Cyclist killed in Sydney

scotty72 said:

The 13-year-old was pushing a bicycle across the Princes Highway at
Heathcote when he was struck by a car

So he was a pedestrian casualty then?

Theo

quote='Theo Bekkers'scotty72 said:

The 13-year-old was pushing a bicycle across the Princes Highway at
Heathcote when he was struck by a car

So he was a pedestrian casualty then?

Theo[/QUOTE]Don't know how that will be noted officially. Either way, it shouldn't happen. Motorists should never assume the road is clear.

Scotty

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 13 Jul 2006 16:07:01 +1000

scotty72 said:

Theo Bekkers said:

scotty72 said:

The 13-year-old was pushing a bicycle across the Princes Highway at
Heathcote when he was struck by a car

So he was a pedestrian casualty then?

TheoDon't know how that will be noted officially. Either way, it shouldn't

happen. Motorists should never assume the road is clear.

So you have more information than you gave?

Such as, for example, that the kid was *not* jaywalking across a major
arterial?

Zebee

Zebee Johnstone said:

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 13 Jul 2006 16:07:01 +1000

scotty72 said:

Theo Bekkers said:

scotty72 said:

The 13-year-old was pushing a bicycle across the Princes Highway at
Heathcote when he was struck by a car

So he was a pedestrian casualty then?

TheoDon't know how that will be noted officially. Either way, it shouldn't

happen. Motorists should never assume the road is clear.

So you have more information than you gave?

Such as, for example, that the kid was *not* jaywalking across a major
arterial?

Zebee

In answer to your rhetorical, disingenuous question...

No,

What I mean is that just because you are doing 79 in an 80 zone doesn't give you a cloak of righteousness.

A motorist ought to drive in a manner that recognises that anything is possible at any time - even if it means you drive at 10 below the posted limit. A car is 1000+ kg of steel - a deadly weapon.

Unless it is revealed that this kid was bent on sucide, then yes - I think the motorist should shoulder a huge proportion of the blame.

If you're driving and there are kids near the shouler or kerb; near a school, playground, shopping strip etc. then - slow the hell down - there are kids about.

This is a perfect eg of why speed limits in residental areas should be 40 or even less

scotty72 said:

This is a perfect eg of why speed limits in residental areas should be
40 or even less

--
scotty72

But this was a Highway, not a residential street.

quote='Damian'scotty72 said:

This is a perfect eg of why speed limits in residental areas should be
40 or even less

--
scotty72

But this was a Highway, not a residential street.[/QUOTE]A highway in a residental area.

Even if out on the open road, you should drive so that you can avoid anything that comes at you. Motorists have to learn to slow down.

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 13 Jul 2006 17:22:29 +1000

scotty72 said:

What I mean is that just because you are doing 79 in an 80 zone doesn't
give you a cloak of righteousness.

And anyone who is crossing a major arterial - which is what the
Princes Highway at Heathcote is - has a responsibility to cross at the
designated points.

Beacuse road safety takes more than one person to make it happen.

If you know nothing more than what you posted, then you don't know
enough to throw any stones.

If you do know, then add more facts.

Zebee

Quoted message said:

Even if out on the open road, you should drive so that you can avoid
anything that comes at you. Motorists have to learn to slow down.

So how fast would you have been driving in that situation, Scotty?
Pedestrian on the side of the road, 10 metres away from you. Would you be
driving at a speed such that you could stop within 10 metres? And what
speed would that be?

Someone Else said:

> Even if out on the open road, you should drive so that you can avoid

Quoted message said:

anything that comes at you. Motorists have to learn to slow down.

So how fast would you have been driving in that situation, Scotty?
Pedestrian on the side of the road, 10 metres away from you. Would you be
driving at a speed such that you could stop within 10 metres? And what
speed would that be?

Don't know.

What I do know is, that as I approach schools, shops playgrounds etc. I do slow down to about 40 or even thirty if there are kids close to the kerb on my side (regardless of the posted limit). Motorists behind often get the [censored] with me. Too bad.

I'm not going to court to tell a judge that I could not possibly expect to see kids behaving like kids in areas that kids hang out.

As for Zeebee, do you know he wasn't at a designated spot. You accuse me of inventing facts then wade on in and do the same.

