Cyclist dies from dooring, Durham NH

[druptight]

http://www.wmur.com/news/bicyclist-dies-after-crashing-into-car-door/27583496#!bGJJxd

I know this isn't news here, but I just can't get over how anti cyclist the news/police all sound when reporting these sorts of things. The police chief in the video actually says ON VIDEO: "I don't know what the cyclist or driver could have done differently in this scenario". I mean COME ON. How about check your mirrors and NOT OPEN THE DOOR. Also says fault hasn't been determined, but I think anyone with a brain can tell you where the fault lies. Nowhere in the video do they suggest that drivers should be careful before opening their door. And they make sure to report on the fact that the cyclist wasn't wearing a helmet.

I always wear a helmet, and can't help but wonder if this guy wouldn't be alive if he'd been wearing one. But the way they report this, just allows reader to immediately place blame on the cyclist and dismiss the driver.

Horrible and unnecessary death, thoughts out to the family. Bike lanes aren't necessarily a safe place people, ride carefully!

[zap]

Sad.

I ride far enough from parked automobiles. I don't expect motorist to check for cyclists before opening their door.

I don't like many bike lanes and rare for me to ride in any of them.

[saf-t]

Almost 100% of the time, a simple act could have prevented the incident.

I see this all the time in my work, when people suffer completely preventable injuries or deaths.

[ultraman6970]

"I don't know what the cyclist or driver could have done differently in this scenario".?????? Easy... LOOK THE F... BACK BEFORE OPENING THE F DOOR YOU MORON!!!

That's the problem with cops, like 99% of them do not ride bikes or motorcycles. The other issue is that the rider was not using the helmet and that the dude died due to the impact later on is just mere bad luck.

The driver had look behind before, the guy had been alive.

As for the rider, well never had accidents in the street (hope never) and is because I'm paying attention 200% of the time, if this bird was waving in and out the bike line well... no coments, sad he died tho. :(

[Gummee]

I ride far enough from parked automobiles. I don't expect motorist to check for cyclists before opening their door.Why not? You'd think it'd be the safe thing to do: make sure nothing's coming before opening your door. That includes cars coming up too closely.

I don't like many bike lanes and rare for me to ride in any of them.
This I'll agree with.

M

[soulspinner]

I once opened my door and an oncoming car hit it. In NY it was my fault. So if it was a cyclist it would be my fault too, right???

[druptight]

I once opened my door and an oncoming car hit it. In NY it was my fault. So if it was a cyclist it would be my fault too, right???

In NH, yes:

Section 265:96

265:96 Opening and Closing Vehicle Doors. – No person shall open the door of a vehicle on the side available to moving traffic unless and until it is reasonably safe to do so and can be done without interfering with the movement of other traffic, nor shall any person leave a door open on the side of a vehicle available to moving traffic for a period of time longer than necessary to load or unload passengers.

Source: (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/xxi/265/265-mrg.htm)

[pdmtong]

Sad.

I ride far enough from parked automobiles. I don't expect motorist to check for cyclists before opening their door.

I don't like many bike lanes and rare for me to ride in any of them.

Agreed. The key word is "expect"

If you ride expecting motorists to check before opening then it's only a matter of time before you go into or over a door.

[FastforaSlowGuy]

I used to be a big fan of bike lanes, until my town started painting them alongside street parking. Without those lanes, I normally give parked cars a very wide berth, riding well into the lane until I'm clear of that section of roadway. I just am not good enough at spotting people in the cars (especially through tinted rear windows) to run the risk of riding close. With bike lanes, however, I find it harder to ride into the lane (drivers get hostile when I do), and the bike lane width is narrower than a car door. So it looks good on paper, but is not so good in reality. Their real function, I feel, is to put drivers on notice that cyclists will be riding around. Again, not sure what that does for me.

Don't get me started on sharrows.

[pdmtong]

Sure the driver could have should have looked but what good is being right if you are dead? So now your family wins a lawsuit years later but problem is you are still dead.

The reporting of no helmet is no different than reporting occupants were not wearing seat belts.

That downtown Durham circle has a lot of activist. Pedestrians cyclists cars. Paying attention required

[Dr Luxurious]

How could it NOT be the driver's fault? If someone rolled a shopping cart into a traffic lane and a car hit it and the driver was injured they'd be locked up. Opening a car door is no different - you're suddenly sticking a large metal object into the path of an oncoming bike...

