Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bicyclists want you to call them "crashes" instead of "accidents" because they want you to believe that all accidents can be prevented by the government. If everyone believes that, then that creates a reason and puts pressure on the government to spend lots of money redesigning roads and doing other things the cyclist lobby wants. It also leads to programs like "Vision Zero." But, statistically, accidents are extremely rare, when you compare them to the billions of trips people make every day, which means they are by definition difficult to stop. Especially by a government that has enough trouble just figuring out how to get the streets plowed when it snows. We seem to recognize all this in other contexts. We don't have "Vision Zero" of no deaths by guys building skyscrapers and we don't change our terms to imply that every death by construction workers could have been prevented if only we tried harder.

You really shouldn’t try to write English if you can’t understand it.

Also, peddling the notion that fatal crashes are “rare” in the US - which appears to be a pursuit to which you have dedicated your existence - is sick.

Have a look at the actual statistics, why don’t you?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate

The US- rate is approximately triple those of most other developed countries and on a par with many developing countries with very poor road infrastructure and little in the way of traffic enforcement.

We stopped enforcing traffic laws to achieve equitable outcomes for all drivers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bicyclists want you to call them "crashes" instead of "accidents" because they want you to believe that all accidents can be prevented by the government. If everyone believes that, then that creates a reason and puts pressure on the government to spend lots of money redesigning roads and doing other things the cyclist lobby wants. It also leads to programs like "Vision Zero." But, statistically, accidents are extremely rare, when you compare them to the billions of trips people make every day, which means they are by definition difficult to stop. Especially by a government that has enough trouble just figuring out how to get the streets plowed when it snows. We seem to recognize all this in other contexts. We don't have "Vision Zero" of no deaths by guys building skyscrapers and we don't change our terms to imply that every death by construction workers could have been prevented if only we tried harder.

You really shouldn’t try to write English if you can’t understand it.

Also, peddling the notion that fatal crashes are “rare” in the US - which appears to be a pursuit to which you have dedicated your existence - is sick.

Have a look at the actual statistics, why don’t you?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate

The US- rate is approximately triple those of most other developed countries and on a par with many developing countries with very poor road infrastructure and little in the way of traffic enforcement.

We stopped enforcing traffic laws to achieve equitable outcomes for all drivers.

Anonymous wrote:Bicyclists want you to call them "crashes" instead of "accidents" because they want you to believe that all accidents can be prevented by the government. If everyone believes that, then that creates a reason and puts pressure on the government to spend lots of money redesigning roads and doing other things the cyclist lobby wants. It also leads to programs like "Vision Zero." But, statistically, accidents are extremely rare, when you compare them to the billions of trips people make every day, which means they are by definition difficult to stop. Especially by a government that has enough trouble just figuring out how to get the streets plowed when it snows. We seem to recognize all this in other contexts. We don't have "Vision Zero" of no deaths by guys building skyscrapers and we don't change our terms to imply that every death by construction workers could have been prevented if only we tried harder.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bicyclists want you to call them "crashes" instead of "accidents" because they want you to believe that all accidents can be prevented by the government. If everyone believes that, then that creates a reason and puts pressure on the government to spend lots of money redesigning roads and doing other things the cyclist lobby wants. It also leads to programs like "Vision Zero." But, statistically, accidents are extremely rare, when you compare them to the billions of trips people make every day, which means they are by definition difficult to stop. Especially by a government that has enough trouble just figuring out how to get the streets plowed when it snows. We seem to recognize all this in other contexts. We don't have "Vision Zero" of no deaths by guys building skyscrapers and we don't change our terms to imply that every death by construction workers could have been prevented if only we tried harder.

You really shouldn’t try to write English if you can’t understand it.

Also, peddling the notion that fatal crashes are “rare” in the US - which appears to be a pursuit to which you have dedicated your existence - is sick.

Have a look at the actual statistics, why don’t you?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate

The US- rate is approximately triple those of most other developed countries and on a par with many developing countries with very poor road infrastructure and little in the way of traffic enforcement.

Anonymous wrote:Bicyclists want you to call them "crashes" instead of "accidents" because they want you to believe that all accidents can be prevented by the government. If everyone believes that, then that creates a reason and puts pressure on the government to spend lots of money redesigning roads and doing other things the cyclist lobby wants. It also leads to programs like "Vision Zero." But, statistically, accidents are extremely rare, when you compare them to the billions of trips people make every day, which means they are by definition difficult to stop. Especially by a government that has enough trouble just figuring out how to get the streets plowed when it snows. We seem to recognize all this in other contexts. We don't have "Vision Zero" of no deaths by guys building skyscrapers and we don't change our terms to imply that every death by construction workers could have been prevented if only we tried harder.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not understand why he isn't charged for manslaughter. Of course this was not intentional, but it still led to a death. The driver needs legal consequences.

From the description of events, it isn't clear he ever saw them or knew he hit them.

So he just drove off and ditched his truck for funsies. Sounds very normal and not sociopathic, so par for the course for drivers in this area.

Perhaps the driver was an undocumented american, and feared they would be deported for what was basically an accident that was the fault of the cyclist. And it was. Cyclists shouldn’t go zooming past vehicles about to make a right turn on their right side. That’s like Bike-101. Stupid.


But if the driver feared being taken into ICE custody and separated from his family just because a cyclist did something dumb, I can totally understand and forgive them for leaving the scene. Someone else does something stupid and now YOU get deported? That’s BS.

Why jump to conclusions when you can manifest assumptions out of thin air.

Unless you were an eye witness to the crash (not an accident), you are an irresponsible nincompoop for peddling baseless rumors.

Although we get plenty of baseless assumptions about how everything is always the driver's fault. Also, we can please stop with this stupid crash/accident nomenclature bullshit? It's very tedious.

If you don’t understand the distinction between an accident and a crash and why most vehicular crashes aren’t accidents, I can only be sorry that you received such a poor quality education.

This is one of cyclists' many weird shibboleths. [/quote

Bicyclists want you to call them "crashes" instead of "accidents" because they want you to believe that all accidents can be prevented by the government. If everyone believes that, then that creates a reason and puts pressure on the government to spend lots of money redesigning roads and doing other things the cyclist lobby wants. It also leads to programs like "Vision Zero." But, statistically, accidents are extremely rare, when you compare them to the billions of trips people make every day, which means they are by definition difficult to stop. Especially by a government that has enough trouble just figuring out how to get the streets plowed when it snows. We seem to recognize all this in other contexts. We don't have "Vision Zero" of no deaths by guys building skyscrapers and we don't change our terms to imply that every death by construction workers could have been prevented if only we tried harder.