man deliberately hits bikers with car, is acquitted.

[mdeth1313]

This is why I started riding w/ one of those fly6 cameras on my seatpost. Haven't needed to use it for anything like this yet, although I was able to diffuse a potentially bad confrontation by letting an angry driver know the whole thing was being recorded.

As one person already mentioned earlier (about the murder trial). Jurors can (and usually are in some way) biased, sometimes just plain stupid and when you factor that in with the inconsistencies, I'm not surprised at the outcome.

[bikingshearer]

Originally Posted by echappist

No, there is a difference. In your example, there was actually exculpatory evidence clearing the officer.

Here's, there was not sufficient evidence (at least in the view of the jury) to convict.

This is the critical civic lesson out of this. The acquittal does not mean the a-hole didn't it, just as the OJ verdict does not mean he didn't do it. In both cases, it means we can't put the perp behind bars for what they most likely did.

Put another way, "most likely did it" is good enough to find civil liability and award damages, but it is not enough for a criminal conviction and putting the accused in prison. And the occasional upsetting not guilty" verdict notwithstanding, that's a good thing.

Given the chance, I'd still be veeeery tempted to key the hell out of this perp's Jag, though.

[Waldo]

Originally Posted by OtayBW

I didn't read the article and acknowledge that I'm not fully up on all the facts, but shouldn't one of these 2 riders have ducked in behind the other when there was a 'CAR BACK'? Again, I am not in any way excusing what appears to be wreckless/raging driver behavior, but there is a time and place to ride 2-abreast, and a time to single up. What happened here?

- Victim blaming is what happened here.

[OtayBW]

Originally Posted by Waldo

- Victim blaming is what happened here.

Only if you see the world in black and white. This seems to be a complicated situation where not everything is as neatly defined as you might like.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[Waldo]

Yes, the way you’d have it, it’s cyclists’ job, when legally using the road, to get the hell out of motor vehicles’ way.

[OtayBW]

Originally Posted by Waldo

Yes, the way you’d have it, it’s cyclists’ job, when legally using the road, to get the hell out of motor vehicles’ way.

Well, yes -that is the law around here and most every other place that I've ever lived.

MD 21-1205 Riding on roadways or on highway.

Riding to right side of roadway. – Each person operating a bicycle or a motor scooter at a speed less than the speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing on a roadway shall ride as near to the right side of the roadway as practicable and safe, except when:

Making or attempting to make a left turn;
Operating on a one-way street;
Passing a stopped or slower moving vehicle;
Avoiding pedestrians or road hazards;
The right lane is a right turn lane; or
Operating in a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle or motor scooter and another vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.
Riding two abreast. – Each person operating a bicycle or motor scooter on a roadway may ride two abreast only if the flow of traffic is unimpeded.

Again, I'm not going to second guess all the details in complex situation, but on balance, when riding on state roads, you stay as far to the right as is practicable. You are indeed permitted to ride 2 abreast when appropriate, and we all have to decide what that means. For me, I ride 2 abreast all the time on the back roads around here, but unless I am intentionally taking the lane and directly engaging with the traffic at their pace, I am moving over when someone yells Car Back. I sure as hell am not going to hang in there 2 abreast on a two lane with someone flying up behind me at 55+ mpg. That would be stupid, but we'll all seen it.

[oliver1850]

Don't know what WI law says about riding two abreast. Believe I've read that Iowa DOT recommends it for visibility reasons.

I think the real issue here is that the laws need addressing. Pretty sure you couldn't hit a pedestrian in a crosswalk and get off with no penalty, and you shouldn't be able to hit a cyclist from behind (no matter where he is in the lane) and get away with it either.

[zap]

Edit

Originally Posted by OtayBW

Again, I'm not going to second guess all the details in complex situation, but on balance, when riding on state roads, you stay as far to the right as is practicable. You are indeed permitted to ride 2 abreast when appropriate, and we all have to decide what that means. For me, I ride 2 abreast all the time on the back roads around here, but unless I am intentionally taking the lane and directly engaging with the traffic at their pace, I am moving over when someone yells Car Back. I sure as hell am not going to hang in there 2 abreast on a two lane with someone flying up behind me at 55+ mpg. That would be stupid, but we'll all seen it.

Drifting.

You are in Merryland were I lived and cycled 'til the end of 16. I know in Montgomery Co. police on occasion would ask groups of cyclists to single up......even with no traffic back.

In the Raleigh area in NC where I now live, groups riding 2 abreast is common, accepted and policy (announced at ride starts) of many cycling clubs.

[djg21]

Originally Posted by mdeth1313

This is why I started riding w/ one of those fly6 cameras on my seatpost. Haven't needed to use it for anything like this yet, although I was able to diffuse a potentially bad confrontation by letting an angry driver know the whole thing was being recorded.

As one person already mentioned earlier (about the murder trial). Jurors can (and usually are in some way) biased, sometimes just plain stupid and when you factor that in with the inconsistencies, I'm not surprised at the outcome.

I use a Fly12 and a Fly 6. I also carry a Kimber Pepper Blaster in my jersey pocket.

[OtayBW]

Originally Posted by zap

I know in Montgomery Co. police on occasion would ask groups of cyclists to single up......even with no traffic back.

I'm not surprised in a sprawling suburban community like Mont. Co. - but they would be wrong, and you have every right to ride 2 abreast when 'not impeding other traffic' - or as I prefer to interpret it: when it's safe for you to do so.

Originally Posted by zap

In the Raleigh area in NC where I now live, groups riding 2 abreast is common, accepted and policy (announced at ride starts) of many cycling clubs.

Same law applies in NC, and as I've said before, it is pretty much common everywhere I've ever ridden to double up when appropriate. If it is your groups' policy to stay 2 abreast throughout an entire ride, through all kinds of traffic situations, well, then I'm happy for you. Otherwise to me, this ain't complicated: you ride 2 abreast when appropriate, you take the lane when appropriate, and you single up as well when appropriate....and you go home and live to do it again another day.