Cyclist killed after bike hits car door

[Oni-kun]

Cyclist killed after bike hits car door


May 23, 2008 12:10 PM
Precious Yutangco
Staff Reporter

The death of a Toronto cyclist, who was killed yesterday after his bike hit a car door that was being opened, is the type of tragedy that is becoming all too familiar on the city's streets, bicycle activists say.

Toronto police say that the 57-year-old man was heading east on his bicycle on Eglinton Ave. W. just west of Avenue Rd. yesterday afternoon around 1 p.m. when the driver of a parked Volvo started to get out of his car.

The cyclist hit the door and flew off his bike before landing on the roadway, where he was struck by an Ford cube van.

The man was taken to hospital where he died of his injuries.

Yvonne Bambrick, assistant coordinator for the Toronto Cyclist Union, said today that while bike accidents are not as frequent as car collisions, the reality is that mishaps with car doors put cyclists at great risk.

"You have to be aware that there are bikes on the road. You must look before you open your door onto the roadway," Bambrick said, adding that cyclists also have to take some responsibility.

"Be aware of the road users around you and act accordingly . . . you can't not pay attention when you're on a bike."

There have been 12 bicycle-related fatalities in Toronto since 2004, according to Toronto Traffic Services. In 2007, there were 1,163 motor-related bike collisions reported.

Although the investigation is still ongoing, Sgt. Tim Burrows, communications and media relations officer for Toronto Traffic Services, said that it was likely an accident and it does not look like charges will be laid.

Regardless, police are asking witnesses to call 416-808-1900 or Crime Stoppers anonymously at 416-222-TIPS (8477).

The family is asking for privacy and police have not released his name.

http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/429336


Sad that this still happens. Drivers, please check your side mirror before opening the door. A cyclist could get killed, smash you into your own door, or another car could come crashing through. And cyclists don't ride in the door zone if possible. If anybody ever sees me taking the whole lane instead of riding to the right of the lane this is why. I don't want to win any door prizes.

[sexpuppet6000]

The truth is motorist don't care about cyclist. I feel like people who are driving generally feel that roads should be strictly mean for automobiles. Also, I'd like to point out that North American drivers are offence drivers!

[Mattones]

thats sad. Never good to hear that happening.

[rosebud]

whether you drive a saab or a kona dew 2010, just be focking careful.

[MtX]

It's amazing how so many drivers DON'T check their blindspots.....

[Homer88]

Can't entirely blame the driver... the cyclist must be going pretty damn fast...

[Oni-kun]

Can't entirely blame the driver... the cyclist must be going pretty damn fast...

That doesn't matter. A CAR or TRUCK could have been going fast and the driver could have opened the door on them too. It is the drivers fault for not checking first. I can't believe the driver isn't being charged. I mean some fault was the cyclist for riding in the dreaded "door zone" but the driver should have looked regardless for anything that could have slammed into his door.

[chrza]

Can't entirely blame the driver... the cyclist must be going pretty damn fast...

Unless the cyclist was whipping around a corner, this is totally the driver's fault. You need to look out your rear view mirror before you step out of it.

Speed doesn't seem to have been mentioned as the issue. The guy died because he was doored and then fell on to the road way where he was struck by a cube van. Pretty brutal.

I can't even count how many times people have come close and VERY close to dooring me. You really need to focus much of your attention to parked cars when riding on a main street. There are way too many stupid drivers out there.

[king_george]

We used to call that winning the door prize..I won a couple myself over the years

First time I ever heard of someone dying from it. Too bad.:cry:

[Oni-kun]

Bet cha he wasn't wearing the helmet.

What can you charge the driver with? Even if you did it would be minor. There's a really slim chance you'd die from hitting the door if you're not going super fast and had a helmet.

Go put on a helmet and get run over by a cube van. If you survive, you win. Or lets see you win the door prize fly through the window of the the door and see how you like it. A helmet had nothing to do with it. If his torso was run over by a van and crushed up I don't see how an undamaged head would do you any good. Please use refrain from making stupid accusations and generalizations. And what is "super fast" why don't you go put on a helmet and ride slow, say 10KM/hr and i'll open the door of my car for you right as you approach the door for you to slam into. How is that?

And how about the driver be charged with negligence? It is not an accident, if he had looked it would not have happened

[Kasakato]

Bet cha he wasn't wearing the helmet.

What can you charge the driver with? Even if you did it would be minor. There's a really slim chance you'd die from hitting the door if you're not going super fast and had a helmet.

Have you ever hit a door at...lets say 15km/h? Its still going to hurt and will certainly knock you off your bike, possibly into traffic. 15km/h is a slow speed in standard traffic.

[fastlayne]

Not sure why the driver wouldn't be charged, especially in a case where a death is involved. I suppose if the bike was being ridden in the same lane as the car, then the biker could be at fault.

As per the Highway Traffic Act.

165. No person shall,

(a) open the door of a motor vehicle on a highway without first taking due precautions to ensure that his or her act will not interfere with the movement of or endanger any other person or vehicle; or

(b) leave a door of a motor vehicle on a highway open on the side of the vehicle available to moving traffic for a period of time longer than is necessary to load or unload passengers. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 165.

[almostfreeman]

The truth is motorist don't care about cyclist. I feel like people who are driving generally feel that roads should be strictly mean for automobiles. Also, I'd like to point out that North American drivers are offence drivers!

Most motorists in this country are downright hostile towards cyclists. Very sad and preventable death.

[Odysseus_Maximus]

Most motorists in this country are downright hostile towards cyclists. Very sad and preventable death.

+1

[jeeva86]

Man, there are so many stupid drivers out there. I don't get why people need to accelerate so fast when the signal 20 meters ahead is bright red. I think it's because these drivers think the car will be out of control if one doesn't either keep the brake or accelerator pressed.

[CheapScotsman]

I never drive close enough for a car door to hit me.

If the road isn't wide enough to accommodate me being outside the car door open zone and clearance beside autos ... It is safer to take the lane and block traffic behind that risk being hit by a car door opening or somebody squeezing you into a car.

[Oni-kun]

I just started cycling on the roads and there is a lot to pay attention to. You have to pay attention to vehicles in the other lanes that might suddenly swerve over. Cars turning right that might right hook you. Cars in opposing direction turning left and hooking you. It's just too much to be looking inside every car as well to make sure you don't get doored. That is why I almost never ride in the door zone. I just take the whole right lane the the people in cars can pass in the left lane. I don't ride on the street in sub-urbs though the traffic is too fast and people aren't used to seeing bikes so they go crazy.

[kurtblak]

Can't entirely blame the driver... the cyclist must be going pretty damn fast...


stupidest comment I've seen in a while coming from an RFD user named homer...well at least he advertises his dumbness.

[M@rk]

There are also a lot of stupid bikers out there that speed between cars even though they see someone with his signal ready to make a right turn.

[kurtblak]

There are also a lot of stupid bikers out there that speed between cars even though they see someone with his signal ready to make a right turn.

And there are a lot of drunk drivers that kill people.

Are all drivers like that?

Your logic is as strong as an expired tic tac.

http://www.ynetnews.com/PicServer2/20122005/852119/DSCF7592_a.jpg

[sxz]

I still never really understood the reasoning behind forcing bikes to use the roads vs. the sidewalk. Are you more likely to be involved in a fatal accident on sidewalks than roads or something?

[legendofxix]

I can see why some drivers dislike Cyclists on the road.
Its a lot easier for a cyclist to lose control and cause an accident than a car.
That being said, was the cyclist weaving between cars? If he was then that was a jackass move on his part.

[manixc]

I still never really understood the reasoning behind forcing bikes to use the roads vs. the sidewalk. Are you more likely to be involved in a fatal accident on sidewalks than roads or something?
Bikes can go pretty fast and I wouldn't want to be hit by one when walking on the sidewalk. That said, I strongly support bike lanes.

[jp06]

Bikes can go pretty fast and I wouldn't want to be hit by one when walking on the sidewalk. That said, I strongly support bike lanes.

are you talking about bike lanes on the ROAD or on the SIDEWALK (like on Lakeshore Blvd)? I would suggest the city make sidewalks wider to fit a bike lane rather than put a bike lane on the road. I'd say North American roads have wide lanes compared to other countries and yet many drivers still can't stay in their own lane which still puts bikers at a risk. I wonder how these ppl even passed their G2 test to begin with. Especially the stupid drivers in the LEFT TURN lane where their car is like 1 meter away from the center island and slightly sticking onto my lane when i'm trying to go straight. I have to avoid hitting them by going a little into the right lane. And these ppl are driving small cars like a civic/corolla. If ppl have that bad of a judgement of the space around them then they really should stick to public transit.

[iam_immigrant]

I got doored this past summer and I almost got hit by a car after I flew off my bike. The stupid focker just poped his door open, wasn't even looking as I saw him looking at his passenger. I know this because I always try to look into the side view mirror of parked cars to see if there's anyone in the car.

First thing the bag of douche says to me when he got out was "look what you did to my door!" Just thinking about makes my blood boil!

Anyways the cop that showed up, 2.5hrs later, said that he couldn't lay any kind of charge because I wasn't injured in the sense that there were no broken bones/limps...but if focked my wrist for about 2 months.

I used to ride on the sidewalk a lot unless I wanted to get anywhere fast or it was busy until I almost got a ticket from a bike cop. But if cyclists don't ride in the "door zone" or the sidewalk where else are they supposed to ride?? And bike lanes don't count because those are just marked "door zones".

[sockhead]

It goes both ways. The roads are meant for vehicles, drivers get peeved when cyclists take up their driving lanes, and even more so when thet decide NOT to respect the traffic signals. If you're going to use my lanes, respect the lights and the the stop signs. You can't have it both ways.

[AzN_RiverdaleCI]

omg tragedy, like the other day I was going home and I was going east on Queen st just past river going towards broadview on that bridge and the cars turning onto queen from king have a stop sign but a car went through it!

that mofo is lucky i didnt have my chain lock on me or else I would've owned his toyota tercel windshield, side windows and body at Broadview red light at jilly's.

lol, but srsly overall drivers are nice as long as you follow the rules of the road.

[Nikita]

It goes both ways. The roads are meant for vehicles, drivers get peeved when cyclists take up their driving lanes, and even more so when thet decide NOT to respect the traffic signals. If you're going to use my lanes, respect the lights and the the stop signs. You can't have it both ways.

