Showing posts with label duty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label duty. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

And Now, For Something Completely Different...

Some time in August, I noticed some strange paint on the road attached to my driveway.



Markings on the road are strictly regulated, lest traffic control devices become confused and non-standard. Uniformity across regions enhances public safety.

These curious marks appeared about every one hundred feet from the north end of FM 1722 to the bridge across Lake Clark. Surveying stakes and cryptic messages appeared at various spots. Something was afoot!




So one day, I spotted a survey crew doing what surveyors do, and I stopped to ask them what the project was. They said that it was the first step for adding shoulders to the roadway. Well now!

I took their pictures with their permission, but alas, those photos are trapped on my crashed hard drive. (I mention this not to whine, but for the opportunity to use "alas" in a sentence.)

So I ask myself, "Self, why would they want to put an improved shoulder on this road?"

One purpose of an improved shoulder is to protect the roadbed from eroding. An extra two to three feet of pavement beyond the normal travel lane will reduce the frequency of requiring repairs. Could this be the reason shoulders are being considered for this road?






As you can see, there is evidence that a shoulder would be helpful on this road to preserve the integrity of the travel lanes.

In conversation with one of my neighbors, they reckoned it was because of the four or five drive-off wrecks that occurred in the past few years. I know for certain that two of them were a result of DUI and another involved a teenage driver. There has been considerable evidence of automobiles leaving the roadway without wrecking as well.






So the theory they propose is that shoulders are needed to make it easier for incompetent drivers to stay out of the ditches. I hope this is not the motivation to add shoulder to this road. We need to get incompetent drivers off the road, not further along it. We need to expect that automobiles be steered with at least enough skill that the vehicle stays within its lane. It is expensive and wrong to accommodate the incompetent.

As a society, we have the wrong attitude about near-misses. When we drop a tire off the edge of the road, when we just miss side-swiping another vehicle, when we inadvertently swerve into the oncoming lane, these should be warning flags. We should see them as a bright red sign that we have a skill deficit that needs to be addressed.

Also, we ought to be ashamed.

We should pride ourselves in the skillful and safe handling of an automobile.

We should scorn those around us who fail to demonstrate such skill. We should despise those who fail in their duty to exercises due care. Those who have poor driving ability and poor judgment, why do we tolerate it? If we make the roads safer for them, will the roads be safer for us?

An awful lot of people have died this year in automobile wrecks. More than an awful lot of people have been injured in automobile wrecks. The amount of property damage inflicted by automobile wrecks is greater still.

We have tried to make our roads idiot proof. How high must the cost be before we admit that idea is a failure?

We need to look in a mirror. We need to prize superior driving ability in ourselves. We need to stop seeking a hardware solution (Safer roads, cars and devices.) for a software problem. (That stuff between the ears.) We need to have the courage to face the ugly truth: It is not the roads that are dangerous, it is us.

Friday, July 10, 2009

Hardware Fix for a Software Problem



A new study concludes that more than half of United States highway fatalities are related to bad roads.

"The group said its research concluded that roadway deficiencies contribute to more than 22,000 fatalities, with poor roads leading to 10 roadway-related crashes every minute (5.3 million a year) and contributing to 38% of non-fatal crash injuries."

So ask myself; "Self, what do they mean by "road deficiencies" and is that really the problem?"

"Miller added that PIRE’s [Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation] study identifies ways transportation officials can improve road conditions to save lives and reduce injuries. For example, he said immediate solutions for problem spots include: replacing non-forgiving poles with breakaway poles, using brighter and more durable pavement markings, adding rumble strips to shoulders, mounting more guardrails or safety barriers, and installing better signs with easier-to-read graphics.

The report also suggested more significant road improvements should be made, including adding or widening shoulders, improving roadway alignment, replacing or widening narrow bridges, reducing pavement edges and abrupt drop- offs, and clearing more space adjacent to roadways.

Although behavioral factors are involved in most crashes, avoiding those crashes through driver improvement requires reaching millions of individuals and getting them to sustain best safety practices,” Miller pointed out. “It is far more practical to make the roadway environment more forgiving and protective.”


