Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 282
  1. #126
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    7,919
    How was she being reckless? You realize you need to prove that right? This guy was riding on a highway, in the dark, next to an active runway, so those lights are going to blend right in. Even a shitty lawyer is going to get her off.

    This is an unfortunate situation all around, but all this does is highlight the unfortunate reality of physics when a car and a bike collide.
    Live Free or Die

  2. #127
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Gaperville, CO
    Posts
    5,845
    Quote Originally Posted by AdironRider View Post
    How was she being reckless? You realize you need to prove that right? This guy was riding on a highway, in the dark, next to an active runway, so those lights are going to blend right in. Even a shitty lawyer is going to get her off.

    This is an unfortunate situation all around, but all this does is highlight the unfortunate reality of physics when a car and a bike collide.
    You an asshole. Go to the Fucking Cyclists thread if you want to parade shit like this around. You're reckless if your driving kills another legal user of road because of your failure to follow traffic laws.

  3. #128
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    7,919
    So every single traffic death should result in a manslaughter charge? I'm not trying to be a dick here but this is not a great example of "fucking drivers".
    Live Free or Die

  4. #129
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Gaperville, CO
    Posts
    5,845
    Quote Originally Posted by AdironRider View Post
    So every single traffic death should result in a manslaughter charge? I'm not trying to be a dick here but this is not a great example of "fucking drivers".
    No, and I didn't say that. Many traffic deaths are single vehicle deaths -- manslaughter not applicable. Many traffic deaths do not have a single party at fault -- manslaughter not applicable. Traffic deaths in which one person's lawbreaking behavior directly causes another persons death? Yes.

    If I blow a stop sign and kill a kid on a bike legally proceeding through an intersection-- I should be charged with manslaughter. If I change lanes without yeilding and run another person off a road and kill them -- I should be charged with manslaughter.

    Just because you're driving a vehicle doesn't absolve you of not having to kill people with your actions. Accidental or not.

  5. #130
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    17,891
    Quote Originally Posted by AdironRider View Post
    How was she being reckless? ...This guy was riding on a highway, in the dark, next to an active runway, so those lights are going to blend right in.
    The shoulder in this area is huge, basically another lane. Hitting him required her to swerve 5+ feet out of the lane. That's reckless by any objective definition. Reckless =/ intentional. It's also two lanes each direction and there was no traffic. She should have been in the left lane and never gotten within 10 feet of this guy.

    Let's say you veer off the road and hit and kill a State Trooper who is pulled over making a traffic stop. Your ass is going to jail, period.

    Quote Originally Posted by AdironRider View Post
    You realize you need to prove that right? ...Even a shitty lawyer is going to get her off.
    He was riding with several others who provided statements. We know exactly what happened here. If they charge her, 99% chance she pleads guilty. If she fights it, yeah, sure, maybe she walks. Got to charge her in the first place to find out, and even if she walks the very act of filing charges sends a message.

  6. #131
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    17,891
    Quote Originally Posted by AdironRider View Post
    I'm not trying to be a dick here but this is not a great example of "fucking drivers".
    Well, you are being a dick and this incident is actually the epitome of the sentiment of this thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by doebedoe View Post
    Traffic deaths in which one person's lawbreaking behavior directly causes another persons death? Yes.

    If I blow a stop sign and kill a kid on a bike legally proceeding through an intersection-- I should be charged with manslaughter. If I change lanes without yeilding and run another person off a road and kill them -- I should be charged with manslaughter.

    Just because you're driving a vehicle doesn't absolve you of not having to kill people with your actions. Accidental or not.
    Exactly.

  7. #132
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Not in the PRB
    Posts
    32,782
    Quote Originally Posted by AdironRider View Post
    How was she being reckless? You realize you need to prove that right? This guy was riding on a highway, in the dark, next to an active runway, so those lights are going to blend right in. Even a shitty lawyer is going to get her off.

    This is an unfortunate situation all around, but all this does is highlight the unfortunate reality of physics when a car and a bike collide.
    I'm curious, would you feel the same way if a pedestrian was walking on the shoulder, and got hit by a car that swerved into the shoulder?

    The shoulder isn't a free lane to use whenever, it's there for things like broken down vehicles, bikes, pedestrians, etc. The very act of swerving into the shoulder and hitting something is reckless.
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin
    "everybody's got their hooks into you, fuck em....forge on motherfuckers, drag all those bitches across the goal line with you." - (not so) ill-advised strategy

  8. #133
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    tetons
    Posts
    8,504
    Quote Originally Posted by AdironRider View Post
    How was she being reckless? You realize you need to prove that right? This guy was riding on a highway, in the dark, next to an active runway, so those lights are going to blend right in. Even a shitty lawyer is going to get her off.

    This is an unfortunate situation all around, but all this does is highlight the unfortunate reality of physics when a car and a bike collide.
    i know you like to push buttons but this comes across as extremely dickish
    esp given that you know lots of cyclists. and even courteous/ aware cyclists
    come on man
    skid luxury

  9. #134
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    inpdx
    Posts
    20,197
    Quote Originally Posted by b-bear View Post
    i know you like to push buttons but this comes across as extremely dickish
    esp given that you know lots of cyclists. and even courteous/ aware cyclists
    come on man
    unfortunately, it's a remarkably common viewpoint tbh, and, as such, i'm happy to see it getting some pushback here

    Everyone succumbs to a certain amount of driver self-centeredness. It takes some perspective to realize piloting vehicles with thousands of pounds of mass have implications. The higher the mass; the higher the responsibility.

  10. #135
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    50 miles E of Paradise
    Posts
    15,566
    From KSL article
    {Police} are waiting on results from a toxicology screening and looking into whether she may have looked down before the crash.
    What's the law in Utardia regarding driving and texting/otherwise using you phone? 'Cause I'm betting that's what happened.
    So sad

  11. #136
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    3,896
    Really, really shitty accident. I am conflicted on accidents like this where a simple mistake, or frankly common bending of a traffic law (going 10mph over, texting/calling/eating, rolling stop signs, etc), results in a horrific accident. It scares me because there was no ill will or active disregard for safety yet it is 100% the drivers fault for killing someone. I want there to be a villain to hate in these cases so that an extreme punishment to fit the extreme tragedy seems fitting... but extreme punishment doesnt seem fitting here despite there being an extreme tragedy.

    I hate the idea of full time autopilot driving, but these kind of situations make me think that option is a better and better idea.

  12. #137
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Missoula
    Posts
    2,104
    Quote Originally Posted by californiagrown View Post
    Really, really shitty accident. I am conflicted on accidents like this where a simple mistake, or frankly common bending of a traffic law (going 10mph over, texting/calling/eating, rolling stop signs, etc), results in a horrific accident. It scares me because there was no ill will or active disregard for safety yet it is 100% the drivers fault for killing someone. I want there to be a villain to hate in these cases so that an extreme punishment to fit the extreme tragedy seems fitting... but extreme punishment doesnt seem fitting here despite there being an extreme tragedy.

    I hate the idea of full time autopilot driving, but these kind of situations make me think that option is a better and better idea.
    Except that it's not an accident, and texting/eating/being distracted IS ill will and active disregard for safely.

    You are behind the wheel of thousands of pounds of steel going really fast. It's your responsibility to pay attention and not kill someone.
    Last edited by jamal; 10-25-2018 at 11:46 AM.

  13. #138
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Gaperville, CO
    Posts
    5,845
    Distracted driving is just as much an active disregard for safety as driving intoxicated.

    We're finally reaching a societal norm that intoxicated driving is unacceptable. If our computer overlords don't take over soon, we will eventually reach the same position with distracted driving.

  14. #139
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    7,919
    Quote Originally Posted by californiagrown View Post
    Really, really shitty accident. I am conflicted on accidents like this where a simple mistake, or frankly common bending of a traffic law (going 10mph over, texting/calling/eating, rolling stop signs, etc), results in a horrific accident. It scares me because there was no ill will or active disregard for safety yet it is 100% the drivers fault for killing someone. I want there to be a villain to hate in these cases so that an extreme punishment to fit the extreme tragedy seems fitting... but extreme punishment doesnt seem fitting here despite there being an extreme tragedy.

    I hate the idea of full time autopilot driving, but these kind of situations make me think that option is a better and better idea.
    This is my thought process on the matter, and as usual more eloquent in delivery. There is risk involved with everything. In this situation one risks this worst case scenario doing what he did. You will never eliminate this risk if you want to ride your bike on a roadway.

    And of course, if she was hammered or texting throw the damn book at her. She openly stopped, clearly felt massive guilt, got the authorities involved herself (way to go buddies that were there by the way). This does not seem malicious or necessarily negligent on the surface.

    If she wasn't hammered or texting I do not see how throwing her in jail and ruining another life, who probably also has kids and a husband, solves anything other than your need for vengeance.
    Last edited by AdironRider; 10-25-2018 at 02:19 PM.
    Live Free or Die

  15. #140
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    inpdx
    Posts
    20,197
    Quote Originally Posted by AdironRider View Post
    you can't go through life eliminating all risk
    That is different than negligence

    Failing to operate a vehicle safely is not the same as a boulder releasing from above a highway and causing an injury


    Quote Originally Posted by AdironRider View Post
    Not everything bad should result in jailtime
    sympathy for the one at fault is generous, but it seems very unbalanced when the result for the victim is significant injury or death

    if you taco a cyclists wheel, but the rider is fine...that's one thing, but changing someone's life because the driver is inattentive is pretty significant

  16. #141
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    inpdx
    Posts
    20,197
    Quote Originally Posted by AdironRider View Post
    I do not see how throwing her in jail and ruining another life solves anything other than your need for vengeance.
    No, it won't bring anyone back. I don't think it is about vengeance either; that doesn't serve society at all.

    What it does is addresses a cultural appreciation of the privilege of driving and the seriousness of what it entails. It establishes a higher threshold for responsibility for driving. By identifying a punishment at par with the damage done, we create an expectation for all drivers.

    Driving is currently so easy that the risks involved are commonly taken for granted.