Wrong...the roads are made for both cars and cyclists. It's the law to ride on the road. If you're driving a car, you should know this. It's people like you, who obviously don't know the rules of the road and who think you own the road who end up dooring cyclists...:rolleyes:

[Kasakato]

It goes both ways. The roads are meant for vehicles, drivers get peeved when cyclists take up their driving lanes, and even more so when thet decide NOT to respect the traffic signals. If you're going to use my lanes, respect the lights and the the stop signs. You can't have it both ways.
Find us the section in the HTA where it specifies that roads are only for vehicular use.

[ChrisBa]

it goes both ways, there are dumb/bad drivers and there are dumb/bad cyclists..

[sockhead]

Wrong...the roads are made for both cars and cyclists. It's the law to ride on the road. If you're driving a car, you should know this. It's people like you, who obviously don't know the rules of the road and who think you own the road who end up dooring cyclists...:rolleyes:

Oh sod off you self-righteous parrot. I never said anything about it being wrong to ride bikes on the road. I am fully aware that bikers are required to use the roads and not the sidewalks to get around. The guy who doored the cyclist is obviously at fault here, and I am not contesting that. All I am saying is that cyclists should understand where motorists are coming from - you occupy a full lane of road, you dart in between cars, you don't respect road signals like traffic lights and stop signs, you hide in peoples blind spots, are you really so surprised that motorists hate you? In Montreal where we live, the cyclist lobby has led to the creation of a full bike lane that goes parallel to the main streets in downtown Montreal, yet most bikers still choose to hang out on the main traffic arteries doing exactly what motorists hate about them.

[Mr._Hankey]

I can see why some drivers dislike Cyclists on the road.
Its a lot easier for a cyclist to lose control and cause an accident than a car.
That being said, was the cyclist weaving between cars? If he was then that was a jackass move on his part.

+1

Cyclists on the road are nothing but traffic hazard. I've lost count of the times I've been driving behind a slow moving vehicle in the left lane, tried to pass it using the right lane only to find a damn cyclist whom I couldn't even see in first place and almost hit him.
They're like parked cars in a no-parking lane.
IMO cyclists should be disallowed from using main roads (50+km/h) and use sidewalks instead. Otherwise it should be considered the municipality's responsibility and fault whenever accidents involving cyclists occur.

[sockhead]

Find us the section in the HTA where it specifies that roads are only for vehicular use.

You're right, it's not specified. As such, cyclists need to obey traffic laws and not cut people off, run red lights, and slow down. And if a cyclist dings a parked car (like I've seen hundreds of times), they need to be accoutable for their actions.

[f00kie]

I can see why some drivers dislike Cyclists on the road.
Its a lot easier for a cyclist to lose control and cause an accident than a car.

I don't drive downtown very often, but cyclists have always pissed me off (both as a driver and as a pedestrian); it seems a lot of cyclists pick and choose which rules they want to follow based on what's easier/faster for them.

I think drivers hate cyclists because it's another thing they have to watch out for, and it's a big one. Generally, you know the car in front of you will keep on going straight, signal lane change/turn, etc. And you know the lanes; no car will fit between two lanes. Cycling is different, however; you never know when to expect them. You have to be looking around at all times to see if there's a cyclists coming up on your right. You have to now be looking at both the sidewalk (as cyclists ride there) and the road.

Of course, the above is not what happened in this incident. I don't understand how you can open up the door like that, as there could be (and in this case, there was) a car coming in the lane next to you, in which case it'd hit your door.

[hi-tech]

I never quite understood why cyclists don't ride on the side walk or on bike paths.

[rosebud]

I never quite understood why cyclists don't ride on the side walk or on bike paths.

It's against the law to ride on sidewalks.

[Kasakato]

I never quite understood why cyclists don't ride on the side walk or on bike paths.

The answer: $110.

[Oni-kun]

I still never really understood the reasoning behind forcing bikes to use the roads vs. the sidewalk. Are you more likely to be involved in a fatal accident on sidewalks than roads or something?

I hate riding on the sidewalk, between dodging pedestrians, every crossing you come across you have to watch out for cars turning right, cars passing through, cars turning left etc.. like all the directions because you could get nailed easily. It is more dangerous riding on the sidewalk then the road. Well except for sub-urbs where people drive like idiots.

[Oni-kun]

I got doored this past summer and I almost got hit by a car after I flew off my bike. The stupid focker just poped his door open, wasn't even looking as I saw him looking at his passenger. I know this because I always try to look into the side view mirror of parked cars to see if there's anyone in the car.

First thing the bag of douche says to me when he got out was "look what you did to my door!" Just thinking about makes my blood boil!

Anyways the cop that showed up, 2.5hrs later, said that he couldn't lay any kind of charge because I wasn't injured in the sense that there were no broken bones/limps...but if focked my wrist for about 2 months.

I used to ride on the sidewalk a lot unless I wanted to get anywhere fast or it was busy until I almost got a ticket from a bike cop. But if cyclists don't ride in the "door zone" or the sidewalk where else are they supposed to ride?? And bike lanes don't count because those are just marked "door zones".

Take the whole lane buddy, I do it sometimes. Just ride smack dab right in the middle of the right lane.

[Oni-kun]

Oh and a bicycle is a vehicle. So thats why it must use the road. You guys are arguing over nothing.

[Oni-kun]

+1

Cyclists on the road are nothing but traffic hazard. I've lost count of the times I've been driving behind a slow moving vehicle in the left lane, tried to pass it using the right lane only to find a damn cyclist whom I couldn't even see in first place and almost hit him.
They're like parked cars in a no-parking lane.
IMO cyclists should be disallowed from using main roads (50+km/h) and use sidewalks instead. Otherwise it should be considered the municipality's responsibility and fault whenever accidents involving cyclists occur.

That is your fault buddy for not seeing him. It could easily have been a pedestrian jay walking or something similiar in size like a motorcycle/vespa and you'd still be at fault. How about you work on your general awareness of your surroundings instead of putting blame. And you are NOT supposed to PASS on the RIGHT lane buddy. Left lane is for passing.

[gamer123]

I hate riding on the sidewalk, between dodging pedestrians, every crossing you come across you have to watch out for cars turning right, cars passing through, cars turning left etc.. like all the directions because you could get nailed easily. It is more dangerous riding on the sidewalk then the road. Well except for sub-urbs where people drive like idiots.

Don't you still have to watch out for those when you ride on the roads? Seriously imho biking on the roads adds nothing but danger to both cyclists and drivers. If bikers are on sidewalks, they'll be crossing streets like pedestrians do, nice and safe.

Take the whole lane buddy, I do it sometimes. Just ride smack dab right in the middle of the right lane.

Yup and you'll be going what, 25km/h on a 60km/h street? Though 60 is the max, going at 25 not only slows down the entire traffic but also cost danger to other drivers as they have to cut and pass you.

Oh and a bicycle is a vehicle. So thats why it must use the road. You guys are arguing over nothing.

It's because the law says so. Don't know what you all think, but imho law isn't perfect.

[jadoocian]

Really sad to see a cyclist go cuz of this. Yesterday I was on my motor cycle, a bicycle ahead of me. All of a sudden a car starts pulling right, into our lane. I guess she wanted to park. Almost hits the bicyclist and he had to swerve. I saw the whole thing and gave her a nice horn to tell her needed to check her blind spot and be more careful. Then I pulled up to her window, and told her she needs to watch for bicycles and motorcycles and should really check her blind spot. She said "thank you"...whatever that means.

I cringe everytime I see someones life put at risk due to some ****** not paying attention.

[Oni-kun]

Don't you still have to watch out for those when you ride on the roads? Seriously imho biking on the roads adds nothing but danger to both cyclists and drivers. If bikers are on sidewalks, they'll be crossing streets like pedestrians do, nice and safe.



Yup and you'll be going what, 25km/h on a 60km/h street? Though 60 is the max, going at 25 not only slows down the entire traffic but also cost danger to other drivers as they have to cut and pass you.



It's because the law says so. Don't know what you all think, but imho law isn't perfect.

Yes you still have to watch out for those on the road but people expect fast moving objects on the road they don't expect fast moving objects on the sidewalk where there are pedestrians. When a car is turning right they are looking for pedestrians not bikes. Everytime you cross one of those sidewalks whre cars are pulling out of plaza's you risk getting hit by a car edging up to the side of the road waiting to turn.

And I guess I probrably average 25km/hr depends on uphill/downhill etc.. I am not on a road bike so i'm not as fast. Of course use your own judgement. On a single lane road I would not take the whole lane. If traffic is rather light on a two lane road there is no danger taking the whole left lane as motorists will safely pass on the left. If traffic is really dense and moving slowly, say downtown, cars aren't going to be going much faster than 25-30 anyway. If the traffic is moving quickly and very dense maybe you should re-evaluate the route you're taking. It's always a judgement call. I'm not saying always take up the whole lane. If its really bad get off and walk your bike on the sidewalk.

What I meant by the last point was people here were arguing that the road is only for vehicles and others were saying where else would you put the bicycles etc.. But I was just pointing out that in the HTA a bicycle is considered a vehicle so is designated to be on the road.

[gamer123]

Yes you still have to watch out for those on the road but people expect fast moving objects on the road they don't expect fast moving objects on the sidewalk where there are pedestrians. When a car is turning right they are looking for pedestrians not bikes. Everytime you cross one of those sidewalks whre cars are pulling out of plaza's you risk getting hit by a car edging up to the side of the road waiting to turn.

And I guess I probrably average 25km/hr depends on uphill/downhill etc.. I am not on a road bike so i'm not as fast. Of course use your own judgement. On a single lane road I would not take the whole lane. If traffic is rather light on a two lane road there is no danger taking the whole left lane as motorists will safely pass on the left. If traffic is really dense and moving slowly, say downtown, cars aren't going to be going much faster than 25-30 anyway. If the traffic is moving quickly and very dense maybe you should re-evaluate the route you're taking. It's always a judgement call. I'm not saying always take up the whole lane. If its really bad get off and walk your bike on the sidewalk.

What I meant by the last point was people here were arguing that the road is only for vehicles and others were saying where else would you put the bicycles etc.. But I was just pointing out that in the HTA a bicycle is considered a vehicle so is designated to be on the road.

I am not sure how HTA define vehicle such that a bicycle is designated, and more importantly safe, to be on the road. Anything that has wheels? A square is a rectangle but a rectangle isn't and can never be a square.

Going by HTA, a bike = a vehicle = any car on the road. So it must occupy one full lane always, because a bike + a car on the same lane (even right lane) is illegal, which also applies with motorcycles. When a car/motorcycle is going much slower than the legal traffic flow, it would be honked and ticketed. This should be the same for bicycles, since a bike = a vehicle = any car on the road, by HTA. As for downtown areas where traffic is slower, I can only imagine it's just as dangerous due to the density.