Once again deflecting the dreadful driving skills of American motorists. Changing the culture is too hard. Let's blame an inanimate object instead of the operator of the automobile. If only the highway were more "forgiving" and not so mean, we would be just fine. I am not responsible, I am a victim here! Sheesh!



All of the "fixes" proposed (Highlighted above) are attempts to allow drifting or out-of-control motor vehicles more room to recover. I find this appalling! Is it not a reflection of our societies tolerance of irresponsible behavior? Better to install break-away light poles than expect Americans to avoid steering their automobiles into them.

It is foolishness to think we can reduce the carnage by making safer roads while ignoring the attitude of society toward responsible public behavior. There is no shame in poor driving skills, and no scandal if you cause a wreck and property damage. Changing this cavalier attitude would be more effective than "fixing the roads".

Technology is doomed in an arms race with fools; There are so many of them and they are persistent and innovative!



Addendum: A sad commentary highlighting this sad state of incivility and accepted carnage can be found at Carbon Trace.

Sunday, May 10, 2009

SMIDSY


In Virginia Beach, this is now a positive defense for failure to do ones duty in the public way. Motorists are no longer expected to operate their vehicles in a manner that avoids hitting slower traffic in their lane.


Commonwealth's Attorney Harvey Bryant said members of his office and the Police Department's fatal crash team met Wednesday and determined there was insufficient evidence to file charges in the death of Daniel Wayne Hersh, the 54-year-old civil engineer and ex-SEAL killed on April 19.
Hersh, an avid cyclist on his Sunday morning ride, was apparently following traffic laws by pedaling east in the right travel lane - not the turn lane - on Shore Drive near Starfish Road in the early light shortly before 6 a.m., when a motorist struck him from behind. He was wearing a helmet and a bright yellow windbreaker with reflective strips, Bryant said. (
Witnesses who came upon the wreck said his blinking tail-lights were still on. -ChipSeal)
"In terms of his safety equipment, there certainly was no fault on his part," he said.
The motorist told police she never saw Hersh, and authorities found no evidence to support potential charges to allege that she hit him willfully or through negligent or reckless driving, Bryant told reporters.
The woman was cooperative, and she realized she had hit a bicyclist only after she felt the impact, stopped and saw Hersh's body, according to Bryant.
Investigators took measurements, photographs and video of the scene, all of which supported the woman's statement that she was in her lane and abiding by the 45-mph speed limit.
There were no witnesses, but investigators determined the motorist had not been smoking, and she passed a breath test for alcohol on-scene.
She denied falling asleep, and her cell phone records showed no calls or text messages at the time of the crash.
The woman loaned her vehicle to police, who conducted a re-enactment video along the same stretch at the same time of day.
None of the efforts produced anything that "would lead to a criminal prosecution or would substantiate a criminal prosecution," the CA Bryant said.


The conclusion of the local authorities is that while unfortunate, this wreck was unavoidable. The motorist wasn't drunk, asleep, speeding or using a phone! She was following the letter of the law, how could she be expected to have a duty to use due care? kijdjdjhhf jhshyjsuw shirewr eirijfr ewirhiehrj ieriherhjrieuhyr hrie iehroeiyfuehrioeyh rhehwfhiouwehriehuiew iuhyerioewuhyruhr uweriouewh hjjf
How could it be her fault? It isn't reasonable to expect a motorist to observe a well lit cyclist in your path. It isn't the drivers fault that she was overdriving her headlights. The manufacturer didn't make them bright enough. The speed limit was too high! lodjndjhyhf dhuduejjfdujdjd fjfdhdsjf ejjfjheiweoqowrhjrejh rehieh jeijhrdool jfdoifiodhjndified idfijosrijhfkdjht ieurie nfuirehreoti iutoietfdi jjjdj
The only reasonable conclusion is that this "accident" could have been prevented by an infrastructure change, not an attitude adjustment. It was a technology failure, not the imprudent and reckless behavior of the motorist.


The notion that there is insufficient evidence to charge the motorist with anything is preposterous and an obvious falsehood.kudsfh jufdhie hdush uhyhy udusuhd hduishyh shdhush suhdijshhrjhsuufdhjh shireuir uyrhe8uhrh eyrueuih 8erheue hreiuie
The motorist violated the cyclist's right of way by (at a minimum) following too close. There is plenty of EVIDENCE of that!kjdsyffr dfuwjserj usi eirie iei reiirjh riieirrjr reirejijhrie riejrieujreijr rjeiujr eiriejre riejrier riureje erier reijrjei eiurei jrieuierie eiieirrujur
Failure to observe traffic. The "I didn't see him, officer" is a confession, not an alibi!jdhfksdfhhfhdd jfhjhdkshjjhfuj fjfjkedujiejrujf jufrjrj jujfhd dhdhe dhue uhfh rujjdjd fdufrrujurjeej hhufrej hjdsheihfd urrehreirhhfd hfdeuirr8uhe uhei ur 8erehr uierjh
I wonder, if this driver had been a male, or unattractive, would she have garnered as much sympathy from the authorities? Is this un-named perpetrator politically or socially connected? ljujuujus hhysts ufjdhdysys jdhgdtegdeyd hdydbdjdjdhdhd ujdhstytgdhd djhdhdyd ydhdyshdyd djfkj dhdhdjdhddh uddndhdjjj jjjjjj
I fear that the real reason law enforcement "can't find a reason to charge her" is that it is blatant vehicle-class discrimination. Auto-ism if you will. kinn ujdyh hygsk kufjj jdhsjjdkjhd jhhhjkkjdhfnfnfjdjdjhdl kujhdgd kjuuj ijdhy hyyhyhh hgysgh hdhdhh
While the general public's attitude toward cyclists has deteriorated as car-centrism has been on the rise, we had refuge in the law. We choose not to be alarmed when law enforcement officers (LEO) decline to issue tickets to motorists for violating a cyclists right of way. (Improper passes, right hooks) We are not upset when they decline to cite cyclists for breaking the law, thus treating cyclists like irresponsible children rather than legitimate road users. (Salmon behavior, night trips without lights) klonj juuh hdsju hy uhdgd hdjdhhhhdjdbhcj j jjj jjjj jjdjd djdkkd lljhyhdh hys juj jjhdg isjrhh dhjjs ksjjs jjuikk
There was a time when the privilege of operating a motor vehicle on the public road brought with it a sense of responsibility and ownership for the consequences of your actions. Hitting someone or something was a BIG deal. Reckless behavior was a serious breach of social norms. gejjskk ijdhhjj jjekik kiik kkij judhr hjdsjj yudjdhdh jhhyddbddhjfj kijhsyyh hydhdjd hdhdysj ggs jjikjhidksks
Something has changed, and it is now infecting LEOs, DAs and our courts. Bicyclist's liberty is being encroached upon. Killing a cyclist is not a crime anymore. Killing a cyclist is not an avoidable event anymore. The law is abandoning us and no longer providing a deterrent to recklessness. There is no expectation of motorists using due care! jeejj jje j skk skk keek kkksk kks ekek kk sksks krkr ksks fkrke skkkr ks skker k
The message being sent to motorists is; "It's a sad unavoidable situation. If there is any fault at all, it most certainly is not that of the motorist. Bicyclists have inferior rights to public roads. There can be no expectation that the laws will be applied to protect cyclists." i must put spaces here because this stupid program wo
SIGH. We would be better served by bicycle "advocates" if they would insist on the enforcement and prosecution of EXISTING law, rather than wasting resources and political capital on writing and passing redundant new laws. What is the point of new laws anyway, when they will be ignored also?



Saturday, April 25, 2009

Perception VS. Reality

After the incident with with Mr. Maniac as described in the previous post, and while I was calming myself down, a motorist pulled onto the road behind me from a side street after yielding as I passed.