When I was younger I had this attitude that all roads were the domain of cars too. Now I understand that roads and cities are for people. All residental roads should be shared areas. Arterials 40, perhaps 50.

That strectch coming into Heathcote is bad. You come off a 100 zone and most motorist keep doing that - right through the village. If the RTA had any brains, they'd give it the speed bump treatment.

scotty72 said:

Don't know how that will be noted officially. Either way, it shouldn't happen. Motorists should never assume the road is clear.

Exactly - the burden of responsibility cuts both ways. As duly noted by Scotty, we *don't* know what exactly occured.

And until the Coroner or the NSW Police finalise their investigations into this incident, I'd caution against turning this thread into a pointless bunch of missives & cheap shots.

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 13 Jul 2006 21:29:25 +1000

scotty72 said:

What I do know is, that as I approach schools, shops playgrounds etc. I
do slow down to about 40 or even thirty if there are kids close to the
kerb on my side (regardless of the posted limit). Motorists behind
often get the [censored] with me. Too bad.

So you know it happened near a school, shop, playground do you?

More than I do.

Zebee

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 13 Jul 2006 21:29:25 +1000

scotty72 said:

As for Zeebee, do you know he wasn't at a designated spot. You accuse
me of inventing facts then wade on in and do the same.

I asked you if you knew, because you made an assumption that it was
so.

I haven't said anything about where the kid was. You are the one
doing that.

I said it was a major arterial, that's the only statement of fact I
have made. Please quote where I have said I knew the accident wasn't
at a "designated spot".

Zebee

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 13 Jul 2006 21:51:06 +1000

cfsmtb said:

scotty72 said:

Don't know how that will be noted officially. Either way, it shouldn't
happen. Motorists should never assume the road is clear.

Exactly - the burden of responsibility cuts both ways. As duly noted by
Scotty, we *don't* know what exactly occured.

No, he's certain he knows what occurred.

I'm the one who says we don't.

Zebee

--
Frank
[email hidden]
Drop DACKS to reply
"scotty72" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Zebee Johnstone said:

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 13 Jul 2006 16:07:01 +1000

scotty72 said:

Theo Bekkers Wrote:
> scotty72 wrote:
>
> > The 13-year-old was pushing a bicycle across the Princes Highway

at

Quoted message said:

> > Heathcote when he was struck by a car
>
> So he was a pedestrian casualty then?
>
> TheoDon't know how that will be noted officially. Either way, it

shouldn't

Quoted message said:

happen. Motorists should never assume the road is clear.

So you have more information than you gave?

Such as, for example, that the kid was *not* jaywalking across a major
arterial?

ZebeeIn answer to your rhetorical, disingenuous question...

No,

What I mean is that just because you are doing 79 in an 80 zone doesn't
give you a cloak of righteousness.

A motorist ought to drive in a manner that recognises that anything is
possible at any time - even if it means you drive at 10 below the
posted limit. A car is 1000+ kg of steel - a deadly weapon.

Unless it is revealed that this kid was bent on sucide, then yes - I
think the motorist should shoulder a huge proportion of the blame.

If you're driving and there are kids near the shouler or kerb; near a
school, playground, shopping strip etc. then - slow the hell down -
there are kids about.

This is a perfect eg of why speed limits in residental areas should be
40 or even less

--
scotty72

Reminds me of a near-hit a few days ago. I was stopped at a red light,
indicator on to turn right on to Albany Highway from a side road. It was
about 6pm, near a small shopping centre. Lots of traffic, just turned dark,
and misty, so visibility wasn't the best. I noted a guy standing by the
lights on the opposite corner waiting to cross Albany Highway. He was
holding his bike ready to walk it across the road.

As I made my right turn, the guy decided it was a good time to cross -
against the red pedestrian light. Luckily for him I had noted him earlier
and was able to stop in time, nearly collecting the car behind my up my
exhaust pipe. If the car behind me had hit it would have pushed my car over
the bike guy who had frozen in my lights like a startled bunny.

He yelled at me that I should be watching the road - I calmly replied that I
was, which is why he wasn't a smear on the tarmac.