[Oni-kun]

I am not sure how HTA define vehicle such that a bicycle is designated, and more importantly safe, to be on the road. Anything that has wheels? A square is a rectangle but a rectangle isn't and can never be a square.

Going by HTA, a bike = a vehicle = any car on the road. So it must occupy one full lane always, because a bike + a car on the same lane (even right lane) is illegal, which also applies with motorcycles. When a car/motorcycle is going much slower than the legal traffic flow, it would be honked and ticketed. This should be the same for bicycles, since a bike = a vehicle = any car on the road, by HTA. As for downtown areas where traffic is slower, I can only imagine it's just as dangerous due to the density.

That is true. But downtown people are more used to seeing cyclists then uptown. They are more aware that they are there. I myself always wear clothing that makes moe more visible (high contrast colours, yellow, orange, red) and reflective bands.

[champlinD]

I am not sure how HTA define vehicle such that a bicycle is designated, and more importantly safe, to be on the road. Anything that has wheels? A square is a rectangle but a rectangle isn't and can never be a square.

Going by HTA, a bike = a vehicle = any car on the road. So it must occupy one full lane always, because a bike + a car on the same lane (even right lane) is illegal, which also applies with motorcycles. When a car/motorcycle is going much slower than the legal traffic flow, it would be honked and ticketed. This should be the same for bicycles, since a bike = a vehicle = any car on the road, by HTA. As for downtown areas where traffic is slower, I can only imagine it's just as dangerous due to the density.

Wow. A square is a rectangle but a rectangle isn't and can never be a square.
bike = a vehicle = any car on the road, by HTA

And I say WTF? a test?

If its a bike = a vehicle = any car on the road,
then is it allowed on 400 series highways?

*******************************************
Vehicles that CAN operate on roads:

* Limited-Speed Motorcycles
* Motor-Assisted Bicycles
* Motor Tricycles
* Bicycles
* Power-Assisted/Electric Bicycles
* Personal Mobility Devices
* Low-Speed Vehicles
* SegwayTM Human Transporter /
Personal Transporter

Vehicles that CANNOT operate on roads:

* Pocket Bikes
* Electric and Motorized Scooters

[gamer123]

If its a bike = a vehicle = any car on the road,
then is it allowed on 400 series highways?

Um that's what I am trying to say, a bicycle shouldn't be defined as a vehicle to be on the roads.

[Mr._Hankey]

That is your fault buddy for not seeing him. It could easily have been a pedestrian jay walking or something similiar in size like a motorcycle/vespa and you'd still be at fault. How about you work on your general awareness of your surroundings instead of putting blame. And you are NOT supposed to PASS on the RIGHT lane buddy. Left lane is for passing.

I am not supposed to go 40 behind an old granny in a 60 zone either but some of us still have places to get to.

[Oni-kun]

I am not supposed to go 40 behind an old granny in a 60 zone either but some of us still have places to get to.

Right and that justifies not checking your blind spot carefully and killing somebody because you have "places to get to"

[Mr._Hankey]

Right and that justifies not checking your blind spot carefully and killing somebody because you have "places to get to"

Do you understand my comparison of cyclists to illegally parked cars?
Think of the following scenario. You're following a slow moving truck in the left lane and want to switch to the right but once you do, you notice a cyclist just ahead of you whom there was no way you could see because the truck was obstructing your front view of the right lane. His life then depends on how quickly you manage to slam your breaks before hitting him. Those cases are pretty redundant in north york.

[Oni-kun]

Do you understand my comparison of cyclists to illegally parked cars?
Think of the following scenario. You're following a slow moving truck in the left lane and want to switch to the right but once you do, you notice a cyclist just ahead of you whom there was no way you could see because the truck was obstructing your front view of the right lane. His life then depends on how quickly you manage to slam your breaks before hitting him. Those cases are pretty redundant in north york.

When switching lanes why are you going so fast that if ANYTHING was obstructed by the truck you would hit it? The cyclist could easily be another car or a motorcycle obstructed by the truck. How about you drive responsiblity and at a reasonable speed where you don't commit to a lane change at such a speed that if there was either a car, cyclist, motorcycle, pedestrian, or anything else that you could not stop. Why would you commit to a lane change when you can't see if its safe? I sure hope you don't commit to left hand turns when you "got somewhere to be" and the view of oncoming traffic is obstructed by a truck. Whether you like it or not it is perfectly legal for a cyclist to be on the road. The road is to be shared and not only for cars. If you don't like it TOO BAD, deal with it. Also, riding on the road in North York is actually more dangerous than downtown because traffic doesn't flow as fast downtown and people are looking out for cyclists. Also a cyclist is easily rolling along at 15-20KM/hr without too much effort. You're not asked to stop on a dime. Your example is poor because it could be any other object in the same spot and under your example you would hit them as well.

[manixc]

Do you understand my comparison of cyclists to illegally parked cars?
Think of the following scenario. You're following a slow moving truck in the left lane and want to switch to the right but once you do, you notice a cyclist just ahead of you whom there was no way you could see because the truck was obstructing your front view of the right lane. His life then depends on how quickly you manage to slam your breaks before hitting him. Those cases are pretty redundant in north york.
The only reason why you can't see the bike is because you are following the truck too closely (which is something you shouldn't be doing anyway).

[Kasakato]

I am not sure how HTA define vehicle such that a bicycle is designated, and more importantly safe, to be on the road. Anything that has wheels? A square is a rectangle but a rectangle isn't and can never be a square.

Going by HTA, a bike = a vehicle = any car on the road. So it must occupy one full lane always, because a bike + a car on the same lane (even right lane) is illegal, which also applies with motorcycles. When a car/motorcycle is going much slower than the legal traffic flow, it would be honked and ticketed. This should be the same for bicycles, since a bike = a vehicle = any car on the road, by HTA. As for downtown areas where traffic is slower, I can only imagine it's just as dangerous due to the density.
When did we start putting equations into the HTA? Basic logic seems to show that the HTA would list approved vehicles, or perhaps Im just crazy.

[ephemera]

I doubt it was the drivers fault and he shouldn't be charged. The Cyclist shouldn't be that close to parked cars. Maybe its time we have licenses for cyclists.

[Oni-kun]

I doubt it was the drivers fault and he shouldn't be charged. The Cyclist shouldn't be that close to parked cars. Maybe its time we have licenses for cyclists.

The HTA states something along the lines of you should ride as to the right as reasonably safe to do so. You don't even have to ride 'that close' some doors extend around 1.5m outwards like halfway into a lane.

[iam_immigrant]

Take the whole lane buddy, I do it sometimes. Just ride smack dab right in the middle of the right lane.

And incur the wrath of downtown road rage...no thanks. Even when driving in my car it freaks me out.

I am not sure how HTA define vehicle such that a bicycle is designated, and more importantly safe, to be on the road. Anything that has wheels? A square is a rectangle but a rectangle isn't and can never be a square.

Going by HTA, a bike = a vehicle = any car on the road. So it must occupy one full lane always, because a bike + a car on the same lane (even right lane) is illegal, which also applies with motorcycles. When a car/motorcycle is going much slower than the legal traffic flow, it would be honked and ticketed. This should be the same for bicycles, since a bike = a vehicle = any car on the road, by HTA. As for downtown areas where traffic is slower, I can only imagine it's just as dangerous due to the density.

I remember something about tire size of the bike. If it's bigger than a certain size then you have to ride on the road...that's why kids don't have to ride on the road...IIRC

I doubt it was the drivers fault and he shouldn't be charged. The Cyclist shouldn't be that close to parked cars. Maybe its time we have licenses for cyclists.


On a two lane road where 1 lane is used for parking do you know how much space is left before you start getting into the "traffic" lane?? Especially with the terrible lane descipline I've seen.
Without knowing if the cyclist was weaving in and out of traffic, and it doesn't sound like he was because if he was traffic would be moving much slower and the cube van would have been able to stop in time, it's completely the driver's fault for not checking his mirrors before opening the door. I've seen this happen so many times I've lost count. That's why I always try to check the mirrors of parked cars for people getting out.

[BlueMax]

+1

Cyclists on the road are nothing but traffic hazard. I've lost count of the times I've been driving behind a slow moving vehicle in the left lane, tried to pass it using the right lane only to find a damn cyclist whom I couldn't even see in first place and almost hit him.

Congratulations! You've admitted to being a BAD DRIVER! Enjoy your ticket.

[Dustbunny]

I am not supposed to go 40 behind an old granny in a 60 zone either but some of us still have places to get to.

??? Yeah, you are. It doesn't matter where you think you have to get to. You don't get to pass until it's safe to do so even it that means going slow for a very long time.

Think of the following scenario. You're following a slow moving truck in the left lane and want to switch to the right but once you do, you notice a cyclist just ahead of you whom there was no way you could see because the truck was obstructing your front view of the right lane. His life then depends on how quickly you manage to slam your breaks before hitting him.

Someone needs to take their driver's test again. Apparently you aren't really up on the rules of the road as there should be no way that scenario ever happens to people who know what they are doing.

[IronMac]

Think of the following scenario. You're following a slow moving truck in the left lane and want to switch to the right but once you do, you notice a cyclist just ahead of you whom there was no way you could see because the truck was obstructing your front view of the right lane. His life then depends on how quickly you manage to slam your breaks before hitting him. Those cases are pretty redundant in north york.

This is one crazy-@$$ example! LOL!

Man, you'd have to be driving really really close to the truck. Illegally close.

Including passing on the right...all I can is that we're all safer when you're here posting on RFD than on the road.

[IronMac]

Look, the law states that the cyclist rides as close to the right hand side of the lane as possible when it is safe to do so. If the cyclist has to take the whole lane then they take the whole lane.

Any driver who thinks differently should have their license revoked.

[perplexed_one]

one solution that seems viable and increasing relevant (in light of higher fuel prices, shrinking oil reserves and environmental concern) are more bike-only lanes.

cyclists are treated like sh1t on the road and aren't allowed to go on the sidewalk. do as europe and asia does, make big cyclist lanes.

of course this won't go ahead until city hall deems the cyclist population high enough for funding entire exclusive lanes on the road. Of course these lanes would go on high traffic roads.

[IronMac]

I don't want to go way off-topic here but I really don't believe bike lanes are the answer. As far as I'm concerned, the best way to handle this is to crack down on everyone, driver and cyclist, who do not obey the rules of the road. Force everyone to share the road civilly and responsibly and back it up with rigorous enforcement and draconian penalties.

