ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Riding > The perfect line and other riding myths
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12-05-2011, 09:21 PM   #331
lemieuxmc
Banned
 
lemieuxmc's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Location: East La Jolla... it's just Clairemont!!
Oddometer: 3,360
Assert your right to the lane... yeah, great idea!

Damn scooter riders! I hate pulling around to make the pass... fuck em!

Caught this one last year on my way to the S.D. Mods vs Rockers ride.
Attached Images
 
lemieuxmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 07:02 AM   #332
Scurley
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Scurley's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Location: New Orleans
Oddometer: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by dolomoto View Post
"Taking the lane" is recommended by several organizations including the GA Governor and League of American Bicyclists.

RE pg 8 of the Georgia LE Pocket Guide:

RE League of American Bicyclists "Ride Better Tips"
Thanks for posting that. I've been telling people the same thing for years. The psychological affect that this practice has on drivers is HUGE. Sure, it seems more courteous to 'hug' the white line, but then you're stuck with peoples' passenger side mirrors buzzing your left shoulder. When, instead, you 'take the lane', it really drives the point home to passing drivers that they need to give you some room when they're passing.

For the record, you better be damned sure you're visible when practicing this technique.
__________________
Alex
2005 SV650S, 2006 Ninja 650R
Scurley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 09:21 AM   #333
LittleRedToyota
Yinzer
 
LittleRedToyota's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Location: Pittsburgh
Oddometer: 2,232
Bicycles on the trail

in a bit of a twist on this topic...

sunday we were out riding trails at one of our favorite local spots and came upon roughly 200 bicyclists dressed up in funny costumes with beer mugs strapped to their packs and kegs strategically located around the trails.

they were having what they call the "punk bike enduro". it was awesome. the trails were muddy as shit, and they were having a blast seeing who could make it the farthest through mud holes, racing down crazy hills, etc.

we all shared the trails and got along fine. we stopped and watched some of their craziness for awhile, and they gave me a good cheer when i wiped out on a hillclimb.

here's a video of them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRyqq5s7g20

thought some of you bicycle guys would enjoy it.

LittleRedToyota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 06:10 PM   #334
dolomoto
Destroyer of Motorcycles
 
dolomoto's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Location: Gen. Oglethorpe's 1733 folly
Oddometer: 2,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurley View Post
...snipped...

For the record, you better be damned sure you're visible when practicing this technique.
Magicshine lights.


__________________
Hot, Nasty, Bad-Ass Speed tours: 2008,2010,2014

Things I've ate/cooked.
dolomoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 06:16 PM   #335
dolomoto
Destroyer of Motorcycles
 
dolomoto's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Location: Gen. Oglethorpe's 1733 folly
Oddometer: 2,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurley View Post
Thanks for posting that. I've been telling people the same thing for years. The psychological affect that this practice has on drivers is HUGE. Sure, it seems more courteous to 'hug' the white line, but then you're stuck with peoples' passenger side mirrors buzzing your left shoulder. When, instead, you 'take the lane', it really drives the point home to passing drivers that they need to give you some room when they're passing.

For the record, you better be damned sure you're visible when practicing this technique.
And sometimes, the cyclists stays way to the right and gets creamed.

Michael Sprick is in a coma because of an inattentive driver.

Long cut and paste from someone who attended the hearing today:

In my opinion, today's hearing went well, probably as well as it could have. Norman Marchant was convicted of both offenses, driving on a suspended license and reckless driving. I couldn't hear the sentencing portion very well, but I believe he received a $100 fine (suspended) on the license charge (explanation below), and a 90-day jail sentence (suspended) and $500 fine on the reckless driving.

Judge Jacqueline F. Ward Talevi, Chief Judge of both Roanoke City and County General District courts, presided over today's cases as a substitute judge. As anticipated, Erin DeHart represented the Commonwealth, while Radford attorney James Turk represented Marchant.

VSP Trooper Troy Dalton testified first. He said that when he was dispatched to the scene on October 8, Marchant told him that he had been driving his truck--a Merita bread truck that some of the witnesses referred to as a panel truck--down a mountain on a stretch of Route 100 when he saw a cyclist in the right lane. He claimed at the time that he was going to steer or change into the left lane (I couldn't hear too well) but that a bluish car passed him on the left, then cut in front of him. He thought he was clear of the bike before impact, and also suggested, on the scene, that perhaps the bike had come toward him. He left the scene in pursuit of the blue car's license tag number but was unable to get close, so he turned around and returned to the scene of the crash. At the scene, Trooper Dalton asked Marchant whether he had seen the cyclist--could he say what color jersey he was wearing or whether he was wearing a helmet? Marchant could not provide any such details. Dalton discovered that Marchant's license had been suspended, and Marchant said that he was unaware of that. He thought he had taken care of a previous fine, upon which the suspension was based (more on that in Marchant's testimony below).

Two eyewitnesses, Kathy and Jerry Bennett, provided invaluable testimony about the crash. Kathy testified that she was the passenger in her husband's truck on that day, and they saw the panel truck and a cyclist ahead of them as they came out of a curve at the top of the mountain, onto a straight stretch. There were no other vehicles around. She said the bike was to the right side of the white line on the right of the road, and a short distance later, they saw bike debris in motion, while the panel truck continued on. They stopped at the scene of the crash. Jerry got out to aid the cyclist, while she got behind the wheel and proceeded down Rte. 100 to obtain the truck's license tag number. A short distance later, she saw a panel truck returning from the opposite direction, assumed it was the same truck, and returned to the scene herself. She again stated that there were no other vehicles around at this time. DeHart offered three photographs of the road in this area. Turk asked Kathy Bennett a number of question about distances, and where were you on the curve, and where were the truck and the cyclist; he seemed to be trying to intimate that perhaps her visibility wasn't clear. Though she was visibly nervous, she held her own.

Jerry Bennett testified that when the cyclist came into view after they crested the mountain, his wife pointed it out and instructed him to move into the left lane. He said, "The bicycle was where it should have been"--to the right of the white line, explaining that the cyclist's entire body was even outside the line. Jerry saw the impact, pulled over and stayed to assist, while his wife got back into the truck in pursuit of the panel truck's tag number. He stated that it wasn't long before the rescue squad arrived, maybe five to ten minutes. I believe he also answered questions using DeHart's photographs, though I'm not sure. The Commonwealth rested its case after his testimony.

Norman Marchant first explained the circumstances of his suspended license. The county where he lives (if he said which one, I didn't catch it) had discontinued its requirement for a county tag or sticker the previous year. However, while the program ended in December, the county had stopped issuing stickers in July. He was cited in the interim period, and was able to explain this to the judge at his hearing, where his case was dismissed. He said that he was unaware of having to pay court costs after the case was dismissed; apparently, the failure to pay these costs was what led to his license suspension, about which he said he received no notice and remained unaware until Trooper Dalton cited him on Saturday, October 8. He went to the courthouse to pay the court costs on Monday, October 10, but it was closed for the Columbus Day holiday. His dad took him there on Tuesday, he paid the costs, then went to the DMV to have his license reinstated.

As to the crash, he testifies that he travels this route for work daily. He said that his speed was 50 - 55 mph coming down the mountain, explaining later on cross examination that the company's trucks are governed to go no faster than 60 - 62 mph. Now, the acoustics in the courtroom were terrible, but I believe that his attorney asked him if he noticed the Bennett vehicle behind him, and his response was that after the impact, he saw them pull off. This seems to conflict with his later testimony. It's possible I heard wrong, but Michael Sprick's family had the foresight to have a court reporter transcribe the hearing, so there will be a record of this testimony for later use, in a civil case.

He testified that the bicycle had large bags on it, and the bike itself was a little to the left of the white line. He "went to get over," and a mid-size, bluish-grey car, maybe an Olds or Buick, sped up real fast, passing him in the lane to his left. He couldn't see the driver or any passengers, as his truck is higher than the car. Then there was "a bump." The car took off at a high rate of speed, and he pursued, trying to get its tag number. He realized that he could not, and so turned around in the crossover and returned to the crash scene. I didn't write notes about this, but I'm almost certain that at this point in the testimony, he denied having seen the Bennett's vehicle behind him, which would contradict his earlier statement. On further questioning about how far to the left he had moved to avoid the bicycle, he said that his left tires were on or to the left of the center line. Turk asked if he felt terrible about the accident. It sounded to me as though Marchant got choked up before answering, "Very much so." On cross examination, Marchant added that he might have hit his horn as the car was passing him, and that he was going to try to get in the left lane. When asked if he had slowed down, he answered, "Yeah, I felt I did."