She remained behind me for about 20 seconds and, as we approached the stop sign at Martin Luther King Street, she started to pass. It is obvious she has mis-judged the space available before the stop sign, because there wouldn't be room to get by in time to clear me! I am already wondering if she will encounter opposing traffic before she can clear the intersection, since she will be in the oncoming traffic lane at the stop sign.


So with about two car lengths from the intersection, I begin slowing while she is alongside me in the next lane. There is a stop sign on our road and the cross traffic does not stop. Thus, I am astonished when she guns it- turning sharply enough to make her tires squeal as she makes a right turn at the intersection at about 20 MPH. I am forced to take evasive action to avoid a collision with her!

In all the other times that this has happened to me, (An overtake attempt too close to an intersection with traffic control signs or devices) the offender strands himself in the wrong lane, impeding opposing traffic and enduring the embarrassment of his predicament until the intersection clears.

There seems to be a compulsion by some motorists to pass cyclists in the road. This lady seemed to perceive that I was going slower than I actually was, even though she had followed behind and paced me for a short period of time. Apparently, she also thought that the space available up to the intersection was greater than it really was. She must have poor decision making skills at the least, or she is unable to operate outside of her pre-conceived expectations. I have no doubt that she would describe herself as a good driver, though!

Maybe she didn't expect a bicycle to be using the space a motor vehicle would. Maybe she didn't expect me to be traveling at 15 MPH. She panicked when reality asserted itself and she found herself in the wrong lane at the intersection.

This is the first right-hook that has happened to me in Texas! To put it another way, it is the first right-hook in more than 13,000 miles of cycling.



Sec. 544.010. STOP SIGNS AND YIELD SIGNS

(a) The operator of a vehicle approaching an
intersection with a stop sign shall stop



Sec. 545.101. TURNING AT INTERSECTION

(a) To make a right turn at an intersection, an
operator shall make both the approach and the turn as closely as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway.


Sec. 545.103. SAFELY TURNING

An operator may not turn the vehicle to enter a
private road or driveway, otherwise turn the vehicle from a direct course, or move right or left on a roadway unless movement can be made safely.



Sec. 545.053. PASSING TO THE LEFT; RETURN

(a) An operator passing another vehicle:

(2) may not move back to the right side of the roadway until safely clear of the passed vehicle.


Sec. 545.401. RECKLESS DRIVING; OFFENSE.

(a) A person commits an offense if the person drives a vehicle in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property.


All of these and other traffic offenses were violated in order to avoid a ten second delay. How silly is that?

Thursday, April 23, 2009

When Once Is Not Enough



On Tuesday, on the way through Ennis, I met a fella who is a bully.


I was traveling south on Main, between where the two railroad spurs cross it. The road here is about 25 feet wide with no lane markings- no center lane nor any fog lines. I was riding in the left tire track of a standard vehicle complying with the slow moving vehicle law.


Up ahead of me, a car began to overtake another car . (Both of them were going north.) After clearing the car he was overtaking, he began to return to the right side of the roadway.


Until he saw me.


Changing the direction of his lateral movement, he swung back onto my side of the road!


I held my lane position.After about half the distance between us closed, he adjusted his trajectory to pass within a foot of my left handle-bar. I would say there was about six seconds of time between his clearing the other car and passing me.
I spat on his windshield as he passed by, and I continued on my way. Within a few seconds the whole thing was out of my mind.

But our bully couldn't let such an insult go.

So I continue on my way down Main, maintaining my lane position. A car overtakes me with due care and in a safe manner, completely on the other half of the road. No sooner had that car passed me then I was buzzed by our bully, again passing me within a foot.

I laughed. I'm sorry, but it just struck me as funny that someone who was so anxious to get to wherever he was going that he was over-taking slower traffic, suddenly has the time and inclination to "teach me a lesson" by backtracking more than two miles in order to do it.







CHAPTER 545. OPERATION AND MOVEMENT OF VEHICLES
SUBCHAPTER B. DRIVING ON RIGHT SIDE OF ROADWAY AND PASSING
Sec. 545.051. DRIVING ON RIGHT SIDE OF ROADWAY.