It's being done with "street racing" and I'm positive it can be done with sharing the road.

[wilson_wu]

Seriously imho biking on the roads adds nothing but danger to both cyclists and drivers. If bikers are on sidewalks, they'll be crossing streets like pedestrians do, nice and safe.

That's if bikes travel at 5km/h, then it'll be safe for them on the sidewalk. But unlike recreational bikers, people downtown use their bikes as their main source of transportation to get to work or school.

It's especially dangerous to bike on downtown sidewalks because of all the storefronts, a pedestrian could pop up anywhere coming out of the stores.

[wikkid_bigshot]

I dont know why pro-motorist and pro-cyclist are fighting amongst each other when the problem lies within the government.

They created roads that are clearly non-bicycle friendly and yet force everyone to share the lane. Other countries that promote bicycle use on the road have bicycle lane. These kind of tragedies can clearly be avoided if there is a bicycle lane on the road.

[rogeryen]

Even though it's against the law to ride on sidewalks, I'd still prefer sidewalks because I just don't believe the road is that safe for me to ride on. Even in Waterloo people when I ride on bicycle lane, I see people drive so damn close to me when they pass me all the time, and all it takes is one hit for me to get run over. The chance of a cyclist dying from getting hit by a car is probably much much larger than that of a pedestrian getting hit by bicycle.

People riding at the speed of the traffic is another story, as I'm not one of them.

[predator]

what's sad is I almost saw a similar accident happen yesterday. Not only that but the woman in the vehicle was quite oblivious to what happened as she was looking into her car while opening the door. My condolences to the cyclists family.

As a cyclist I recognize the inherent danger of car doors and always look out for occupied cars or cars with a chance of a door being opened but mistakes can happen and a lapse of judgment while looking at the left for example to merge temporarily into traffic could happen. I think all cyclists and motorists should be aware of their environment to prevent this tragedy from happening again.

[edgedamage]

Do you understand my comparison of cyclists to illegally parked cars?
Think of the following scenario. You're following a slow moving truck in the left lane and want to switch to the right but once you do, you notice a cyclist just ahead of you whom there was no way you could see because the truck was obstructing your front view of the right lane. His life then depends on how quickly you manage to slam your breaks before hitting him. Those cases are pretty redundant in north york.
Wow you don't get it do you. Do us a favor take off your dumb ass new era cap,
park your fart can ricer car and let the responsible drivers use the road. "DUHHHHHHHHHHH I hate it when I follow too close to a truck and almost kill someone when I pass on the right."

[BlueMax]

Wow you don't get it do you. Do us a favor take off your dumb ass new era cap,
park your fart can ricer car and let the responsible drivers use the road. "DUHHHHHHHHHHH I hate it when I follow too close to a truck and almost kill someone when I pass on the right."

ZING! :D

[mlc2000]

Interesting note: no one has even brought up the fact that all vehicles travelling on a roadway EXCEPT BICYCLES
require an illuminated front headlamp.

A bike is easy to blend into the background scenery, within the viewability of a side view mirror.
I suspect that if cyclists were required to use a front headlamp, day and night, just like cars, motorbikes and scooters,
they would stand a better chance of being seen.

I can't wait to hear the reasons why a cyclist shouldn't require a headlamp.

[Oni-kun]

Interesting note: no one has even brought up the fact that all vehicles travelling on a roadway EXCEPT BICYCLES
require an illuminated front headlamp.

A bike is easy to blend into the background scenery, within the viewability of a side view mirror.
I suspect that if cyclists were required to use a front headlamp, day and night, just like cars, motorbikes and scooters,
they would stand a better chance of being seen.

I can't wait to hear the reasons why a cyclist shouldn't require a headlamp.

At night, dusk, and dawn you are required to have head and tail lights. Many different ones can be purchased at various bike stores and outdoor equipment stores such as MEC.

And in the daytime if I'm wearing a bright yellow or orange reflective jersey and you don't see me I don't know what else we could do to increase visibility.

[Emancipated]

slap schtick pain or what-have-yous are only funny in movies where it's choreographed! Driving is very revealing of a person's intellect; the worse the driver, the dumber they are in every day tasks. That said, dumb people also have a right to test for a license but if you're a crappy driver, you need to be branded as one; if not for your own goodness sake, then for others on the road you have to share it with. I'm talking about appropriate labels. You're a noob, you wear a noob label.

[almostfreeman]

Interesting note: no one has even brought up the fact that all vehicles travelling on a roadway EXCEPT BICYCLES
require an illuminated front headlamp.

A bike is easy to blend into the background scenery, within the viewability of a side view mirror.
I suspect that if cyclists were required to use a front headlamp, day and night, just like cars, motorbikes and scooters,
they would stand a better chance of being seen.

I can't wait to hear the reasons why a cyclist shouldn't require a headlamp.

A little off topic but ...

Headlights are required from dusk to dawn on bicycles. During the day they aren't bright enough to really make a rider more visible as bicycle lights are powered by low wattage lights. Lasers might makes bike riders more visible but then motorists would be complaining that they are getting "blinded by the light."

[Oni-kun]

Update

Charges sought after car door death

'Penalty should reflect severity' of incident
May 25, 2008 04:30 AM
Laura Stone
Staff Reporter



Drivers who strike someone or something when opening their vehicle doors into traffic should be charged, says Yvonne Bambrick, assistant co-ordinator at the Toronto Cyclists Union.

"It's your vehicle, you should be responsible," Bambrick said.

Bambrick's comments were made with regard to the death of a 57-year-old cyclist on Thursday. The man, who had not been identified, died after he ran into an open car door and was hit by a cube van after he fell onto the road at Eglinton Ave. W., around 1 p.m.

"One must be held responsible for their actions. I don't know the specifics of this case, but I know the penalty should reflect the severity of what happened," she said.

"There needs to be some kind of repercussion when their action affects others the way hers did," she said, referring to the driver who opened the door of her parked car into the path of the cyclist – an action called dooring.

Staff Sgt. Andy Norrie, of Toronto Traffic Services, said no charges have been laid in Thursday's incident, but police were investigating.

He said it's possible the driver could be charged under Section 165 of the Highway Traffic Act which requires motorists to take "due precautions," so as not to endanger any other person or vehicle.

"If this investigation determines that that offence has occurred, then the appropriate charge will be laid," Norrie said.

There is also the possibility of a fine, ranging from $115 to $500.

Bambrick, who also plans Pedestrian Sundays in Kensington Market, said she doesn't think a fine is a strong enough penalty in this case.

Next Thursday, the Advocacy for Respect for Cyclists plans to organize a cycling memorial ride for the man, starting at 9 a.m. at Bloor St. W. and Spadina Ave.


http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/429709

[7Stryder7]

There is also the possibility of a fine, ranging from $115 to $500.

Bambrick, who also plans Pedestrian Sundays in Kensington Market, said she doesn't think a fine is a strong enough penalty in this case.


Based on my understanding of this situation, the Fifty-Seven year old bicyclist's life is worth somewhere between $115-$500?!?!? I hope there are additional penalities more severe than this simple fine.

[mlc2000]

At night, dusk, and dawn you are required to have head and tail lights. Many different ones can be purchased at various bike stores and outdoor equipment stores such as MEC.

And in the daytime if I'm wearing a bright yellow or orange reflective jersey and you don't see me I don't know what else we could do to increase visibility.

So a scooter or a motorcyclist could just wear a reflective jersey?

A head light at all times of the day or night is what will help.

I habe a headlight for my bike, cost me about $200 and its exceptionally bright.

[almostfreeman]

So a scooter or a motorcyclist could just wear a reflective jersey?

A head light at all times of the day or night is what will help.

I habe a headlight for my bike, cost me about $200 and its exceptionally bright.

You paid $200 for a bicycle light ? :confused:

As motor vehicles travel at a far greater speed and are allowed to travel on 400 series highways it is probably a good idea to be as visible as possible when traveling at highway speeds. During the day a reasonably attentive driver traveling at the speed limit should have no problem being able to see a bicyclist.

I would have no problem turning on my bike light during the day if it were mandatory but realistically I don't think it would have any impact on being more visible. I think some other suggestions like expanding bike lanes in cities would have a more profound impact on bicycle safety.

[dealguy2]

The route I take to and from work is on pretty busy, slow urban streets and I usually can go a lot faster than the car traffic so I just ride in the lane. The thing that drives me nuts is even though I'm staying one car length from the car in front people behind still honk like I'm holding them up.

I've seen all kinds of ******** things since I started biking to work. There's so many stupid drivers out there it's astonishing. You have to be able to predict what each of these idiots is going to do. I can usually tell what they're just about to do.

[johnboy]

That's terrible news.

I almost got doored many times and try to ride on the sidewalk as much as possible. I don't care about the by laws. More often than once, someone just parked on the side street and opened their door right away. I swerved a bit in anticipation. Of course, the driver was oblivious BUT had to swing the door wide open. WTF.

I always check my door before opening.

Riding on sidewalks can be dangerous too. Especially when coming up to a side road intersection where hedges and tall fences are blocking my view. When driving a car up to those, I try to look out for bikers that ride on the side walk. Some cases, I forget to stop behind the sidewalk first. A bike could t-bone me. But I would be more concered with the biker...

[mlc2000]

You paid $200 for a bicycle light ? :confused:

As motor vehicles travel at a far greater speed and are allowed to travel on 400 series highways it is probably a good idea to be as visible as possible when traveling at highway speeds. During the day a reasonably attentive driver traveling at the speed limit should have no problem being able to see a bicyclist.

I would have no problem turning on my bike light during the day if it were mandatory but realistically I don't think it would have any impact on being more visible. I think some other suggestions like expanding bike lanes in cities would have a more profound impact on bicycle safety.

I don't drive my car close enough to get doored
Why are cyclists that close?
put on a head light and people will see you
its no different with daytime running lights on cars.
They reduce accidents.
But hey, its your life.

And no, I didn't pay $200, I paid $75 for a scratched $200 light.
Its an extremely bright bike light, and it runs on a rechargeble battery that fits in the water bottle holder. Look them up Cyglo Hiflux 200.
They are so bright I can ride in the woods at night and light up a path for 2 riders.

[kerorogunso]

Bike lanes should be paved before government encourages people to ride their bikes to work. They are risking cyclists' life and putting this responsibility onto drivers.

It is a terrible news, but sometimes I don't like cyclists because they are blocking the traffics on a already-very-busy road and causing unnecessary panic for some drivers, i.e., sudden lane change or simply drive on the line because they are trying to avoid the bicycles. If a bike is on the right lane, then all vehicles are moved to the left lane and a single bike uses the entire right lane on the entire road.

[George W. Bush]

It's amazing how so many drivers DON'T check their blindspots.....

90% of drivers out there are too busy daydreaming, talking on the phone, scratching their butts, picking their nose and plain just dumb drivers out there. If you ask them where is their blindspot they would have not idea what you are talking about. Canadian drivers suck. Actually, most drivers suck.

In high traffic area, bicyclists should use the sidewalk until the lazy bum government provides them with safe space to bike!

[perplexed_one]

Interesting note: no one has even brought up the fact that all vehicles travelling on a roadway EXCEPT BICYCLES
require an illuminated front headlamp.

A bike is easy to blend into the background scenery, within the viewability of a side view mirror.
I suspect that if cyclists were required to use a front headlamp, day and night, just like cars, motorbikes and scooters,
they would stand a better chance of being seen.

I can't wait to hear the reasons why a cyclist shouldn't require a headlamp.

too expensive probably. one who can afford to buy a car can obviously get a pair of good headlights, that being said the hardcore cyclists are couriers, students and bohemian ppl. If their bike cost from 200-400 then buying a headlight that cost $200 is not really proportionally necessary or affordable (if that phrase makes any sense to you).

another reason would be that the city would have implement this motion across the board for all cyclists. Ppl who are occasional, recreational cyclists will have to foot the bill for something they don't need as much as the hardcore urban cyclist. These occasional cyclists will seethe with rage that they are being coerce to buy headlights when they are already annoyed by the city imposing new taxes and regulations and ramping up old ones.

[mlc2000]

Uh couriers don't bike $200-$400 bikes.
And whats a bohemian? A hobo with a bike?
Helmets are pretty expensive for motorbikes and scooters.
Maybe they should get a break too.

Its about protecting your own ass.
Its not all the car drivers fault. If the cyclist doesn't use the tools available to
be seen, then they take their lives into their own hands.



too expensive probably. one who can afford to buy a car can obviously get a pair of good headlights, that being said the hardcore cyclists are couriers, students and bohemian ppl. If their bike cost from 200-400 then buying a headlight that cost $200 is not really proportionally necessary or affordable (if that phrase makes any sense to you).

another reason would be that the city would have implement this motion across the board for all cyclists. Ppl who are occasional, recreational cyclists will have to foot the bill for something they don't need as much as the hardcore urban cyclist. These occasional cyclists will seethe with rage that they are being coerce to buy headlights when they are already annoyed by the city imposing new taxes and regulations and ramping up old ones.

[perplexed_one]

Uh couriers don't bike $200-$400 bikes.
And whats a bohemian? A hobo with a bike?
Helmets are pretty expensive for motorbikes and scooters.
Maybe they should get a break too.

Its about protecting your own ass.
Its not all the car drivers fault. If the cyclist doesn't use the tools available to
be seen, then they take their lives into their own hands.

1. my point exactly, so why would they buy headlights?
2. yeah
3. no motorbikes retail in the thousands, i think they can shell out a hundred or two for a good quality helmet.
4-6. totally agree, you are taking a risk when your ride with cars on busy roads.

[nfnx]

i hate cyclists on the road... i mean im not speaking about all but in the downtown area, a lot of them cycle as if they own the street. a big discussion on this was on am640 this morning and im glad it was... i am not alone.

when there is traffic and gridlock, many cyclists weave their way around cars (sometimes scratching them) and cycle on the sidewalk..

on red lights, they inch up past the line preventing right turning cars to turn which also grinds my gears...

my god, as if the lanes werent narrow enough, they ride 1 - 2 meters from the sidewalk meaning i have to cut into the opposite lane to pass them or drive at 20km/h on a 50 zone ...

the cyclist dying is a very sad thing, dont get me wrong, but at the same time that person is just as responsible as the person in the car who opened the door.

[eightyeight]

You ask any cyclist, they'll tell you motorists are idiots.

You ask any motorist, they'll tell you cyclists are idiots.

Problem here is that the only thing stopping a cyclist from death during a collision is a helmet. Therefore, cyclists are the ones who have to be careful.

Sure, it's unfair. Both parties SHOULD be much, much more cautious/respectful of the other. But when it's 2500 lbs of metal vs. 60 lbs, it's quite clear who has more to lose in a collision..

Cyclists, slow down and be safe. You don't have to prove to the world that biking is the better way by weaving through cars to beat them to the next stoplight..

"Hahaha.. Stupid motorists!! I made it to the next light faster than they did!!*WHACK* (followed by 5 years of physical rehab and irreversible brain damage)"
..Yup, you sure showed us.

[Oni-kun]

i hate cyclists on the road... i mean im not speaking about all but in the downtown area, a lot of them cycle as if they own the street. a big discussion on this was on am640 this morning and im glad it was... i am not alone.

when there is traffic and gridlock, many cyclists weave their way around cars (sometimes scratching them) and cycle on the sidewalk..

on red lights, they inch up past the line preventing right turning cars to turn which also grinds my gears...

my god, as if the lanes werent narrow enough, they ride 1 - 2 meters from the sidewalk meaning i have to cut into the opposite lane to pass them or drive at 20km/h on a 50 zone ...

the cyclist dying is a very sad thing, dont get me wrong, but at the same time that person is just as responsible as the person in the car who opened the door.

A cyclist has every right to use the road as you do. Why does your right turn take precident over a cyclist waiting at a light to go forward. You know they do that so they don't get right hooked when the light turns green right? Why do motorists drive like they own the road? They don't its a shared space. Would you like pedestrians to not cross the road on a green light so it doesn't block your right turn?

I agree that cyclists hould not weave around cars and go between lanes as that just causes problems and is dangerous for everybody. And I also agree that in some cases both can be at fault. But answer this. If you were driving along and somebody all of a sudden swung their door open at last moment and you crashed into their door and smashed up the front of your car. Is it your fault too?

[at1212b]

If you're a cyclist that doesn't drive often, it is easy to think "Sheeesh, what is wrong with all the cars" as I was before I learned to drive.

But as a driver, I understand how easy it is to forget that cyclists are around. So now when I bike, I make sure to be extra careful in taking actions knowing what its like from the driver's point of view. The bottom line is the cyclist could be in the right, but 2 tons going x km/hr will always win out.

One thing as a driver that is hard to anticipate is quick and sudden movements ie making a left turn, it is easy to ascertain how fast a person is walking, but difficult to judge the speed of a bike, esp if they come out of nowhere as sometimes you're thinking they should be stopped behind that other car instead of going.

Also, Bike riders take way too many shortcuts, sometimes going the opposite direction, cutting in between stopped cars, etc. (I am guilty of that at times) as I know when I'm cycling, there is the mentality of 'I shouldn't really be stopped, esp in a traffic jam like the other cars, therefore I should be able to go around them'

I'm also thinking that cyclists also technically break alot of traffic rules, and if held up to the same standard as a vehicle, would get pulled and ticketed since its so easy to have that jay walking mentality. But on the flip side, there is very little awareness, or education as to how cars and bikes should co-exist. (for example, when passing, cars usually go around a cyclist, leaving alot of room. Therefore, when those cars are stopped, since there is very little room at the side, shouldn't bikers stop behind the car vs passing it on the single lane)

The car lobby is too strong here as this city is not geared towards cycling... only recently did a bike union register itself as a lobby, so maybe way down the road, there will be alot more improvement in safety, education and investment to being cycling friendly.

[at1212b]

A cyclist has every right to use the road as you do. Why does your right turn take precident over a cyclist waiting at a light to go forward. You know they do that so they don't get right hooked when the light turns green right? Why do motorists drive like they own the road? They don't its a shared space. Would you like pedestrians to not cross the road on a green light so it doesn't block your right turn?

I agree that cyclists hould not weave around cars and go between lanes as that just causes problems and is dangerous for everybody. And I also agree that in some cases both can be at fault. But answer this. If you were driving along and somebody all of a sudden swung their door open at last moment and you crashed into their door and smashed up the front of your car. Is it your fault too?


Not disagreeing with your post, but some interesting points are raised. So if a cyclist has every right to be on the road, shouldn't there then be a licensing standard or examination of sorts? As a driver does not have every right to be on the road since they have to adhere to registration, licensing, testing, fees, suspensions, etc.

Maybe if everybody was aware of what each's role is, there would be a lot more harmony.

[lagos]

i hate cyclists on the road... i mean im not speaking about all but in the downtown area, a lot of them cycle as if they own the street. a big discussion on this was on am640 this morning and im glad it was... i am not alone.

when there is traffic and gridlock, many cyclists weave their way around cars (sometimes scratching them) and cycle on the sidewalk..

on red lights, they inch up past the line preventing right turning cars to turn which also grinds my gears...

my god, as if the lanes werent narrow enough, they ride 1 - 2 meters from the sidewalk meaning i have to cut into the opposite lane to pass them or drive at 20km/h on a 50 zone ...

the cyclist dying is a very sad thing, dont get me wrong, but at the same time that person is just as responsible as the person in the car who opened the door.


couldn't have said better...especially those messenger types kill me...personally, I wouldn't ride a bicycle or a bike for that matter in the city, it's just too dangerous...

[henryh]

A cyclist has every right to use the road as you do. Why does your right turn take precident over a cyclist waiting at a light to go forward.

Just wanted to point out that a lot of the cyclists who this do so by creeping up from behind stopped traffic to the front. It's like any other car, you're not supposed to try to pass someone at a stop light, even if you can squeeze by them.

[webdoctors]

Where I biked in Seattle, the law was u had to have night lights, to light up your bike if you drove after dusk. My lighting system was about $100 and my bike was $600.

It was worth it, sometymes I almost hit ppl bicycling in the dark going the opposite direction to me with no lights or reflective surface on the front of their bikes.

Its not that expensive, and pretty useful for letting others see U, and helping you see the road better.

too expensive probably. one who can afford to buy a car can obviously get a pair of good headlights, that being said the hardcore cyclists are couriers, students and bohemian ppl. If their bike cost from 200-400 then buying a headlight that cost $200 is not really proportionally necessary or affordable (if that phrase makes any sense to you).

another reason would be that the city would have implement this motion across the board for all cyclists. Ppl who are occasional, recreational cyclists will have to foot the bill for something they don't need as much as the hardcore urban cyclist. These occasional cyclists will seethe with rage that they are being coerce to buy headlights when they are already annoyed by the city imposing new taxes and regulations and ramping up old ones.

