Know the rules The Paceline Forum Builder's Spotlight


Go Back   The Paceline Forum > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #106  
Old 03-03-2023, 07:34 AM
smontanaro smontanaro is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Evanston, IL
Posts: 1,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldpotatoe View Post
Yup, this 'hang 'em high, NOW' mentality, particularly if somebody kills people on a bicycle, is kinda disturbing but predictable.
I'm not condoning such attitudes, but suspect it stems from two things, one, past leniency in other cases, two, failure to recognize/assert that drivers bear extra responsibility given the potential life threatening nature of their place on the road.
__________________
Monti Special

Last edited by smontanaro; 03-03-2023 at 11:45 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 03-03-2023, 09:33 AM
zap zap is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spdntrxi View Post
not surprised...

and the weed results taking more then a week ? One reason why I am against the legalization of it.
An example of what another country has done. From the Canadian federal government.

https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/...a/qa2-qr2.html

What is an oral fluid drug screener?
In order to be approved for use in Canada, an oral fluid drug screener must be comprised of both: an oral fluid collection kit and a reader. It can detect the presence of some drugs in oral fluid, including THC, the main impairing component in cannabis. These devices are fast, non-invasive, and accurate. A positive result on an oral fluid drug screener is strongly suggestive of recent cannabis and recent cocaine use. A positive result on an oral fluid drug screener may provide enough information to move the investigation forward either by making a demand for a drug recognition evaluation or a blood sample.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 03-03-2023, 09:52 AM
NHAero NHAero is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 9,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by zap View Post
An example of what another country has done. From the Canadian federal government.

https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/...a/qa2-qr2.html

What is an oral fluid drug screener?
In order to be approved for use in Canada, an oral fluid drug screener must be comprised of both: an oral fluid collection kit and a reader. It can detect the presence of some drugs in oral fluid, including THC, the main impairing component in cannabis. These devices are fast, non-invasive, and accurate. A positive result on an oral fluid drug screener is strongly suggestive of recent cannabis and recent cocaine use. A positive result on an oral fluid drug screener may provide enough information to move the investigation forward either by making a demand for a drug recognition evaluation or a blood sample.
Thanks for posting this. I have a meeting next week with our local police chief to ask about enforcement of the new four foot law here in MA. I will read up on this and ask about weed too. I imagine many of you in states where it's legal get plenty of whiffs while riding. Here it's particularly noticeable when a landscaper truck passes me.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 03-03-2023, 10:58 AM
cdimattio cdimattio is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by smontanaro View Post
I'm not condoning such attitudes, but suspect it stems from two things, one, past leniency in other cases, two, failure to recognize/assert that drivers best extra responsibility given the potential life threatening nature of their place on the road.
I am sure there is also sincere frustration with some of the prevalent views from inconvenienced motorists which present themselves in comments to news stories every time there is a tragedy like this:

"The driver was probably texting at the time. People who insist on riding bikes on high speed roads are begging to die. Just because you can do something does not mean you should. Now this poor driver will have to live with the guilt of accidentally killing a few dopey people."

"Dangerous pastime, Cycling" "I couldn't agree more. Can we please ban it?"

"These lycra louts think they own the road."

"Roads are for autos not large groups of bicyclists pretending to be autos"
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 03-03-2023, 11:46 AM
smontanaro smontanaro is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Evanston, IL
Posts: 1,651
Yeah, that too. ^^^^
__________________
Monti Special
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 03-03-2023, 12:27 PM
Vientomas's Avatar
Vientomas Vientomas is offline
Member?
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Coeur d'Alene, Idaho
Posts: 2,160
Never mind. Sorry.
__________________
Member? Oh, I member.
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 03-04-2023, 06:48 AM
oldpotatoe's Avatar
oldpotatoe oldpotatoe is offline
Proud Grandpa
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 47,032
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdimattio View Post
I am sure there is also sincere frustration with some of the prevalent views from inconvenienced motorists which present themselves in comments to news stories every time there is a tragedy like this:

"The driver was probably texting at the time. People who insist on riding bikes on high speed roads are begging to die. Just because you can do something does not mean you should. Now this poor driver will have to live with the guilt of accidentally killing a few dopey people."

"Dangerous pastime, Cycling" "I couldn't agree more. Can we please ban it?"

"These lycra louts think they own the road."

"Roads are for autos not large groups of bicyclists pretending to be autos"
Yup read the comments about this sort of thing ONLY if you want to see red, get angry and wonder What The Farge is wrong with people.
__________________
Chisholm's Custom Wheels
Qui Si Parla Campagnolo
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 03-04-2023, 09:29 AM
bigbill bigbill is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hackberry, AZ
Posts: 3,754
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldpotatoe View Post
Yup read the comments about this sort of thing ONLY if you want to see red, get angry and wonder What The Farge is wrong with people.
The internet and social media has allowed the worst of us to have a platform. I live in a neighborhood in AZ that is mostly retired people. On several occasions, I've been told to ride somewhere else. About 18 months ago, I featured in the HOA facebook page because someone asked if cycling should be allowed on neighborhood streets. The majority of replies were against cycling. I ride anyway and just give a friendly wave (with all fingers) when someone says something.

During the best cycling months, I'm in rural Wyoming which is very bike friendly.
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 03-14-2023, 09:56 AM
windsurfer windsurfer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: SB and Central Coast, Ca
Posts: 350
From NTSB preliminary report that was just released.

This information is preliminary and subject to change. Release date: 14 March 2023

​​At about 7:57 a.m. (mountain standard time) on Saturday, February 25, 2023, a group of bicyclists was engaged in an informal organized ride, traveling southbound in the 6500 block of South Cotton Lane in Goodyear, Maricopa County, Arizona. As the bicyclists were crossing a bridge over the Gila River, they were approached from behind by a 2019 Ford F-250 pickup truck traveling in the left lane closest to the center median. The bridge comprised two traffic lanes each for northbound and southbound traffic. The opposing lanes were separated by a 41-foot-wide paved median, and the roadway had a posted speed limit of 45 mph. The bridge also included 5-foot-wide shoulders located between the right traffic lane and the concrete bridge railings located on each side of the bridge.

The 20 bicyclists were riding in formation of either two abreast or single file on the southbound shoulder and the adjacent edge of the right southbound lane. As the pickup truck approached the group from behind, the truck departed its lane of travel, crossed over both the right southbound lane and the shoulder before striking the bridge railing. Following the impact, the pickup truck veered back to the left, struck the bicyclists, crossed over both southbound travel lanes, and came to a stop in the center median of the roadway. As a result of the crash, two of the bicyclists were fatally injured, and 18 others sustained various other injuries ranging from minor to severe. The pickup truck driver was uninjured.

The Goodyear Police Department is the party to this National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigation.​

All aspects of the crash remain under investigation while the NTSB determines the probable cause, with the intent of issuing safety recommendations to prevent similar events.
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 03-14-2023, 10:49 AM
Wolfman Wolfman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Westside Los Angeles
Posts: 418
In all my years of driving, I've never had a car act like that... but, when I've seen accidents happen, cars act like that when there's human error involved.

I try to learn from these discussions, because I do try to change my behavior based on the data, but it sounds like the cyclists were doing everything correctly, which makes it all the more tragic.
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 03-14-2023, 03:54 PM
jimcav jimcav is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,690
I've seen that exact type of vehicle behavior

late night travelling on I-270 towards DC. very few vehicles, it was like 1-2am, A jeep Cherokee in front of me was weaving a bit, I suspected he was drunk or dozing off, I flashed blights, no response, just another drift, and as I was about to honk, he suddenly veered over, hit the right guard rail, lots of sparks, drift over, hit rail again, and then his head snapped up, I passed at max speed, and saw a very startled look on a young man's face.

I've also been behind a vehicle at 70mph with a front tire blowout, and even that did not result a 2-lane swerve. That was long ago and I think most cars, even trucks may have stability programs to even lessen it. Plus, a major thing like catastrophic tire fail/wheel fell off etc should have been obvious to investigators.

I'd say there is low chance the vehicle suddenly did something, but rather this guy was asleep or inattentive and hit the guardrail, and either inertia of the truck coming off the rail and/or his over-reaction resulted in killing cyclists.
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 03-14-2023, 06:02 PM
Peter P. Peter P. is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Meriden CT
Posts: 7,228
Thanks for the update. Good information.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.