In her summation, DeHart, among other points, argued that the cyclist should have been given all the respect of the other vehicle. Turk made a number of unseemly arguments, including that Marchant's actions did not rise to the level of a danger to life, limb or property warranting a reckless driving charge (really?!?!); that there was room for error in what the Bennetts saw; and that there was no other reason for Marchant to have driven on except in pursuit of the other vehicle's tag number. DeHart rebutted that last argument, pointing out (as best I could hear) that he might have been scared and thought to flee.

We were lucky to have Judge Talevi today. She was in a difficult position, but she proved herself a tough jurist. She began by telling the defendant, "No doubt this [the day of the crash] was one of the most difficult days of your life," and that she knows he is filled with regret. On the suspended license charge, some documents from his previous hearing were in evidence, including a form he had signed which showed that he was or should have been aware of the need to pay court costs. Yet she took into account that he acted immediately after October 8 to pay those costs and reinstate his license. She found him guilty on the charge and fined him $100, suspended due to his quick action.

As to the reckless driving charge, she began by saying this was a "very, very troubling case." After considering the testimony that Mr. Bennett saw the accident but Mrs. Bennett did not, the judge surmised that Mrs. Bennett would have seen another car had there been one. She accepted the Bennetts' testimony, and did not believe Marchant's account. She concluded that the cyclist was not in Marchant's lane of travel, and that Marchant operated his vehicle inappropriately, and adjudged him guilty of reckless driving.

At this point, the lawyers argued about what penalty should be imposed. DeHart brought up the critical impact the crash has had on Sprick. This was the first mention of the extent of his injuries. She asked the judge to consider a suspended judgment (not sure what that means) and that Marchant's license be suspended and a hefty fine imposed. Turk argued against all that. The judge said that had there been evidence that Marchant had swerved, she would impose a significant jail sentence. Given the evidence, however, she sentenced him to 90 days in jail, suspended, and imposed a $500 fine. She reviewed his driving record critically, she said, and found that he had 5 points against him already. I'm really confused about this, but she decided not to suspend his license. Would reckless driving on top of 5 points mean an automatic suspension? I didn't understand that decision.

In the hallway following the hearing, four of us who had attended (Jerry Ford from Blacksburg, Barbara Duerk from Roanoke, and Katy Miller and myself from Radford) spoke with Jerry and Kathy Bennett, Erin DeHart, and Trooper Dalton. The Bennetts were interested in finding out about Michael's condition and his family's plans. It was uplifting to listen to each of them share their accounts of how so many people--the Bennetts who stopped to help and bore testimony today, Trooper Dalton, who contacted the German consulate, Barbara, who hosted Michael's sister and has visited him in the hospital every single day--and people like Larry Blakey, who cut short his transcontinental bike trip to fly to Roanoke on his own dime, as well as Alinda Perrine, Bobby Guet and the staff of Free Spirit Adventures in Caldwell, WV, all came together to help Michael. I hope you don't mind my sharing my impression that these people, who put aside the demands of their ordinary lives to assist this stranger in need, make my heart feel good. Think of them, perhaps, should you lose hope in your fellow human creatures.

Finally, I believe that we should not vilify Norman Marchant. He seems to be remorseful for the consequences of his actions. And I don't think any good will come of thinking of him as an enemy, an "other." Was the sentence steep enough? Would any sentence be? Our judge today well understood the gravity of what she heard, and I have no doubt that she applied her best judgment in answer to it. I feel positive about today's hearing, as do at least two of the other audience members (I haven't compared notes with Jerry Ford).
__________________
Hot, Nasty, Bad-Ass Speed tours: 2008,2010,2014

Things I've ate/cooked.
dolomoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 06:49 PM   #336
bwalsh
Beastly Adventurer
 
bwalsh's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Location: Hell town
Oddometer: 10,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by dolomoto View Post
And sometimes, the cyclists stays way to the right and gets creamed.
~Snip~
So what I got from that is...
1: He lied about being cut off/the entire accident.
2: He was accusing the non existent blue car of hitting the cyclist.
3: He left the scene.
4: He felt remorseful and came back to see what happened. He was also in a company truck and they would surely notice damage the the truck and would have a hard time explaining the dents, scratches to his boss.
5: He felt bad about what happened.
6: He knew his license was suspended.
7: He got off with a slap on the wrist...
8: The F'n judge is a pansy(No offense Pansy!)