  17. #142
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    7,919
    Fair enough, this situation is certainly different than an act of god.

    Do you think the biker took on more risk by riding on the highway at night? Should that be taken into account at all?

    The lady is not acting like someone who isn't going to be mentally fucked forever. Some may prefer physical prison, but I'd wager she now is trapped in a mental one for life.
    Live Free or Die

  18. #143
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Gaperville, CO
    Posts
    5,845
    Quote Originally Posted by AdironRider View Post
    Fair enough, this situation is certainly different than an act of god.

    Do you think the biker took on more risk by riding on the highway at night? Should that be taken into account at all?

    The lady is not acting like someone who isn't going to be mentally fucked forever. Some may prefer physical prison, but I'd wager she now is trapped in a mental one for life.
    Why are you trying to make this about the victim? It is established that the biker was riding on a large shoulder, with lights, with other riders, who saw this happen.

    You sound like someone who is asking if someone was wearing a short skirt, walking home after dark, took on more risk of being sexually assaulted. As if that makes it more understandable or okay that they are sexually assaulted.

  19. #144
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Missoula
    Posts
    2,104
    Ah, yes, the driver was the true victim here. Also, what was the cyclist wearing?

  20. #145
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    inpdx
    Posts
    20,197
    Quote Originally Posted by AdironRider View Post
    Do you think the biker took on more risk by riding on the highway at night? Should that be taken into account at all?
    I have no idea. Someone is hopefully looking at that. It is possible. However, I want to emphasize that the operator of the larger vehicle should carry a heavier burden of resposibility (the whole mass thing). That delta in mass is a huge factor. If the driver is not operating appropriately for conditions (driving at a speed that headlights can't adapt for, for example)

    Quote Originally Posted by AdironRider View Post
    The lady is not acting like someone who isn't going to be mentally fucked forever. Some may prefer physical prison, but I'd wager she now is trapped in a mental one for life.
    perhaps...seems like how any of us might feel, but that doesn't eliminate the community's need to adjudicate the results of this event with appropriate actions. Otherwise, why have rules?

  21. #146
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    3,896
    Quote Originally Posted by doebedoe View Post
    Why are you trying to make this about the victim? It is established that the biker was riding on a large shoulder, with lights, with other riders, who saw this happen.

    You sound like someone who is asking if someone was wearing a short skirt, walking home after dark, took on more risk of being sexually assaulted. As if that makes it more understandable or okay that they are sexually assaulted.
    The drivers guilt and the actions or the victim are separate issues. I hate that people get shouted down whenever the victims obviously negligent/dangerous actions are brought up. They do not excuse or warrant the tragedy, but they deserved to be discussed. Its just a separate conversation from the guilt/culpability/liability of the perpetrator, which is the only thing you seem intent on discussing. I don't think anyone here thinks the driver isnt culpable or doesn't deserve punishment.

  22. #147
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    7,919
    I think you are sliding down a slippery slope by saying one road user has more responsibility than the other. That is exactly why lots of people hate cyclists for thinking the rules apply to thee and not to me so to speak.

    You have two forms of transportation where there are inherent risks, including death, sharing a roadway, and outside of specific situations (like an Idaho stop sign) share the same responsibilities and rules to follow. People can die and no rules could be broken. In this case it appears she only broke a rule determined by society to result in a ticket currently.

    I would agree that most traffic infractions should face stiffer penalties than they currently do though.
    Live Free or Die

  23. #148
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    inpdx
    Posts
    20,197
    Quote Originally Posted by AdironRider View Post
    I think you are sliding down a slippery slope by saying one road user has more responsibility than the other. That is exactly why lots of people hate cyclists for thinking the rules apply to thee and not to me so to speak.

    You have two forms of transportation where there are inherent risks, including death, sharing a roadway, and outside of specific situations (like an Idaho stop sign) share the same responsibilities and rules to follow. People can die and no rules could be broken. In this case it appears she only broke a rule determined by society to result in a ticket currently.

    I would agree that most traffic infractions should face stiffer penalties than they currently do though.
    not a slippery slope & it does not absolve smaller vehicles of responsibility to operate safely

    it has everything to do with the level of potential damage ::: speed and mass

    huge trucks
    small trucks
    passenger vehicles
    motorbikes
    scooters
    bicycles
    pedestrians
    kids

    we already have many precedents for level of potential danger

  24. #149
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Missoula
    Posts
    2,104
    Quote Originally Posted by AdironRider View Post
    I think you are sliding down a slippery slope by saying one road user has more responsibility than the other. That is exactly why lots of people hate cyclists for thinking the rules apply to thee and not to me so to speak.
    .
    A person in 4000lbs of steel going 60 mph absolutely does have more responsibility than someone on a bike. not just from a physics standpoint but legally as well. Know how you have to have things like a driver's license and insurance to drive a car? And last I checked, cyclists are the ones responsible for over 30000 deaths a year in the us.

  25. #150
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    7,919
    Just because you don't need a license to ride a bike does not absolve you from risk, or the rules of the road.

    What does a body count have to do with anything?
    Live Free or Die

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •