGinnis Ferry at 5 or 6
||||| am
|||| (still
||||| dark out). The guy who died was a triathlete I think.
|||||
|||||
||||
||||
|||| http://www.gwinnettdailyonline.com/GDP/archive/articleACDD9B49A8214577
|||| 88919E3D7732E075.asp
|||
||| Usually I stay out of these exchanges, but the newspaper report
||| above is infuriating. The guy was traveling NB, and went into the
||| NB lane to avoid being in a right-turn only lane. He was struck
||| from behind and killed, but the driver was not cited, quote,
||| "because bicycle riders are supposed to remain on the right edge of
||| the roadway."
|||
||| The cop also presumed that the cyclists could not see the car coming
||| since it was behind them.
|||
||| This guy was doing precisely what he should have been doing, and was
||| run down. The driver was, at best, inattentive.
|||
||| There was nothing about lights in the article.
|||
||
|| I agree with the officer's assesment, but only if:
||
|| 1) The cyclist was about to make a right turn. In that case, he
|| should have been in the right turn lane. Otherwise, the right side
|| of the straight through lane is exactly where he belonged.
||
|| 2) The cyclist was riding at night with no lighting. Sorry if this
|| sounds cruel, but the poor guy had no business on the roads at night
|| without proper lighting.
||
|| 3) The motorist wasn't speeding, and because of lack of lighting and
|| a course change by the cyclist, was unable to see him until too late.

I find your #3 really hard to believe. Even if the cyclist was wearing all
black on a black bicycle, he should have been visable to a automobile driver
at night with his lights on. The only possibility I can see is if the
cyclist came sweeping across several lanes very quickly. That too, I find
hard to believe because the cyclist would have seen the drivers lights.

Tom Henderson said:

Tom Henderson <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

I agree with the officer's assesment, but only if:

I should qualify all this with the statement that I'm using Florida
traffic law. not Georgia. I can't imagine requiring a cyclist riding
straight through an intersection to ride on the far right of a
turn-only lane, then cut accross turning traffic. Surely even GA law
isn't that backwards?

Tom

I agree. The law states that the cyclist should be "as far as practically
possible to the right hand side of the road." Whatever practically
possible means is open to the interpretation of the officer.

Maybe this image will avoid further confusion. This is the scene of the
accident - http://tinyurl.com/4fhn9

As you can see the right turn lane is for vehicles entering the parking
lot of the building that is on the East corner. If the cyclist was
"veering" into the right continuous lane, then that would be the fault of
the cyclist. Even though he may have been entering the right side of the
continuous lane, if he's veering then that would make it hard for the car
driver to avoid. OTOH, I don't understand why the motorist wasn't in the
left lane. The only reasons would be the cyclist could not be seen, or
there was another car in the left lane (not likely at 5:00 AM), or the
driver wasn't paying attention.

Phil M.

--
"Learn from the mistakes of others. You can't live long enough to make
them all yourself." ­Martin Vanbee

Yes, Georgia law says "Cyclists may not ride more than two abreast".

The person who knows most about what happened that morning is his training
partner, who survived.

"Frank Krygowski" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Phil M. said:

Georgia state law says that cyclists are supposed to ride "as far as
practically possible to the right hand side of the road." So that is open
to intepretation. Nonetheless, cyclists should not have to ride on the
shoulder or in the gutter as stated by the police officer.

Does Georgia law permit riding two abreast?

Most states use phrasing similar to what you gave (although more use the
word "practicable" in place of "practically possible"😉, but most states
also say "Cyclists may not ride more than two abreast."

Seems to me this gives tacit permission to riding two abreast, which forms
an interesting conflict with the "far right" provision you quoted.

--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com, replace
with cc.ysu dot edu]

Roger Zoul wrote:
<snip>

Quoted message said:

|| 3) The motorist wasn't speeding, and because of lack of lighting and
|| a course change by the cyclist, was unable to see him until too late.

I find your #3 really hard to believe. Even if the cyclist was wearing

all

Quoted message said:

black on a black bicycle, he should have been visable to a automobile

driver

Quoted message said:

at night with his lights on. The only possibility I can see is if the
cyclist came sweeping across several lanes very quickly. That too, I find
hard to believe because the cyclist would have seen the drivers lights.

If there is oncoming traffic, it would be difficult to see a _dump truck_ in
all black with no lights. There have been times I have detected the
presence of cyclists because they broke the beam of an oncoming vehicle's
headlights. I couldn't tell _what_ was there until I was too close to have
otherwise responded. All I knew was _something_ crossed the road between me
and the car coming towards me. If the cyclist hadn't crossed the street, I
might well never have seen them at all. This was in an area where I am
_very_ alert because there are so many wrong-way stealth cyclists, and the
posted speed limit is 50 MPH (81 KPH).

For some reason, pedestrians and cyclists have a hard time imagining not
being seen when such bright headlights are shined at them. It's actually
not that hard at all. Try driving a motor vehicle in the dark, even one
with a clean and undamaged (not pitted by road debris, a.k.a. new)
windshield. The amount of detail you can see drops by about 85% as soon as
there are oncoming headlights.

Austin
--
I'm pedaling as fast as I durn well please!
There are no X characters in my address

"AustinMN" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Try driving a motor vehicle in the dark, even one
with a clean and undamaged (not pitted by road debris, a.k.a. new)
windshield. The amount of detail you can see drops by about 85% as
soon as there are oncoming headlights.

Agreed. For that matter, when I jog early in the morning nd face oncoming
headlights, I have a very difficult time seeing the terrain in front of me,
even at a slow jogging pace. That's why lighting is legally required for
bikes on the road at night.

Tom

Tom Henderson <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"AustinMN" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Try driving a motor vehicle in the dark, even one
with a clean and undamaged (not pitted by road debris, a.k.a. new)
windshield. The amount of detail you can see drops by about 85% as
soon as there are oncoming headlights.

Agreed. For that matter, when I jog early in the morning nd face oncoming
headlights, I have a very difficult time seeing the terrain in front of me,
even at a slow jogging pace. That's why lighting is legally required for
bikes on the road at night.

Tom

I know this intersection quite well; it is very, very, busy and
hectic. It makes the morning traffic accident reports a couple of
times per week - - at least.

I used to ride through that part of town, about fifteen years ago, but
surrendered, for reasons of traffic safety. It could have just as
easily happened in broad daylight, IMO.

In the end, those of us who train in urban settings make our own
choices about maximizing training time and asserting our road
priviledges. Sometimes we consciously introduce variables to our
safety that we don't even control.

As I age, I get less and less willing to trust the judgement of
motorists that I don't even know. I used to dread the thought of
being overtaken by someone who was distracted with a cassette tape;
that was before cell phones...

rsquared

(Witheld) said:

I know this intersection quite well; it is very, very, busy and
hectic. It makes the morning traffic accident reports a couple of
times per week - - at least.

Not at 5:00 AM.

Phil M.

--
"Learn from the mistakes of others. You can't live long enough to make
them all yourself." ­Martin Vanbee