Then the person who wrote this ask's "Was the sentence steep enough?"
I ask...What sentence?

It's a F'ed up world when you can maim or kill someone in a motor vehicle and get off with a light/no jail sentence at all......
__________________
2004 XR650L / 2001 R1150GS
NWVA TAG NWVA TAG MAP RTE THREAD & IN LIST



bwalsh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 07:59 PM   #337
lemieuxmc
Banned
 
lemieuxmc's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Location: East La Jolla... it's just Clairemont!!
Oddometer: 3,360
+1000 for Bwalsh!

There was absolutely no downside to this A-hole for creaming the guy on the bicycle. There is no evidence that he hit him intentionally, JUST THAT HE WAS COMPLETELY OBLIVIOUS!

Do you think that this dumbass would have been sharp enough to notice a bicycle rider who had moved left in an attempt to "assert" his position as a lawful road user? Wanna bet your life on these kind of moron drivers paying attention? Ask a Highway Patrol Officer, Fire Fighter/Paramedic, or Tow Truck driver, how often someone slams right into their vehicle when it is on the shoulder with strobes flashing.

Truly, you should have known...
lemieuxmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 10:32 PM   #338
Onederer
Crunch Nugget
 
Onederer's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Location: Faith
Oddometer: 760
The same social inequalities that some people are currently protesting against are alive and well in all levels of American society, not just the chasm between rich and poor.

If someone at a public shooting range recklessly kills another shooter because they failed to properly handle their rifle/pistol, would they also only receive a small fine? Somehow I doubt it.

Automobiles are weapons, ram a police car with one or drive it into a business to rob it and it will be treated by the court as one, but run a pedestrian, bicyclist or motorcycle rider over and is not given the same consideration simply because one was more intentional than the other while the final outcome of situation could be the exact same; someone, other than the automobile driver, is dead. Whoops, my bad, I just killed the bread winner of a family of four and the leading scientist who was near a breakthrough for a cure to cancer, a double whammy for a family and the world, but I didn't see him, my bad.

Just venting, not trying to preach to the choir.

I've got a damn Erector Set wrist and ain't afraid to use it. Aaarrrrrghh, sigh.
__________________
When I reach retirement age, I hope to fit into one of the cliques here.
Onederer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2011, 07:13 AM   #339
bwalsh
Beastly Adventurer
 
bwalsh's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Location: Hell town
Oddometer: 10,936
My personal opinion is the guy
1: Was probably distracted, like talking of texting on a cell phone.
1: knew his license was suspended, with the supporting documents that were presented during the trial that he signed, he knew.
2: Left the scene because it was suspended and he thought he could get away with it.
3: Felt guilty for hitting the guy...or more likely knew he had been seen hitting the cyclist, hence his return to the scene.
I wonder if he is still driving for that company?

I read about hit and run accidents damn near every day. People take NO responsibility for any thing THEY do now days. Sad I tell ya...
__________________
2004 XR650L / 2001 R1150GS
NWVA TAG NWVA TAG MAP RTE THREAD & IN LIST



bwalsh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2011, 07:13 PM   #340
dolomoto
Destroyer of Motorcycles
 
dolomoto's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Location: Gen. Oglethorpe's 1733 folly
Oddometer: 2,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwalsh View Post
My personal opinion is the guy
1: Was probably distracted...
I read about hit and run accidents damn near every day. People take NO responsibility for any thing THEY do now days. Sad I tell ya...
Until we remove the excuse "I just did not see the rider"....justice will not be served. Whether it be a motorcycle or bicycle rider, it is still acceptable to plead "I did not see them". Most folks (cagers) can recollect moments when they were surprised at seeing a moto or bicycle in an unexpected place. IMO, we've let the cagers off the hook for too long.