(a) An operator on a roadway of sufficient width shall drive on the
right half of the roadway, unless:

(1) the operator is passing another vehicle;
(2) an obstruction necessitates moving the vehicle left of the center of
the roadway and the operator yields the right-of-way to a vehicle
that:

(A) is moving in the proper direction on the unobstructed portion of the roadway





So our bully, in expressing his objection to my "arrogant" and high-minded lawful use of the public way, failed to drive on the right hand side of the roadway and he also failed to yield to my right of way. He violated Sec. 545.051.





Sec. 545.053. PASSING TO THE LEFT; RETURN; BEING PASSED.

(a) An operator passing another vehicle:

(1) shall pass to the left of the other vehicle at a safe
distance.


He also violated Sec. 545.053 by failing to provide a safe distance between me and himself when he overtook me after he turned around. He did not follow the path of the car ahead of him the did pass me with due care and in a safe manner. He very obviously and deliberately attempted to intimidate me with his car.

With this in mind, I accuse this motorist of violating Sec. 545.401:




545.401. RECKLESS DRIVING; OFFENSE.

(a) A person commits an offense if the person drives a vehicle in willful
or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property.



Why is it possible for people such as this to keep their driving privileges?


Imaginary laws

"You have to stay to the side of the road."

The words were shouted at me by a motorist as he crowded me out of the lane.

This was Tuesday, on hwy 34 about four miles from Ennis, traveling west.

This particular motorist, driving a white SUV and towing a utility trailer, had been having a difficult time finding a safe place to pass, due to oncoming traffic and terrain.

He honked at me, and must have been surprised when I didn't pull over out of his way. When he finally had an opportunity to pass me (after being delayed for about 45 seconds) he pulled up in the oncoming lane and slowed down to pace me. His passenger window was down and he was screaming something at me.

At the same time he began crowding me with his vehicle, forcing me to give way toward the edge of the lane. I was tempted to begin pounding on the side panels of his car, but the trailer was wider than his vehicle and it spooked me. (This is usually rather effective though. The pounding can be very loud inside, and can be quite frightening for the motorist, while being unlikely to cause damage.)

Not understanding what he was saying, I yelled at him to "Follow the Law." I repeated it about three times. In the end, he crowded me all the way off the shoulder into the grass, then he sped away. He did this with two vehicles following behind him. The confrontation lasted about 10 seconds.


Sec. 545.053. PASSING TO THE LEFT; RETURN; BEING PASSED.


(a) An operator passing another vehicle:

(1) shall pass to the left of the other vehicle at a safe distance; and
(2) may not move back to the right side of the roadway until safely clear of the passed vehicle.


(b) An operator being passed by another vehicle:

(1) shall, on audible signal, move or remain to the right in favor of the passing vehicle; and
(2) may not accelerate until completely passed by the passing vehicle.



At a minimum he violated this law, and I complied with it. I was riding legally in the lane in accordance with the slow moving vehicle law and bicycle specific lane positioning law. He failed to pass me at a safe distance (Sec. 545.053(a)(1)) and he pulled back into the lane when before he was properly clear of me. (Sec. 545.053(a)(2)) He did this with full knowledge of what he was doing as he was looking at me through his passenger side window.


Sec. 545.401. RECKLESS DRIVING; OFFENSE.

(a) A person commits an offense if the person drives a vehicle in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property.

(b) An offense under this section is a misdemeanor punishable by:

(1) a fine not to exceed $200;
(2) confinement in county jail for not
more than 30 days; or
(3) both the fine and the confinement.

Because he deliberately used his vehicle as a weapon, he also committed a reckless driving offense, wouldn't you say?

Monday, April 20, 2009

Complacency

Sadly, because driving an automobile has become such an ordinary everyday event, people have become insensitive to the grave responsibility of operating one on the public roads.

Regardless, it is both a moral and legal duty to overtake slower vehicles with due care and in a safe manner, whether they are operating within the law or not.