Don't know whether it's true but I've heard that in Holland you'll fail a drivers' test if you don't look for bikes before opening a door.

[druptight]

Sure the driver could have should have looked but what good is being right if you are dead? So now your family wins a lawsuit years later but problem is you are still dead.

The reporting of no helmet is no different than reporting occupants were not wearing seat belts.

That downtown Durham circle has a lot of activist. Pedestrians cyclists cars. Paying attention required

I don't disagree at all that paying attention is required here, and as a cyclist this is always true - I assume every door will swing open, every person on the sidewalk will run into the road, and every vehicle from all directions will turn in front of me. And IMO, you're an idiot if you're not wearing a helmet. This guy allegedly died of head trauma, so he might be with us today to tell us what happened were he wearing a helmet.

All that being said, wearing a helmet isn't a state law if you're over 16, and looking before opening your door is. So from that perspective, it should be pretty open and closed as to where the fault lies here.

[gavingould]

we actually have a municipal law on the books here in chicago for opening a car door into the path of a cyclist...
doesn't make any difference though. ignorance, general "in-a-hurry"-ness, self importance all seem to override.

[bobswire]

It's the law here to check before opening car door and is enforced in San Francisco because of the good work and activism of San Francisco Bike Coalition. Never the less always expect the unexpected.

[FastforaSlowGuy]

we actually have a municipal law on the books here in chicago for opening a car door into the path of a cyclist...
doesn't make any difference though. ignorance, general "in-a-hurry"-ness, self importance all seem to override.

What good are these laws if nobody enforces them (i.e., charges and prosecutes the driver)? Seems to me that opening a door into a marked bike lane in a busy area without looking is reckless. New Hampshire has a name for reckless acts that cause someone's death: manslaughter (http://nhrsa.org/law/630-2-manslaughter/).

Edit: At the very least, and regardless whether the law requires looking for cyclists, the conduct is negligent. And again, NH has a name (and a multi-year prison sentence) for negligent acts resulting in a person's death. (link (http://nhrsa.org/law/630-3-negligent-homicide/))

[charliedid]

Very sad...

Time to stop painting bike lanes in the street and time to start building bikeways.

[gavingould]

i agree, enforcement is the problem. same with distracted driving/cell phone use in the car... we've got several different local and state laws forbidding use without a hands-free device but there's next to zero enforcement.

in fact the police are often using their phones, texting, parked in bike lanes, opening doors into paths etc. they've got a lot to do but shouldn't be above following what they're meant to enforce.

[zap]

Why not? You'd think it'd be the safe thing to do: make sure nothing's coming before opening your door. That includes cars coming up too closely.




Motorists in big city USA have a difficult time understanding what that stalk thingy does to the left of that round thingy called a steering wheel.

Looking before opening an automobile door is way beyond the mental capacity of too many motorists.

I've seen motorists pull out of a parking spot without looking too……...

IMO, riding in a bike lane next to parked automobiles is the most dangerous place to ride a bicycle.

[SlackMan]

Sad.

I ride far enough from parked automobiles. I don't expect motorist to check for cyclists before opening their door.

I don't like many bike lanes and rare for me to ride in any of them.

+1. Regardless of what laws are regarding opening doors, I have no trust in motorists to look before opening door. It's also one of the things I almost constantly reinforce to my 11-year old when we're out riding together.

[christian]

The reporting of no helmet is no different than reporting occupants were not wearing seat belts. It's a hell of a lot different. Wearing seat belts is mandated by law. There is a significant body of statistical evidence that shows that seat belts save lives. Neither of those is true for wearing a bike helmet. It's about as relevant as reporting the driver wasn't wearing a helmet.

[pdmtong]

Forgot to add that I do feel the law should obligate the driver to have looked before opening the door. It's no different than requiring you to look before you pull out from being parallel parked into the lane of traffic

[pdmtong]

It's a hell of a lot different. Wearing seat belts is mandated by law. There is a significant body of statistical evidence that shows that seat belts save lives. Neither of those is true for wearing a bike helmet. It's about as relevant as reporting the driver wasn't wearing a helmet.