[Kasakato]

Where I biked in Seattle, the law was u had to have night lights, to light up your bike if you drove after dusk. My lighting system was about $100 and my bike was $600.

It was worth it, sometymes I almost hit ppl bicycling in the dark going the opposite direction to me with no lights or reflective surface on the front of their bikes.

Its not that expensive, and pretty useful for letting others see U, and helping you see the road better.

The same law applies in Canada, lights 1/2h before sunset, and 1/2 after sunrise.

[nfnx]

A cyclist has every right to use the road as you do. Why does your right turn take precident over a cyclist waiting at a light to go forward. You know they do that so they don't get right hooked when the light turns green right? Why do motorists drive like they own the road? They don't its a shared space. Would you like pedestrians to not cross the road on a green light so it doesn't block your right turn?

I agree that cyclists hould not weave around cars and go between lanes as that just causes problems and is dangerous for everybody. And I also agree that in some cases both can be at fault. But answer this. If you were driving along and somebody all of a sudden swung their door open at last moment and you crashed into their door and smashed up the front of your car. Is it your fault too?

well if they are to ride the streets with the drivers then at red lights shouldnt they be behind the white line to allow cars to turn right? i mean when it is clear, it is legal to turn right on red lights for a reason. by taking that extra curve around the jerk cyclists who parks himself 2 meters past the white liine the car driver puts his life in danger by pulling right out into the middle of the lane and exposing himself to a front on collision.

also, again if they were to cycle 1 or 2 meters from the curb and cycle with the cars, then they should be subject to the same rules that we abide by.
freak if i have to drive 20 km home from work behidn a cyclist everyday then i might as well walk.

finally, we know that the car driver opened his door and hit the cyclists... but if that cyclists hit a parked car (which happens a lot), and then fell and got run over... you wouldnt blame the cyclist would you? now what if the guy opened his car door to get out and just as he was... the cyclist hits it because he wasnt paying attention and kept riding with his head down? boom, dead.. same story, cyclists fault.

[GangStarr]

Try and door the cyclists in the below video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSwig1tgUtY

[IronMac]

well if they are to ride the streets with the drivers then at red lights shouldnt they be behind the white line to allow cars to turn right? i mean when it is clear, it is legal to turn right on red lights for a reason. by taking that extra curve around the jerk cyclists who parks himself 2 meters past the white line the car driver puts his life in danger by pulling right out into the middle of the lane and exposing himself to a front on collision.

Yes, cyclists should be behind the white line.
And I would hope that the driver isn't stupid enough to risk their life and would simply sit and wait a few minutes in that sort of situation.

also, again if they were to cycle 1 or 2 meters from the curb and cycle with the cars, then they should be subject to the same rules that we abide by.
freak if i have to drive 20 km home from work behidn a cyclist everyday then i might as well walk.

You can walk at least 15 kms an hr? Better question is whether or not you can walk 20 kms in one shot?

finally, we know that the car driver opened his door and hit the cyclists... but if that cyclists hit a parked car (which happens a lot), and then fell and got run over... you wouldnt blame the cyclist would you? now what if the guy opened his car door to get out and just as he was... the cyclist hits it because he wasnt paying attention and kept riding with his head down? boom, dead.. same story, cyclists fault.

I don't know about other cyclists but I've been riding for well over 20 years and I can count on the fingers of one hand, well, actually only ONE finger the number of times I've hit a parked car. A cyclist hitting a parked car is very very rare.

As for your example, it makes no sense since the driver is still not paying attention. If he was, he would have looked in his mirror to check for any cyclist (paying attention or not) and would not have opened the door.

[mjl_toronto]

Looks like another cyclist hit by a car http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/432422

A cyclist was struck by a car this morning near Lake Shore Blvd. E. and Parliament St.

The impact of the collision sent the man flying into the windshield of the car, which was cracked but did not shatter.

The man was taken to St. Michael's Hospital with serious head injuries, but he is expected to live, according to police.

There was a considerable amount of blood at the scene.

The woman driving the car was shaken, but not hurt.

Police say the cyclist and the car were both going northbound on Parliament St. when the accident happened just before 9 a.m.

The cyclist apparently cut in front of the car and he was struck.

The man's bicycle was flung about 10 metres from the point of impact.

Police say the man wasn't wearing a bicycle helmet.

The accident is still under investigation and witnesses are asked to call Traffic Services at 416-808-1900.

Last week, a cyclist was killed when he struck a car door that was being opened.

The impact sent him into the street, where he was struck and killed by a cube van.


I've started cylcing to work recently and these accidents are starting to make me worry. Maybe the solution would be to start cycle-pools where cyclists all ride in groups of 5 or more from one destination to another (no, I'm not serious).

[AzN_RiverdaleCI]

I've started cylcing to work recently and these accidents are starting to make me worry. Maybe the solution would be to start cycle-pools where cyclists all ride in groups of 5 or more from one destination to another (no, I'm not serious).

All these accidents are because of bad cyclists. I so far haven't seen a fatality or accident where it wasn't the cyclists fault.

"Maybe the solution would be to start cycle-pools where cyclists all ride in groups of 5 or more from one destination to another" QFT

[nfnx]

Looks like another cyclist hit by a car http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/432422



I've started cylcing to work recently and these accidents are starting to make me worry. Maybe the solution would be to start cycle-pools where cyclists all ride in groups of 5 or more from one destination to another (no, I'm not serious).

exactly what i was talking about!

[mjl_toronto]

All these accidents are because of bad cyclists. I so far haven't seen a fatality or accident where it wasn't the cyclists fault.
I'm assuming by 'all' you mean to only refer to these 2 accidents? I surely hope you didn't mean all accidents between bikes and cars because that would be a very uneducated/ignorant statement.

"Maybe the solution would be to start cycle-pools where cyclists all ride in groups of 5 or more from one destination to another" QFT
Are you QFT'in 'cuz you agree? Honestly, I was just kidding about it but perhaps it may work.

This topic is really fresh in my mind and perhaps as elevated my awareness to car/bike incidents on the road that I noticed two very stupid things yesterday. As I was riding home, I encountered a very stupid cyclist who decided to jump the gun on a red light and proceeded to cross the street as the lights turned yellow for the intersecting traffic. What he didn't anticipate was an equally stupid driver decided to speed up and blatantly ran the red light (other cars had to brake suddenly for this idiot as well). The car barely braked in time and the cylcist jumped off his bike barely avoiding collision. Funny thing is, both cyclist and driver blamed each other when they were both at fault.

The second incident involved only a black Ford F150 pick up truck who was obviously in a hurry to go somewhere. The male driver was weaving in and out of a single lane traffic into a dedicated bike lane on Dundas St E. I guess the 40km/h posted speed limit wasn't fast enough for him. I tried to catch up to the guy to tell him off but I got caught at a light.

[TenzoR]

There are bad drivers and there are bad cyclists. The world is not perfect

[IronMac]

There are bad drivers and there are bad cyclists. The world is not perfect

Yep...and you get apologists on both sides.

[AzN_RiverdaleCI]

There are bad drivers and there are bad cyclists. The world is not perfect

QFT. I used to be bad ass, but I learned how speed isn't everything since the next light will get you. Plus you sweat like crazy when you push and go fast. I actually get to work faster when I go slow as I get all green lights!

[element88]

Can't entirely blame the driver... the cyclist must be going pretty damn fast...

The driver was responsible for killing this cyclist. I can't believe they are not being charged.

Two years ago, I had this happen to me. I was cycling just inside the parking lane line and a drive suddenly threw his door open in front of me. I went through the glass in the door, split my helmet open, my forehead open, had a broken arm, 3 broken ribs and a broken collarbone.

What happened next was unbelievable. I was really groggy and still hanging in the door and he tried to push me off it and was yelling at me for wrecking his door !!

Thank god there was a plain clothes police unit traveling in the opposite lane who witnessed the entire incident and were able to restrain the driver from trying to interfere with me further and arrested him for numerous charges including negligence and assault.

Anyway, I was just 17 at the time and spent 2 months recovering from my injuries. The head injury was the most difficult to deal with. I was damn lucky that I was not killed or thrown into the van traveling beside me.

All this could have been avoided had he simply checked his mirror before getting out !!

[element88]

All these accidents are because of bad cyclists. I so far haven't seen a fatality or accident where it wasn't the cyclists fault.



Whatever. I am betting you have never cycled on the roads.
While some cyclists are reckless, the majority of regular commuter cyclists tend to be pretty responsible and follow the rules of the road.

The majority of accidents are caused by inattentive motorists who are either on their cell phones or are too stupid to even be driving. All motorists should be shoulder checking before they pull out or get out of their cars.

My accident was ruled entirely the fault of the driver in court. I was not cycling recklessly. He was charged and convicted.

[IronMac]

Good for you, element88! Was he also convicted of assault?

[almostfreeman]

Whatever. I am betting you have never cycled on the roads.
While some cyclists are reckless, the majority of regular commuter cyclists tend to be pretty responsible and follow the rules of the road.

The majority of accidents are caused by inattentive motorists who are either on their cell phones or are too stupid to even be driving. All motorists should be shoulder checking before they pull out or get out of their cars.

My accident was ruled entirely the fault of the driver in court. I was not cycling recklessly. He was charged and convicted.

Unfortunately he has been on the on the roads ... probably still oblivious to the rules of the road. http://www.redflagdeals.com/forums/showthread.php?t=505140&highlight=ebike+accident
The kind that gives cyclists a bad rep.

[gatorb6]

There are bad drivers and there are bad cyclists. The world is not perfect

Exactly. Fact is, a lot of people just don't pay attention while driving, biking or even walking for that matter - cell phones, ipods, etc. Look at all the preventable car to car accidents there are.

It's more significant here because cyclists and pedestrians are way more vulnerable and serious injuries are more likely to occur. I am still surprised how many risks cyclists take on these roads. They should be even more aware and cautious than they probably need to be and always err on the side of caution.

[almostfreeman]

The driver was responsible for killing this cyclist. I can't believe they are not being charged.

Two years ago, I had this happen to me. I was cycling just inside the parking lane line and a drive suddenly threw his door open in front of me. I went through the glass in the door, split my helmet open, my forehead open, had a broken arm, 3 broken ribs and a broken collarbone.

What happened next was unbelievable. I was really groggy and still hanging in the door and he tried to push me off it and was yelling at me for wrecking his door !!