We are out there...whether it be a motorcyclist, bicyclist or a Mom pushing a stroller. Cagers need to be held to a higher standard when they maim/kill/put in a coma a vulnerable road user.
__________________
Hot, Nasty, Bad-Ass Speed tours: 2008,2010,2014

Things I've ate/cooked.
dolomoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2011, 06:36 AM   #341
LuciferMutt
Rides slow bike slow
 
LuciferMutt's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Location: New(er) Mexico
Oddometer: 11,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurley View Post
Thanks for posting that. I've been telling people the same thing for years. The psychological affect that this practice has on drivers is HUGE. Sure, it seems more courteous to 'hug' the white line, but then you're stuck with peoples' passenger side mirrors buzzing your left shoulder. When, instead, you 'take the lane', it really drives the point home to passing drivers that they need to give you some room when they're passing.

For the record, you better be damned sure you're visible when practicing this technique.

I've known about this for years too...but there are some places where it just NOT SMART to do it.
__________________
You couldn't hear a dump truck driving through a nitro glycerin plant!

Badasses might screw with another badass. Nobody screws with a nut job. -- Plaka
LuciferMutt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2011, 07:03 AM   #342
rivercreep
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Location: S.E. Pennsylvania (Reading)
Oddometer: 3,243
What I hate the most...

...is that laws vary state to state in terms of what is legal in terms of traffic regulations.
In Pa. (for example) Bicyclists are required by law to operate their vehicles as far right as safely possible. Then I read where other states have different laws. W.T.F.?

I.M.H.O. Due to the fact that we live (speaking strictly for the US here) in a day and age where travel between States is so common place; wouldn't it make sense to make all regulations the same?
As things stand today, I think it's too easy for people to plead ignorance and get away with things.

Is there anyone here who actually takes the time to research what the traffic laws are for another State when they travel to it? If you don't and you screw up; is ignorance an acceptable excuse? (I don't think so F.W.I.W.).
rivercreep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2011, 08:12 AM   #343
bwalsh
Beastly Adventurer
 
bwalsh's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
Location: Hell town
Oddometer: 10,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivercreep View Post
wouldn't it make sense to make all regulations the same?
You just answered your own question as to why they are not all the same.
__________________
2004 XR650L / 2001 R1150GS
NWVA TAG NWVA TAG MAP RTE THREAD & IN LIST



bwalsh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2011, 12:26 PM   #344
BrandonR
Studly Adventurer
 
BrandonR's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Location: Oregon
Oddometer: 861
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivercreep View Post
...is that laws vary state to state in terms of what is legal in terms of traffic regulations.
In Pa. (for example) Bicyclists are required by law to operate their vehicles as far right as safely possible. Then I read where other states have different laws. W.T.F.?

I.M.H.O. Due to the fact that we live (speaking strictly for the US here) in a day and age where travel between States is so common place; wouldn't it make sense to make all regulations the same?
As things stand today, I think it's too easy for people to plead ignorance and get away with things.

Is there anyone here who actually takes the time to research what the traffic laws are for another State when they travel to it? If you don't and you screw up; is ignorance an acceptable excuse? (I don't think so F.W.I.W.).

Road laws are reserved for the states to make (State rights are integral to the design of the US system) , are you suggesting that we have federal traffic laws instead? Perhaps then we would need a Federal Police force to enforce them.
__________________
Brandon Reed
2009 Husqvarna TE610
BrandonR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2011, 12:32 PM   #345
IheartmyNx
Ihave2draft
 
IheartmyNx's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Nashville TN, no chit, police state.
Oddometer: 3,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrandonR View Post
Road laws are reserved for the states to make (State rights are integral to the design of the US system) , are you suggesting that we have federal traffic laws instead? Perhaps then we would need a Federal Police force to enforce them.
Hey I'm up for that! Then there'd be ONE set of laws to have to learn, and ONE group of "enforcers" to enforce them, rather than 3 or more separate departments.

City
Sheriff
State Trooper (Or, "Highway Patrol")
And DOT...
__________________
Everyday IS 3/11!
Everybody's always talking out the side of their mouths about our "dependency on foreign oil", what about our dependency on cheap china crap? Who exactly again is killing our dollar?
IheartmyNx is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
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 On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 01:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014