I see your point. Not looking at the reporting from legal requirement grounds. Instead see this as common reporting practice. Right or wrong I often see the helmet or seatbelt status commented on in death situations

[Mark McM]

Forgot to add that I do feel the law should obligate the driver to have looked before opening the door. It's no different than requiring you to look before you pull out from being parallel parked into the lane of traffic

As reported in Druptight's posting, it is in fact required by law in New Hampshire that the driver should have looked and made sure opening the door did not impede other traffic. So Deputy Chief Kelley's statement that, "I don’t know what the bicyclist or the driver could have done differently,” is rather ill-informed - the driver could have obeyed the law and not opened their door in the path of the bicycle.

[malcolm]

I don't think I routinely check my mirror when getting out of my parked car, but I'm usually in a lot with no traffic on the sides of a parked car. When parallel parking I always look in the mirror to make sure I'm not stepping out in front of a passing car. I hope I would notice a bike.

Only example in my lifetime I can recall of a doored rider was years ago in New Orleans riding along St. Charles ave. in front of Audubon Park someone opened a door in front of a friend that was in front of the rest of us. It looked like it was on purpose but who knows. Broke out the window of the car and my friend got a couple cuts on his forehead and scalp. He was wearing a leather hair net it that tells you how long ago it was. Driver was pissed, we were pissed, called each other dumb arses and left after straightening up the bike.

[eddief]

look back, open car door with your right hand instead of your left. A new habit to think about looking back or looking in the mirror before you open the door. We learned how to wear seatbelts, we learned how to bring our own bags to the supermarket, we could be trained to open the door differently. Wonder how many cyclists are doored each year?

[Mark McM]

I see your point. Not looking at the reporting from legal requirement grounds. Instead see this as common reporting practice. Right or wrong I often see the helmet or seatbelt status commented on in death situations

We see a similar thing in general aviation. After an incident, we often see it reported that "no flight plan was filled", even though it has absolutely zero bearing on the incident - in VFR flights (the majority of flights for general aviation) not only is a flight plan not required for VFR flights, they do absolutely nothing to improve safety. (The only function of a VFR flight plan is that in case a plane is overdue, it gives the searchers an idea of where to look for the plane.)

[DukeHorn]

I disagree with the reflexive "it's the car driver's fault", especially in the evening. I don't get enough details from the article though I'm sorry that the incident happened.

I live in the Mission in SF. Last week when I was trying to move my car for street cleaning at 11.30pm, I barely missed hitting two consecutive cyclists in the bike lane who were cycling in (a) dark clothing and (b) with no lights. I was literally staring in my rear view mirror trying to guess whether a cyclist was coming based on a darker shadow moving in a grey-ish black background. Rolled down my window and said "lights at night would be safer". I got a "sorry" (girl) and a "f-you" (guy).

Hang out in my neighborhood and count the number of cyclists at night with no front lights. It's not just the back light that protects you. (and wearing black hoodies at night while cycling just seems dumb-since it's the hipster uniform in the Mission).

[rnhood]

Why would someone be barreling down the street by parked cars like blalocks bull? And no helmet to boot. Very stupid....

and very sad.

[pdmtong]

I disagree with the reflexive "it's the car driver's fault", especially in the evening. I don't get enough details from the article though I'm sorry that the incident happened.

I live in the Mission in SF. Last week when I was trying to move my car for street cleaning at 11.30pm, I barely missed hitting two consecutive cyclists in the bike lane who were cycling in (a) dark clothing and (b) with no lights. I was literally staring in my rear view mirror trying to guess whether a cyclist was coming based on a darker shadow moving in a grey-ish black background. Rolled down my window and said "lights at night would be safer". I got a "sorry" (girl) and a "f-you" (guy).

Hang out in my neighborhood and count the number of cyclists at night with no front lights. It's not just the back light that protects you. (and wearing black hoodies at night while cycling just seems dumb-since it's the hipster uniform in the Mission).

i'm on the peninsula in an area with no sidewalks and not many streetlights. same thing. runners, cyclists. no lights. dark clothing. in the middle of the street. I cant tell you the number of times I have almost nailed someone because even though I know to look, and am looking, I could not see them until almost too late. and I am only going 25mph....

[Mark McM]

Why would someone be barreling down the street by parked cars like blalocks bull? And no helmet to boot. Very stupid....

and very sad.