Thank god there was a plain clothes police unit traveling in the opposite lane who witnessed the entire incident and were able to restrain the driver from trying to interfere with me further and arrested him for numerous charges including negligence and assault.I can

Anyway, I was just 17 at the time and spent 2 months recovering from my injuries. The head injury was the most difficult to deal with. I was damn lucky that I was not killed or thrown into the van traveling beside me.

All this could have been avoided had he simply checked his mirror before getting out !!

I agree that the law should be applied equally and it seems as if this motorist is indeed responsible for the death of another person. I'm sure this motorist is feeling some regret from this incident which should probably be considered when applying a penalty for this thoughtless act.

Your personal story is pretty horrifying. Thanks for sharing it and hopefully the people who hear about it may take that extra second to be mindful in our daily haste.

[sprung]

that is scary. glad to hear the driver did get charged with dooring you. btw, you wrote "The head injury was the most difficult to deal with." Just wondering was that with or without a helmet? i see unhelmeted parents riding with helmeted kids and always wonder if they want their offspring tending to a vegetable should the worst happen...

[TenzoR]

that is scary. glad to hear the driver did get charged with dooring you. btw, you wrote "The head injury was the most difficult to deal with." Just wondering was that with or without a helmet? i see unhelmeted parents riding with helmeted kids and always wonder if they want their offspring tending to a vegetable should the worst happen...

Two years ago, I had this happen to me. I was cycling just inside the parking lane line and a drive suddenly threw his door open in front of me. I went through the glass in the door, split my helmet open, my forehead open, had a broken arm, 3 broken ribs and a broken collarbone.

He was wearing a helmet

[element88]

Good for you, element88! Was he also convicted of assault?

Yep, convicted of 7 charges in all including the assault on me, gross negligence, negligence causing injury, assault on police officer, etc. He was a really nasty guy. I am so glad the police were right there when it all happened !! I have no idea what this guy would have done otherwise ?

The police officers were very professional and handled the whole situation with tremendous expertise and compassion. They dealt with the idiot very quickly, got back up immediately and tended to me until the medics arrived. They also followed up by visiting me in hospital several times during my stay to see how I was doing. Both were really decent !!

[element88]

that is scary. glad to hear the driver did get charged with dooring you. btw, you wrote "The head injury was the most difficult to deal with." Just wondering was that with or without a helmet? i see unhelmeted parents riding with helmeted kids and always wonder if they want their offspring tending to a vegetable should the worst happen...

Actually, I had a helmet on. I have never cycled without one. However, the force of the impact - my speed, momentum etc caused my head to hit the front post of the car door and split it open. Had I not had it, I would probably not be here right now according to the neurosurgeon I saw in the ER. I ended up with 14 stitches and a severe concussion in addition to my other injuries. I do have permanent nerve damage but can deal with that.

I am like you though - I find it very frustrating to see parents without helmets. It is not modeling good behaviour to kids and should they suffer an impact, not only are they putting their kids at risk - but they will either die or be vegetables as you stated.

BTW - I donated my damaged helmet to the police department for their bike safety program for kids and now have a new one.

[Kasakato]

Without getting in a debate over the effectiveness of helmets, keep in mind they are a one shot use type of item. Once you take one impact, its time to toss it. The expanded foam compresses and absorbs the impact, thereby rendering it useless.

[element88]

Without getting in a debate over the effectiveness of helmets, keep in mind they are a one shot use type of item. Once you take one impact, its time to toss it. The expanded foam compresses and absorbs the impact, thereby rendering it useless.

That is a great point !! This is absolutely correct - Any impact should result in the helmet being replaced. In my case the damage was obvious and it was donated solely to show school children the importance of wearing a helmet. It will never be worn again by anybody.

I now have a new one.

[blahblohblah]

I agree with previous comments about dumb bikers.

I feel it is the biker's own fault for what happened to him.
Don't blame the car driver.

If you are a bike rider on a busy street the onus is on you to be careful.
Motorcyclists on the highway have to by more vigilant than a person in a car.

I have seen many stupid or ignorant bikers on Toronto roads - weaving in and out of traffic or taking up a portion of the right lane so that car drivers have to change lanes to get around them.

A bicycle does not have right of way on the road so be careful.
To the bikers - you do not own the road.

When driving a car if you rear end someone it is automatically your fault. The person behind should be aware of what is happening in front of him. In the same way, the biker was behind the parked car. The biker was not observant of what was happening in front of him and therefore it is his fault.

[AzN_RiverdaleCI]

Whatever. I am betting you have never cycled on the roads.
While some cyclists are reckless, the majority of regular commuter cyclists tend to be pretty responsible and follow the rules of the road.

Rawr, wanna put your money where your mouth is? I commute and or cycle(if I am not working) 16km a day on the roads.

I use to go fast, however, you realize how red lights really screw you over. So I go a reasonable speed and get all greens! However, when a cyclist goes through a red while I am stopped, it is ON. VTEC TIEM! "Portland just kicked in yo" (applies only when im on the trek portland)

[hobophobe]

What's the reason behind why cyclists are not allowed on the sidewalk?

I ask because if it is due to the difference in speeds between cyclists and pedestrians, why are cyclists and cars on the same road?

[Nikita]

I agree with previous comments about dumb bikers.

I feel it is the biker's own fault for what happened to him.
Don't blame the car driver.

If you are a bike rider on a busy street the onus is on you to be careful.
Motorcyclists on the highway have to by more vigilant than a person in a car..

I'm assuming you stating an opinion and not purporting to state law, because different vehicles do not have different levels of responsibility on the roads legally.

I have seen many stupid or ignorant bikers on Toronto roads - weaving in and out of traffic or taking up a portion of the right lane so that car drivers have to change lanes to get around them.

A bicycle does not have right of way on the road so be careful.
To the bikers - you do not own the road.

When driving a car if you rear end someone it is automatically your fault. The person behind should be aware of what is happening in front of him. In the same way, the biker was behind the parked car. The biker was not observant of what was happening in front of him and therefore it is his fault.

To the drivers on the road - you do not own the road either.

The law is that a driver must exercise due diligence by checking for oncoming vehicles (which includes bikes) before opening the door. This driver didn't do that...else he would have seen the cyclist and wouldn't have opened it when he did. He didn't obey the traffic laws. There's been no suggestion from authorities that the cyclist was doing anything other than obeying traffic laws. So, how again is this the driver's fault? There is no law that cyclists have to look inside car windows to ensure the driver is obeying the laws applicable to drivers. And the cyclist wasn't coming from behind, he was coming beside the car.

[mjl_toronto]

So, how again is this the driver's fault?

I think you meant 'cyclist's'

[Nikita]

I think you meant 'cyclist's'

Thank you for the correction :) . Indeed, I did mean 'cyclist's'.

[hoopsandyoyo]

This would not happen if bikers actually follow the rules and ride their bikes properly on the road, with hand singals and hamlets and NOT on the side of road/sidewalk, right next to a car on the road while flying past stop signs/red lights as they please.

This should only be a drivers fault if, he opened his door into a bike lane.

[15-20_God]

This would not happen if bikers actually follow the rules and ride their bikes properly on the road, with hand singals and hamlets and NOT on the side of road/sidewalk, right next to a car on the road while flying past stop signs/red lights as they please.

this happened because all drivers are drunks that talk on the phone while they drive, make random u-turns, idle excessively, don't signal when they turn, speed or drive too slow. therefore this accident was the drivers fault 100%

[mlc2000]

Damn, I thought 15-20 was going to inject some humour into the thread...>:(

[Nikita]

This would not happen if bikers actually follow the rules and ride their bikes properly on the road, with hand singals and hamlets and NOT on the side of road/sidewalk, right next to a car on the road while flying past stop signs/red lights as they please.

This should only be a drivers fault if, he opened his door into a bike lane.

No it's only the driver's fault because he broke a traffic law, checking to ensure it's safe to open his door.

Damn, I thought 15-20 was going to inject some humour into the thread...>:(

Umm, he did, I think you missed the sarcasm...:)

[Pensive]

The driver should have taken a quick glance before opening his door to make sure that all is well. Just another one of the thoughtless people in this city of millions who think they're the only ones who exist. They just do whatever THEY want, when THEY want, with no thought of others or of the possible consequences or their actions. :mad:

[GangStarr]

Damn, I thought 15-20 was going to inject some humour into the thread...>:(

He did, it was sarcasm.

[CoffeeAddict]

The police are cracking down on both drivers AND cyclists
http://www.thestar.com/article/445155

Be safe out there guys!

[GangStarr]

The police are cracking down on both drivers AND cyclists
http://www.thestar.com/article/445155

Be safe out there guys!

Yeah except you can't give a cyclist a ticket for not stopping at a stop sign. Considering how many useless 4 way stops we have it makes sense.

[danfromwaterloo]

Yeah except you can't give a cyclist a ticket for not stopping at a stop sign. Considering how many useless 4 way stops we have it makes sense.

Yes you can.

A bicyclist is a vehicle that is bound to the same rules of the road as a car, truck, or motorcycle. Just because we've assumed that they're impervious to tickets doesn't mean that it's true...

[Kasakato]

This would not happen if bikers actually follow the rules and ride their bikes properly on the road, with hand singals and hamlets and NOT on the side of road/sidewalk, right next to a car on the road while flying past stop signs/red lights as they please.

This should only be a drivers fault if, he opened his door into a bike lane.

1) 'Halments' are not required over 18 in Toronto.
2) Where else are you supposed to ride? As close to the right curb as possible is the law.

[GangStarr]

Yes you can.

A bicyclist is a vehicle that is bound to the same rules of the road as a car, truck, or motorcycle. Just because we've assumed that they're impervious to tickets doesn't mean that it's true...


Yeah and am I going to get points on my cycling license, then my cycling insurance will go up....

Your not going to get a ticket when you have pedel power.

I'm not saying I don't follow the rules while I am biking, but when your on side streets that have 4 way stops every intersection its just unreasonable to expect a cyclist to make a full 3 second stop at each one of them. I do however only proceed when I have made eye contact with other drivers and know it is safe to proceed. That or I go at the same time as a car travelling in my direction.

[Kasakato]

Yeah and am I going to get points on my cycling license, then my cycling insurance will go up....

Your not going to get a ticket when you have pedel power.

The highway traffic act applies to all vehicle on the road. Vehicle include motor cars, bikes, etc. Go read up about the HTA on elaw, ignorance is no excuse.

[GangStarr]

The highway traffic act applies to all vehicle on the road. Vehicle include motor cars, bikes, etc. Go read up about the HTA on elaw, ignorance is no excuse.


