Driver not responsible for cyclist's death

16 Feb 2012 09:25p.m.

karen wrote:

the problem is not with cyclists or drivers it is with the kiwi attitude to anything different from what they beleive in.Its the she,ll be right , no worries mate, bravado attitude....just like riding 2 abreast , speeding wether in a car or bike, drinking and driving etc.What other country forces laws on its citizens to protect them selves.Why do we have to wear cycle helmets.....only NZ and Oz have that one,is it because we can not ride bikes ? Speed limits...countrys like germany,italy no speed limits but far less accidents on motorways,even the UKs motorways flow at a much faster pace .America is not even that paronoid.Has society here bred a non caring bullet proof person because we all beleive the laws will protect us as long we adhere to all rules nothing can harm us!.The law says I can ride two abreast..so I do,the law says I must wear a cycle helmet and I will reduce my chance of brain injury..so now I ride fast in trafic and zig zag about the place.I can drive my car at the speed limit between the white lines and if anything gets in my way to bad,my $50,000 car can go fast so I do because my seat belt will save me.Have we ever stopped to think we are products of our own demise.We are kiwis and this is what we do,live life to the max....sometimes we stuff up, deal with it.

04 Feb 2012 08:16a.m.

Charlie wrote:

GARY, I cycle drive. I contribute my rates & taxes towards the maintenance of Auckland's roads through registration and petrol surcharges. Maybe together we should target our frustration against unregistered pedestrians, I'm sure the younger ones don't even have jobs. If you cared to read or watch articles on Miss Bishop you'd find that reports have said the cycle path was congested by pedestrians. It wasn't actually a cycle path reserved for cycles, it's some sort of foot/cycle path combined. It's often chocka with pedestrians and skaters and you can't ride on it. It's those pesky pedestrians again. JD, what city do you live in? 1.5 to 2 m? You're talking about the width of the cycle lanes on both sides of the road combined right? I've gone out and measured and I haven't found one over 90 cm. Something else that makes your comment misleading is that the left most edge of the cycle lane on a road can't be ridden in because: 1) pedals hit the curb --> crash. 2) drainage grates often in deep recesses which project more than 50 cm from curb, front tyre goes in --> crash over handle bars. 3) ridge at change in road surface (since many roads are constructed so that the tar seal gives way to just tar or concrete gutters) --> bike tyre can't steer or move across ridge --> fall-to-side crash GENERAL comments: I was surprised to learn that cyclists are legally allowed to ride two abreast. I don't see why. I've seen idiots do this, on blind corners in open road speed limit areas. It's bloody inconsiderate and dangerous. But, there are considerate cyclists, just as there are considerate drivers, including a nice bus driver who slowed down a little to let me turn right recently. I give a little thank you wave to drivers like that, same as if I'm in car and someone's nice to me. I have to say, I have never nearly been the cause of an accident. But several times, often for less than 3 seconds gain, several motorists have been willing to risk my life. For less than 3 seconds.

03 Feb 2012 12:45p.m.

Alan wrote:

JD the reason cyclists ride along that line is too avoid car doors, the exact reason the woman in this article was killed. And, Dan, a better idea than banning cyclists on busy roads would be to ban the parking of cars on busy roads. Roads are thoroughfares. You look at Tamaki Drive about 90% of the width of the road is cars. And still the cyclist is vilified.

03 Feb 2012 12:14p.m.

Ben wrote:

Here we go again, blame the cyclist. I have been hit twice by cars with drivers that do not bother looking. One opened the car door, did not look and I went flying in the middle of the road not because I had time to break but because the door hit me. Fortunately the incoming traffic was able to stop but I now have a detached shoulder. I wear hi-vis vest and my flashing lights are on day or night, I follow all the road rules, no exception. But if the driver does not bother looking it does not matter. As usual everybody blame the cyclist. The fact is that if the driver would have continued looking while opening his door the cyclist would still be alive today. So do not blame the cyclist for breaking and trying to take evasive action. I rode a bike in several countries (Japan, Norway, Canada, USA) and never bit hit once in 40 years, but in 3 years I have been hit twice in New Zealand!

03 Feb 2012 10:18a.m.

JD wrote:

I think what he meant Alan, was that most roads have a designated cycle lane, usually 1.5 to 2 meters in width, granted some roads have narrower lanes, but the aforementioned is the norm. How often do you see cyclists riding on, or even to the right of the lanes painted line. Are these cyclists ignorant or just arrogant, one of the strongest messages vehicle drivers must follow, is that of keeping left. If cyclists truly feel the painted line is the only part of the road they want to or can ride on, then good, lets do away with the wasted two meters of road and repaint the white line on the extreme left edge of the road, thus giving motorists a much wider land to avoid cyclists without having to cross the centre line in the process.

03 Feb 2012 08:29a.m.

Gary wrote:

Its a crime that Mr Becker was charged in the first instance. He should sue the Police. As for the cyclist - there is a cycle lane right there. Why was she on the road? Its appalling that precious money is used for the benefit of precious cyclists when registered road users have to run the guantlet of boy racers who use the road as a race track. What other road users have this privilage? Yet we condone it.

03 Feb 2012 12:35a.m.

Alan wrote:

James it is you whom is arrogant. Your motor vehicle is designed around the very concept of two abreast. And I bet half the time you are carrying and empty passenger seat around with you. A cyclist cannot take up any less space on the road. If the roads are congested it is because of all the single occupant cars on the roads.

03 Feb 2012 12:19a.m.

Darren M wrote:

Glad this guy got off. Cyclists anger me thinking they own the road. I have come close several times to collecting them. They ought to be locked-up for riding pushbikes side by side also.

02 Feb 2012 11:05p.m.

Jed wrote:

William, surly you cannot be serious, you give the impression that the truck just merrily drove on and took no evasive action to avoid the cyclist who had fallen on the road. This could not be further from the truth, the cyclist fell literally meters in front of the truck, the driver had no chance at all to avoid what happened. Remember, a vehicle travelling at 50kmh is covering close to 14 meters/second, you work out how long he had to react when the cyclist fell 3 or 4 meters in front of his truck. How quickly could you take evasive action in a 20 tonne truck or even your car in that time.

02 Feb 2012 10:51p.m.

Dan wrote:

Simple solution, Ban cyclists from using busy roads, the roads are built for motor vehicles. Cyclists just bring an unnecessary element of risk, and can also be quite arrogant when told so. They hold traffic up and expect drivers to be vigilant of them but very rarely do the same.