Where did you get the information that the cyclist was "barreling down the street by parked cars like blalocks bull?" None of the reports I've read said anything about the cyclists speed, time of day, traffic conditions, etc.

[druptight]

It was on a weekend mid afternoon, from what I've read, so broad daylight. It is a downhill there, so gravity would be carrying the cyclist down the hill. Either way, the comments above about dark clothing have no bearing here - but are point well taken about a knee jerk "it's always the driver's fault" sentiment.

[Elefantino]

The fact that the deputy chief purports that he doesn't know the traffic laws of the state of New Hampshire means one of two things: 1) he needs to back to deputy chief school, or 2) the traffic laws of the state of New Hampshire aren't applicable when it involves a cyclist's death.

In too many locales, it's the latter.

How many of us have had police or sheriff's deputies tell us to "get on the sidewalk" in jurisdictions where it is expressly illegal?

I really wish I knew why, generally speaking, there was such a blind spot among our cops and courts to cycling. I have heard all the armchair theories but they can't all be right.

:confused::mad:

[DukeHorn]

It was on a weekend mid afternoon, from what I've read, so broad daylight. It is a downhill there, so gravity would be carrying the cyclist down the hill. Either way, the comments above about dark clothing have no bearing here - but are point well taken about a knee jerk "it's always the driver's fault" sentiment.

The linked article said "Sunday night" and it "broke the evening quiet" so I had no true reference as to time except assuming past afternoon.

[sitzmark]

Very sad...

Time to stop painting bike lanes in the street and time to start building bikeways.

Very sad indeed. But ... wanting to throw out the years of petitioning and campaigning for the right to use the roadways as any other vehicle and return to being allowed on (a limited number of) bikeways? Gotta be a better solution.

[Shin Getter]

I tend to ride a bit slower when I ride by parked cars or try to leave enough space for the car door to open. Other thing I try to do is to keep one eye out and see if there is a person in the car...but that is not always possible...especially in a busy area.

I really don't like riding in bike lanes where cars are parked on the right of it.

Other thing I find dangerous is people that throw their doors open. I don't see why you would want to use a ton of force to open a car door. I used to work in Malibu and had to park on the street. There are tons of cyclists that ride on PCH...one time I did almost door a cyclist. He came up on me real fast. I open my door slowly all the time...and I saw him in the sideview mirror. I was able to pull the door closed as he passed by. I can't imagine if I was one of the door flingers...guy would have slammed into my door.

[r_mutt]

"i don't see what the bicyclist or the driver could have done different to prevent that accident"

sheriff = idiot.

[bikinchris]

Stay out of the door zone

Stay out of the door zone.

BTW, it is MUCH farther into the road than you think.

In every dooring crash, you fall into traffic. Every one:

http://youtu.be/CudJvSbS2aY

How far away from the cars SHOULD you ride?

http://youtu.be/FPA-ZcYGT94

Consider taking an LAB cycling course, please. It will probably save your life.

Some drivers in Europe are taught to open their door with the right hand, allowing them to see the blind spot.

[unterhausen]

motorists know fairly intuitively where the door zone ends -- they stay out of it. However, when it comes to cyclists, they expect us to ride in it. It's interesting to watch on a street where motorists are forced to drive in the door zone, they go really slow.

[gemship]

Here in Gloucester,Ma. where I live the city for what ever reason painted some bike lanes on a few of the main roads within the city. Well they never widened the road and of course there are parked cars on the shoulder. Simple common sense and fear of this happening has me riding more in the road and using less of the lane. Bike lanes are very dangerous places to be when they are designed like this. I am sorry to hear of this grim reminder:o

[oldpotatoe]

Ride past parked cars around 'down town' Boulder, around the mall....

No bike lane, if I see somebody open their door as I pass, I say, "door prize", and get the same response when I get one, 'FU', there is a lot of friction in Boulder.

I know a guy who got doored over 10 years ago and is just now riding outside.
Went over the open door, landed on his shoulder, broke same.

[Corso]

My son goes to UNH, that street location is right on campus. I’ve had coffee many times at Java Joes.

Next week, there will be many, many college kids on bikes and skateboards RIGHT THERE!

They better figure “it” out very soon!

Driver at fault. Period. Sounds like perhaps the Cop knows the kids family. Why else would he NOT have charged the driver, surely the Police knows the law!