Yeah except your not going to get a ticket for running a stop sign when your riding a bike. I know cyclists are to follow the rules of the road, but it can't be enforced.

[Tolwyn]

A little OT... but I was wondering who is at fault if it's two cars involved instead of a car and a cycle? For instance, Car A parked opens the driver's side door directly into the path of Car B coming down the lane. What does insurance see it as? I'm thinking it's pretty tough for Car B to stop in time if there isn't any warning.

Just curious as I tend to drive on the right hand lane on 17th Ave downtown Calgary next to all these parked cars... much like Queen St in Toronto...

[flimbs]

A little OT... but I was wondering who is at fault if it's two cars involved instead of a car and a cycle? For instance, Car A parked opens the driver's side door directly into the path of Car B coming down the lane. What does insurance see it as? I'm thinking it's pretty tough for Car B to stop in time if there isn't any warning.

Just curious as I tend to drive on the right hand lane on 17th Ave downtown Calgary next to all these parked cars... much like Queen St in Toronto...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Highway Traffic Act would apply here as well. It is the owner's responsibility to enter and exit the vehicle in a safe manner. Thus, if the parked car owner let's his/her car door fly wide open, and your car smashes it off....it would be mr. fly-wide's fault.

[Kasakato]

Yeah except your not going to get a ticket for running a stop sign when your riding a bike. I know cyclists are to follow the rules of the road, but it can't be enforced.

Why can it not be enforced? If there's any difference between a car and a bike, its that it would be easier to stop the cyclist.

[Codegen]

As a frequent cyclist who will occasionally put on 100km on his bike in one day (Buckingham > Aylmer and back), I find it's not very often other drivers give me hell. Save for the one-off of biking down Rideau and having a guy about to turn onto Colonel By just about turning into me.

I'm good for two incidents a year of coming inches to being doored (and I'm the type that makes my sentiments quite clear in this scenario). There is no way I cannot be in view.

The thing that has probably saved my ass is frequently biking down roads with high speed limits (The 148 and the 309, and to a lesser extent the 315 and 317) has probably taught me to be a bit more alert to what's going on around me.

[gamer123]

What happens when a bike is at fault during an accident with a car, since the biker doesn't have insurance?

[AzN_RiverdaleCI]

What happens when a bike is at fault during an accident with a car, since the biker doesn't have insurance?

nothing, only thing is they can sue you in court for monies.

[flimbs]

As a frequent cyclist who will occasionally put on 100km on his bike in one day (Buckingham > Aylmer and back)
woah, I just google maped your distance. nice!

I'm just starting out with North York -> Pickering and back, and that's just 80km. Plus, I'm not sure if I can do it everyday.

[gamer123]

nothing, only thing is they can sue you in court for monies.

exactly, another reason why i believe bikes shouldn't be on the road. what if the cyclist can't afford the money? why do drivers required insurance (minimum 3rd liability) and cyclists don't yet they both travel on the same roads together?

[flimbs]

exactly, another reason why i believe bikes shouldn't be on the road. what if the cyclist can't afford the money? why do drivers required insurance (minimum 3rd liability) and cyclists don't yet they both travel on the same roads together?
Good question actually. Because even though, damage done by a cyclist and the bicycle would be minimal most of the time, there may be instances where the cyclist is at fault and the damage can be significant. I`m not sure what happens in this case, where the cyclist may be stone broke.

[IronMac]

exactly, another reason why i believe bikes shouldn't be on the road. what if the cyclist can't afford the money? why do drivers required insurance (minimum 3rd liability) and cyclists don't yet they both travel on the same roads together?

It's an interesting question but using your logic and bicycles are then forced onto sidewalks what will happen in case of an accident? They still won't have insurance.

Don't use this as an excuse to push bicycles off of roads but rather to open up the idea of whether or not cyclists should carry insurance.

[Dustbunny]

Good question actually. Because even though, damage done by a cyclist and the bicycle would be minimal most of the time, there may be instances where the cyclist is at fault and the damage can be significant. I`m not sure what happens in this case, where the cyclist may be stone broke.

Well I can tell you when some idiot on a bike hit my car (and yes it was his fault by anyone's count) he got a bent tire and I had a dented front panel and hood. Not a fair trade at all as far as I'm concerned, but nothing I could do since he was broke and had no insurance. Sure if I'd called police he could have been ticketed or something (they do that here) but what was the point? IMO anyone who is over 16 and rides a bike, should have insurance. They are the ones who are out on the roadways and can cause accidents and damage like anyone else. The other bonus would be then they may have to prove they know the rules of the road before they venture out as well.

[gamer123]

WOW, I just saw this dude, dress shirt and pants, no helmet, biking on the right lane down 404!! It was in the Finch/Sheppard area. like WTF!! should have taken pics but i was in the fast lane

[GangStarr]

WOW, I just saw this dude, dress shirt and pants, no helmet, biking on the right lane down 404!! It was in the Finch/Sheppard area. like WTF!! should have taken pics but i was in the fast lane

That is certainly dangerous and not allowed. However if he was over 16 he doesn't have to wear a helmet.

Also, while reading up on biking I noticed something cool. Some intersections that change based on a cars presence actually have seperate sensors that work REALLY well for bikes. You will two or three white dots in a striaght line in the straight or left turn lane. Put your bike over these 3 dots and the light changes right away, you will see the hand start to flash. Much faster then pushing the pedestrian light.

I love doing this. Many of the dots have a bit of tar so there hard to spot. But they do work.

http://www.toronto.ca/cycling/images/4-2.jpg

http://www.toronto.ca/cycling/policies.htm

[hardcandy1911]

Riding a bike in Toronto is going to become a death wish. With more and more people changing their driving habits (so they say).

This will turn to a gory and deadly consequences in the coming years to come. Their is no protection on a bike other than your helmet, one wrong move and your done. Its bad enough we have people who don't know how to drive, mix that with people who cant ride a bike properly and you will definitely get some troubles down the road.

The truth of it is, an automobile regardless of the price of gas shouldn't be substituted for a bicycle. Life of a human being is much more valueable then risking it to save a few dollars riding a bike. Riding the bike is very safe, but not in the downtown core streets of Toronto.

Besides, price of gas in Europe is 3x more then it is here, people are stupid for choosing a bike over their car. Damn right stupid!

[mjl_toronto]

This will turn to a gory and deadly consequences in the coming years to come.
So not the soon to come years but the years that come after that? :cheesygri

So how do motorcycles fit in your world? Maybe pedestrians should be banned on sidewalks, afterall, a careless driver can easily run a curb and kill several people. If we banned pedestrians, then the careless driver won't hurt anybody. It would also get rid of j-walkers and drunks walking on the road carelessly.

[Legend24]

I always switch to the left lane when passing a bike... I don't care how much room I have (or think I have). All it takes for an accident to occur is for them to clip the curb, lose control of their bike and come flying into my vehicle when I'm trying to pass them in the lane. Obviously, I could make a mistake as well and assume I have more space than I do, but that's not very likely.

I hate when they weave through traffic though and it especially bothers me when cyclists (and bikers) come up from behind and take a left turn at the same time as a car as if there were two turning lanes. It's not so bad when they're stopped beside you waiting to turn left (still dangerous), but it frightens me when they ride through all the stopped vehicles and pull up beside you while you're in the process of making the turn.

Happened to me once at a stop light. It was my turn to go and as soon as I started turning left, a bike comes flying around the corner from behind me and cuts me off (theoretically, he should have stopped at the sign behind me and then proceeded when it was his turn). Then he gave me the finger. Didn't feel like getting arrested that day so I let it go.

[Avant_Garde]

I've personally been stopped for running a stop sign on my bike. I got off with a warning but the Cop said demerit points would be applied to my drivers license and if he were to write me a ticket it would be $110. I've also been stopped for running a red light, again same thing, demerit points to your driver's license but the ticket would be $190.

[7Stryder7]

I've personally been stopped for running a stop sign on my bike. I got off with a warning but the Cop said demerit points would be applied to my drivers license and if he were to write me a ticket it would be $110. I've also been stopped for running a red light, again same thing, demerit points to your driver's license but the ticket would be $190.

so do you just not see the red light or something?

[gamer123]

and what if as a cyclist you dont have driver's license?

[GangStarr]

Thats total bull$hit, you cant get tickets against your drivers license for bike offences.

You just have cops lying to you, thats why you get a warning time and time again.

[sprung]

wow, charges laid. very rare for driver to get in trouble...

Toronto Police Service
News Release

Traffic fatality #20/2008, Update, Charge laid

Friday, June 27, 2008 - 3:11 PM
Traffic Services
416-808-1900

On Thursday, May 22, 2008, at 1:12 p.m., police responded to a personal injury collision at Eglinton Avenue West/Avenue Road.

It is alleged that:

- a 57-year-old man was cycling east on Eglinton Avenue West, passing a line of parked cars on the south side of the street,

- an occupant of one of the cars, a woman, 43, opened the driver's door,

- the cyclist struck the door, lost control of his bicycle, fell onto the roadway and was struck by a truck.

The cyclist was taken to hospital where he succumbed to his injuries. This is the first cycling fatality of 2008.

Traffic Services, in consultation with the City of Toronto’s Prosecutors' Office, have laid a charge of “Open Vehicle Door Improperly” under the Highway Traffic Act.

An information laying out the charge has been filed with Old City Hall Courts.



Constable Wendy Drummond, Public Information, for Sergeant Tim Burrows, Traffic Services

There are no files attached to this release.

[champlinD]

I've personally been stopped for running a stop sign on my bike. I got off with a warning but the Cop said demerit points would be applied to my drivers license and if he were to write me a ticket it would be $110. I've also been stopped for running a red light, again same thing, demerit points to your driver's license but the ticket would be $190.

Is this new way of making money for dept or old ways?
Is this legit way or just a threat/scam?

[IronMac]

The truth of it is, an automobile regardless of the price of gas shouldn't be substituted for a bicycle. Life of a human being is much more valueable then risking it to save a few dollars riding a bike. Riding the bike is very safe, but not in the downtown core streets of Toronto.

Besides, price of gas in Europe is 3x more then it is here, people are stupid for choosing a bike over their car. Damn right stupid!

I'd stop taking any more of that candy, if I were you.

[IronMac]

I've personally been stopped for running a stop sign on my bike. I got off with a warning but the Cop said demerit points would be applied to my drivers license and if he were to write me a ticket it would be $110. I've also been stopped for running a red light, again same thing, demerit points to your driver's license but the ticket would be $190.

You do not have demerit points added to your license as a result of infractions committed while on a bike.