[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Driving Pet Peeves
-
Subject: Re: Driving Pet Peeves
-
From: kennino@"cs.orst.edu" (Ken Ferschweiler)
-
Date: 16 Jun 1995 17:48:35 GMT
-
Followup-To: rec.autos.driving,rec.bicycles.soc
-
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving, rec.bicycles.soc
-
Organization: College of Engineering, Oregon State University
-
References: <3rk8v0$5gd@CUBoulder.Colorado.EDU> <3rkdg4$sud@park.rdcs.kodak.com> <3rq805$o78@gap.cco.caltech.edu> <3rs0h2$ik4@park.rdcs.kodak.com>
-
Xref: news.clark.net rec.autos.driving:71369 rec.bicycles.soc:19690
KP (batten@newsserver.rdcs.Kodak.COM) wrote:
: Wrong in many ways. If a fool comes blasting down the road and rams into you
: he stands every bit as much chance of being injured as he would if he hit
: a deer. Its not uncommon for them critters to come flying through the
: windshield.. BUT, there are other ways of suffering damage. EVEN if you are
Are you seriously complaining that bicyclists are endangering "a fool
[who] comes blasting down the road and rams into" them because they may
then come through the windshield and cause injury? Can you cite a
single incident of a motorist being injured in this way, or are you
just making this up?
: in the wrong (I know thats impossible because ONLY car drivers can be in the
: wrong.. right?) if the police blotter says the bicycle was completely at fault,
: all witnesses say the biker was at fault, the BICYCLST says he was at fault,
: guess who gets to pay the medical bills. Guess who stands the chance of getting
Okay, I'll guess - not the motorist. If you can cite a single instance
in which all interested parties and witnesses agree that the cyclist is
at fault, but the motorist is forced to pay the cyclist's medical
views, I will admit that my guess was wrong. Otherwise, I will claim
you are just setting up another straw-man argument.
: sued... guess who's insurance gets jacked up... and if the biker is killed...
Your insurance will also go up if you hit an automobile whose driver is
completely in the wrong.
: guess who not only suffers all the above but also stands the chance of loosing
: their license, or at a min. being harrassed by the state for several years
: and forced to take periodic driving tests for no reason.
Your opinion, then, is that being forced to take a driving test merely
for killing a cyclist constitutes harassment?
: I'm not saying this is gosple in all states, but.. from what I've been told,
: while a biker is to be treated like any other vehicle on the road, when they
: are in an accident they are treated as a pedistian. From personal experience
I don't know what a "pedistian" is. Do you mean "pedestrian"?
: I know what our state says about auto vs. pedistrian accidents, even when
: as stated above EVERY one says there was no way possible for the auto to avoid
: the accident and it was 100% the pedestrians fault. From the experience of
: my ex neighbors mother I know what the results are if the pedistrian in a
: situation like above is unfortunately killed.
Well, don't leave us in suspense. What does your state say? I assume
you mean, "as expressed in its laws", rather than "as expressed in the
general opinion of your friends". And what are the results of such an
accident?
: .. even if all car drivers became 100% good
: drivers who were totally respectful of the bikers, many of the bikers would
: still find something to complain about...
Try us.
========================
Ken Ferschweiler Internet: kennino@cs.orst.edu
Department of Computer Science
Oregon State University
Follow-Ups:
References: