[Closed] Just be careful out there.

Yeah, obviously they [i]went looking[/i] for that [i]because[/i] they had a camera going...

(BTW, 2m40secs of dullness until the crash)

😯 2:38

Glad they are ok

WTF?!
Although did they really need to include the first 2.5 mins?

An offence as clear cut as that should result in a custodial and a lifetime driving ban.

Wow that was horrendous, especially in slow mo. I commute to work every day and it gives me the fear every time. I ride with extreme caution and allow plenty of space for driver stupidity but that video just goes to show you are not safe from total f*&K wits. Hope that driver gets a ban and a sentence.

I wonder how they traced the driver? Doesn't look like a good enough shot to get the license plate, but then I am watching it in thumbnail view.

An offence as clear cut as that should result in a custodial and a lifetime driving ban.

Why - because they crashed into bikes. It was a RTA, they happen lots, do you have any idea how many prisons we would need to build if everyone was imprisoned for crashing their vehicles?

It was a RTA

They're not RTAs, they're RTCs, and they happen because someone screwed up.

'Accident' doesn't mean someone didn't screw up. It means without intent.

Though that vid looks like it may have been with intent.

Advantages of wearing a helmet!

[img] http://www.rotorburn.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=233819&d=1335862952 [/img]

I wonder how they traced the driver?

Why - because they crashed into bikes. It was a RTA, they happen lots, do you have any idea how many prisons we would need to build if everyone was imprisoned for crashing their vehicles?

I never suggested that everyone should receive a custodial sentence for crashing their vehicles, accidents do happen but in this instance it looked far from accidental. They were on a fairly straight, wide road with good visibility, the cyclists were wearing bright clothing and riding in a very predictable way with plenty of room to pass and the car drove into them at an angle that looked very much like he targeted them.

So given that the car appeared to be used as a weapon I think a custodial sentence and a life time driving ban would be wholly appropriate in this instance.

News article...
[url= http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/04/tiny-bicycle-camera-helps-solve-hit-and-run/ ]http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/04/tiny-bicycle-camera-helps-solve-hit-and-run/[/url]

Whole hearted scaremongering. hate the spreading of this kind of video.

sure be careful out there, but all this video makes me do is question my hobbies and feel more nervous about road use.

unnecessary if you ask me.

Why - because they crashed into bikes. It was a RTA, they happen lots

Not only did he somehow manage to hit both of them, in broad daylight when they were in a well-marked separate cycle lane, but he then [u]fled the scene[/u].

1st is bad enough. 2nd is inexcusable. They could have been seriously injured and needing an ambulance.

As others said, his angle of "attack" suggests it might even have been deliberate, in which case it [i]should[/i] be assault, or even attempted murder.

[i]but all this video makes me do is question my hobbies and feel more nervous about road use.[/i]

Why? The driver was caught and will be punished, I don't think that will include being deported to the UK to re-offend.

maybe they shouldn't have been riding on the wrong side of the road! :p

Whole hearted scaremongering. hate the spreading of this kind of video.

From the article:

Police were able to slow the video down and enhance it enough to see the car’s license plate number, which investigators traced to 43-year-old Michael Medaglia.

Medaglia claims he wasn’t driving that day, and that the car had been stolen. Police say they aren’t buying his story, and arrested him for felony hit and run, along with several other charges, including [u]drug possession[/u] and violation of probation.

Sounds like he may have had reasons to be driving erratically and for not wanting to stop. 😯

i see the end of this conversation being 30 people saying 'well don't watch it then'

so i'll leave it there.

suffice to say watching crashes/incidents doesn't make me happy, regardless of the outcomes of legal proceedings.

Don't know what the fuss is about. Its only a couple of roadies.

Good to see the same old motorist nonsense is spouted in America too:

"Im sorry the bicyclist were hit. Glad they were not hurt. Lets face reality though. You don't pay dmv fees to ride on the street. You don't pay tax's to the state to maintain the street that you feel you have? more of a right to be on than the cars and trucks that DO pay the fee's. You fail to stop at lights or signs because you would then have to un-clip your toes and put your foot down. NO. Your above the laws that we as drivers must follow. You are not the victims. "
(YouTube comment)

[i]*sigh*[/i]

Personally I would say accident and, provided everyone was ok and any damage was remedied leave it at that. If I were the driver and the cyclist wanted to notify the authorities then so be it. Sometimes you cock up. I am pretty sure most of us on here have had accidents? Or been involved in similar.

However fleeing the scene jumps it to a whole different level for me. No longer an accident but a crime and if the powers that be accepted such things it would be a lot easier to prosecute. Minimum an assault, max well wherever you want it to be.

I can only assume that car drivers there are the same law abiding paragons of virtue that they are in this country 🙄

in this instance it looked far from accidental

Don't be quick to judge. I've seen people veering all over the place whilst changing CDs, eating sandwiches etc. Now that's not to excuse such behaviour, after all the results are the same, but there's a big step between being dangerously incompetent and malicious intent.

Don't be quick to judge. I've seen people veering all over the place whilst changing CDs, eating sandwiches etc.

GrahamS - Member
Good to see the same old motorist nonsense is spouted in America too:

Yeah, cheers for posting that. There's a reason I never read Youtube comments! You could've said it was that at the beginning!

Some people (pingu66) on here sound like Youtube commenters. 😐

Who else picked up on the helmet impact at 3:17!!

Fair enough if it was deliberate but we can't possibly tell from this footage whether it was. The driver could have instinctively swerved to avoid another object in the road, could have had a mechanical failure.

But I didn't listen to any audio (as I am in the office) so the driver may have incriminated themselves there though.

Yeah, cheers for posting that. There's a reason I never read Youtube comments!

[img] [/img]

Exactly! 😀

I initially missed the rear cyclist whacking his head sideways on the floor, which can admittedly result in bad injuries. For some reason I was more focusing on how the lead cyclist got the cars frame in his left buttock which must have left him with a right pain in arse for weeks.

Cyclists blasted through a stop line without stopping at the very beginning of the vid. One rule for one.....

Fair enough if it was deliberate but we can't possibly tell from this footage whether it was. The driver could have instinctively swerved to avoid another object in the road, could have had a mechanical failure.

There's not even a hint of steering added after the initial impact, takes a good few seconds. I'd suggest that seems like they've got distracted and only reacted after hitting the cyclist.

So, not an accident then? A driver decides to focus their attention on another activity rather than driving. That can't be anything other than deliberate. Driving safely requires full attention, surely?

While I appreciate the point you're making, doesn't quite work like that. I have numerous times soldered myself to a PCB because while soldering a very fine IC someone has walked into the room and taken my attention. Wasn't deliberate, we have inbuilt reflexes that take care of moving your attention to something else.

I'd suggest that seems like [s]they've got distracted[/s] they're out of their tree

Agreed otherwise though - deliberately doing something else whilst driving is not the same level of malice as deliberately running into someone. That's why we have manslaughter and murder as separate offences.

Agrees with this ^

Yep, so "be careful" of drugged up, distracted, American, CD changing, sandwich eating, mechanically failing, hit & run drivers.

Cyclists blasted through a stop line without stopping at the very beginning of the vid. One rule for one.....

I wondered who'd pick up on that 🙄

@1:15 - Legal, right turn on red, cycle lane to cycle lane, no?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_turn_on_red

@0:02 - okay they didn't fully stop, but they did slow right down. Hardly "blasting" through.

Didn't think it was worth commenting on personally (note: that is a comment on GrahamS's post)

You are supposed to STOP at red lights even if you are turning right. It's an implicit stop sign, not a give-way.

My brother lives in Michigan and he doesn't dare ride on the road; he reckons the chances of being taken out by a texting SUV driver are very high indeed. In Michigan state it's not illegal to text while driving.

I've heard quite a few people in the USA try and argue that cyclists should not be on the roads at all. Including my EX girlfriend...

But as anyone who's tried to do outdoor pursuits there knows, you are only allowed recreational activities in designated areas* and as long as it doesn't get in the way of the majority.

* except snowmobiling - in Wisconsin there is an extensive network of snowmobile trails all over the place, private land the lot. As soon as the snow melts though you are out of luck again. Bizarre if you ask me.

As an aside, I've never understood the "you don't pay taxes" argument.

Widespread "road tax" misconceptions aside, how many cyclists [i]also have cars?[/i] They're not mutually exclusive.

My brother lives in Michigan and he doesn't dare ride on the road; he reckons the chances of being taken out by a texting SUV driver are very high indeed. [b]In Michigan state it's not illegal to text while driving.[/b]

.
Yes it is.

Of course not to excuse the driving but if the cyclist had been using a mirror he would have seen the car coming and could have swerved right, hopped the kerb and avoided being hit.

I use a mirror on road and I've had to ride off the road to avoid being hit by a high speed vehicle. Only once in some 40-50'00 miles of cycling but I've also seen quite a few dangerously close overtakes coming and been able to move a couple of feet closer to the kerb to regain a comfortable passing distance.

f course not to excuse the driving but if the cyclist had been using a mirror he would have seen the car coming and could have swerved right, hopped the kerb and avoided being hit.

seriously???

This thread gets more bizarre by the minute!

Mirrors? to be honest I'd rather not know I'm about to be taken out

This thread gets more bizarre by the minute!

+1! With friends like these...

don simon - Member
Why do you see this as scaremongering?

Cycling is a relatively safe activity, some people who see videos like these may have their view swayed.

I'm not sure I see much point in these "isn't this outrageous" threads TBH beyond curiousity - the only positive out of this one is "take a video" - no way could those riders have avoided the crash. I bet the driver spaced out for whatever reason rather than intentionally rammed them.

Or it could be related to being an advertisement for using video cameras and shifting the power, after all the driver was traced, arrested and is awaiting court.
Perhaps we should ask the OP what his view is, eh?

I was thinking about this thread while riding in this morning. It struck me as utterly incomprehensible how, on a cycling website, there can be so many (even 1 is too many) suggestions that it was somehow the cyclists fault or even that they could have avoided it (with a f**in MIRROR). Even coffeeking's yeah, but they ran a stop sign, is baffling.
The only conclusion I could draw is that, like my first post, they were "joking" or being ironic in some way. Surely?

I presumed coffeeking was joking, and the others were trollign or idiots.

TBF tho I don't see why a cyclist should always be presumed "in the right", even on a bike forum.

Even if they've been ploughed into from behind??!

Even if they've been ploughed into from behind??!

[img] [/img]

You are supposed to STOP at red lights even if you are turning right. It's an implicit stop sign, not a give-way.

The two junctions in the video actually have explicit STOP signs, so yeah fair enough they [i]should[/i] have completely stopped, had a look, then carried on. But they didn't exactly blast through them.

if the cyclist had been using a mirror he would have seen the car coming and could have swerved right, hopped the kerb and avoided being hit.

😯 From the looks of the video they'd have had maybe one second to react, [u]if[/u] they happened to be looking in the mirror at the right time, and hopping up the kerb would have put them straight into a tree or metal sign.

TBF tho I don't see why a cyclist should always be presumed "in the right", even on a bike forum.

True, but likewise I don't see how any of their actions could be interpreted as "wrong".