It occurred to me that if I'd hit him, either because I didn't see him in
time or the car behind had crashed into my car, the report would have read
something like "cyclist killed by car" and I would have been savaged in
places like this group by people who didn't know all the facts and
circumstances.

I don't agree that cars are weapons. A weapon is a thing designed to injure
or kill the target or a thing used with the intention to injure of kill.
I'll go along with the metaphor for now though. If a car can be considered a
weapon, surely it's incumbent on people to take reasonable care to stay out
of the way. If I was holding a gun, would said bike guy have walked in front
of the muzzle as I was pointing it? If he had, and I took my shot and hit
him, would I be wholly to blame? Partly? What proportion? That's for people
who are trained (judges) or selected (juries) to determine when given as
many interpretations of events as possible (witnesses and parties involved).

In the instance above, I would have been partly responsible for hitting the
bike guy. As it happened, I luckily looked in his direction as I turned. I
was also looking at the road opposite to make sure no cars came through the
intersection while I was turning and glancing at driveways in the area to
ensure a clear run. He was only one of many things to take into account. I
just happened (more by habit that design) to pay him the attention at the
right time. He was lucky, He might not have been. By the way, this should in
no way be interpreted as a (he brought it on himself" type of statement -
nobody deserves to be hurt or killed by making a mistake.

It certainly taught me to me much less judgemental when I read the reports
posted here and elswhere of people being killed and injured in traffic. I
don't know the facts. For all I know, the kid who was killed may have been
doing somethign similar to my bike guy. Maybe not.

I'm hoping there's a little less baying of the hounds when these reports
come through. we're all people - riders, drivers, walkers - at base, people.
People make mistakes and other people suffer sometimes.

Cheers,

Frank - mmmm the first coffee of the day is always the best!

Zebee Johnstone said:

In aus.bicycle on Thu, 13 Jul 2006 21:29:25 +1000

scotty72 said:

What I do know is, that as I approach schools, shops playgrounds etc. I
do slow down to about 40 or even thirty if there are kids close to the
kerb on my side (regardless of the posted limit). Motorists behind
often get the [censored] with me. Too bad.

So you know it happened near a school, shop, playground do you?

More than I do.

Zebee

Stop grandstanding you twit.

I was asked whether I in fact drive slowly enough to avoid kids running out (or words to that effect). I answered that specific question. I did not apply that to this case.

Then again, you know that; however, you wish to be a sanctimonious bore...

Now, until you can stop being contrary for the sake of it and have something sensible to add, go away and spoil someone else's day.

Scotty

Plodder said:

Reminds me of a near-hit a few days ago.

Quoted message said:

I'm hoping there's a little less baying of the hounds when these
reports come through. we're all people - riders, drivers, walkers -
at base, people. People make mistakes and other people suffer
sometimes.

Being in Perth, you will remember the case recently where a drunk driver,
driving without a licence, was held to be not guilty of dangerous driving
when he ran over and killed a girl pushing/riding her bike accross a busy
hwy. The jury decided that that a sober person with a licence could not have
avoided the child.

He was charged with several other offences, of course.

Theo

cfsmtb said:

scotty72 said:

Don't know how that will be noted officially. Either way, it
shouldn't happen. Motorists should never assume the road is clear.

Exactly - the burden of responsibility cuts both ways. As duly noted
by Scotty, we *don't* know what exactly occured.

Scotty does know exactly what happened. If that goddamned driver had been
travelling at 15 km/h in an 80 zone when the kid crossed at the obviously
marked crossing, this would not have happened.

Theo

Zebee Johnstone said:

cfsmtb wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Exactly - the burden of responsibility cuts both ways. As duly noted
by Scotty, we *don't* know what exactly occured.

Quoted message said:

No, he's certain he knows what occurred.

I'm the one who says we don't.

The rest of us are surmising. From experience, who is most likely to be on
the lookout for possible danger, the driver, or a 13 yo child? In my
experience that would come in at 80/20 for the driver.

Theo

Must admit thought, the low-level trolling on this thread is becoming extremely loathsome.

One actual fact: Someone's son/brother/friend is dead and the best several sad individuals, who commonly mistake the internet as an adjunct to reality, is to type out the same lame pontificating [censored]. Grow up for fcuksakes.