Bike Accident painting. From Mo's Photostream on Flickr. There is a very fortunate, and foolish, cyclist in Austin Texas today.
Driver charged after hit and run of cyclist
By Andrea Lorenz | Thursday, July 23, 2009, 04:54 PM
Austin American-Statesman
An Austin man, Gregory Feazell, was charged with failure to stop and render aid, a third-degree felony, after police say he hit a cyclist Tuesday evening on Brodie Lane near William Cannon Drive.
A witness told police the driver of a PT Cruiser hit a cyclist near the H-E-B at 6900 Brodie Lane. The cyclist flew over the top of the car and rolled onto the street, according to the arrest warrant.
Police say Feazell, 26, left the scene for a nearby apartment complex, where police found him. According to arrest documents, Feazell told police he had returned home to tell his mother what happened and that he had had no phone service at the scene of the crash.
The cyclist, Ross Clurman, told police he was within a few inches to the curb - as close as he could get - when he was hit. Clurman said the driver got out of his car and asked him if he was alright, according to police. Clurman responded, “What do you think?”
Clurman was taken to University Medical Center Brackenridge with complaints of pain in his neck and back, according to the documents.
This is a typical "hit from the rear while being overtaken" collision, and was easily avoidable had the cyclist not been riding in the "fear zone", as close to the curb as possible. Had Mr. Clurman been riding five feet out from the curb (instead of five inches), Mr. Feazell would have changed lanes to pass him. Instead, Mr. Clurman signaled to Mr. Feazell that it was "OK" to pass him without changing lanes, by pulling over as far right as he possibly could.
The Texas Transportation Code defines the travel lanes on Brodie Lane as being of insufficient width for a bicycle and an automobile to share side-by-side, and that a cyclist has the legal right to control the entire lane. It's not just a "right", rather it's a defensive imperative for cyclist safety.
Notice that Mr. Feazell, according to this report, was not charged with the existing and applicable statute of failure to maintain proper distance while passing.
Of greater value to cyclists than a new, unenforced "safe passing" law, would be an insistence that the existing law be enforced (perhaps even adding a specified minimum distance during the next legislative session). But of even greater value, and one that would truly save lives, would be the removal of the "Far Right as Practicable" language in the Texas Transportation Code, so that cyclists like Mr. Clurman wouldn't be lured into the death trap they think they are supposed to ride in.
As much as Mr. Feazell is at fault in this collision, Mr. Clurman had the power to prevent it. Had Mr. Clurman controlled his lane as a slow moving vehicle, he almost certainly would not have been struck, whereas the lane position he chose increased the probability. Those who refuse to recognize this fact are simply more comfortable in the Fear Zone of victimization than they are in taking responsibility for their own safety.
Hat tip to velociped for bringing this to our attention.
10 comments:
There are other traffic crimes Mr. Feazell could be charged with as well as the passing too closely that you rightly pointed out.
He could also be charged with reckless driving, and hit and run. If our society would consider hitting a person or property with an automobile is a shameful and terrible act, this fellow would have additional charges to face.
But it would seem that we no longer have an expectation that we should exercise due care when operating a motor vehicle in the public way. Driving has become such an everyday, normal and common activity that we have become callous and cavalier about it.
PM - just a little meta-comment here. Can you provide references to the source of the images that you post on this blog? Just a little credit for the creators would be really good.
Eliot,
Good point, and I try to, when I can tell who the creator is. But if no credit is listed, or creative commons, I'll just use it.
Creative Commons often requires a link back or credit to the author of some sort.
I'm really sad that the cyclist doesn't even realize that he is doing something wrong. He very innocently said he was trying to be a good rider. I hope that this incident helps him to figure out that what he thinks is good is really not.
It is NOT safe to ride in the "fear zone". Very true!
I always wonder if the cyclist had on any kind of bright vest or bright clothing or if he was riding in regular street clothes or a fancy jersey whose colors were not at all bright.
I have become a big proponent of a bright reflective vest ($2-$4) at some Hardware stores.
My heart goes out to the injured cyclist! Prayers and best wishes to him!!
In the Boston area, even when I ride close to the middle of the lane, cars often try to pass me without changing lanes, or while being "in between lanes". It's as if people see a bicycle and just don't know what to do; the concept of changing lanes does not occur to them as the common-sense solution.
One thing that confuses me in the story you posted: Why was the driver charged with failure to stop and render aid if he stopped, got out of the car, and asked the cyclist if he was okay?
@Filigree
"Why was the driver charged with failure to stop and render aid if he stopped, got out of the car, and asked the cyclist if he was okay?"
Primarily, because he was not okay. In his own words, he described responding "understandably rudely, to his inquiry with: 'What the [four-letter-word] do you think?'" Also, it was clear from the newspaper article and personal summary that he was suffering from neck and back injuries. There is little doubt the cyclist sustained injury.
The law states quite clearly:
"The operator of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in the injury or death of a person or damage to a vehicle that is driven or attended by a person shall give the operator's name and address, the registration number of the vehicle the operator was driving, and the name of the operator's motor vehicle liability insurer to any person injured or the operator or occupant of or person attending a vehicle involved in the collision; if requested and available, show the operator's driver's license to a person described [above]; and provide any person injured in the accident reasonable assistance, including transporting or making arrangements for transporting the person to a physician or hospital for medical treatment if it is apparent that treatment is necessary, or if the injured person requests the transportation."
§550.023
Whether the victim stated he was alright or not, if it is apparent he wasn't, then the motorist is required to remain on-scene until the aforementioned criteria are met.
While I do ride in the middle of the traffic lanes for higher visibility (and to assert my right to use the road), I do not believe that this accident could have been completely avoided by the cyclist riding further left. You assume that the driver in this incident would ave given greater passing distance, but you can't accurately predict it. As it is portrayed, the driver DID see the cyclist. I interpret this to mean that the driver could have possibly used the same judgment of spatial relationships, thus making it equally likely that the cyclist could have still been hit.
BLondon said...
"You assume that the driver in this incident would ave given greater passing distance, but you can't accurately predict it. As it is portrayed, the driver DID see the cyclist. I interpret this to mean that the driver could have possibly used the same judgment of spatial relationships, thus making it equally likely that the cyclist could have still been hit."
Absolutely not. The collision MOST LIKELY (there is no 100% certainty is cases like this) occurred because the cyclist gave the motorist permission to pass him without deflecting his (the motorist's) lane position. Had the cyclist controlled his lane, the motorist would have pulled out to pass him... just as he would any other slow-moving vehicle.
Traffic studies in the USA and England (including Ian Haslett's in Austin) have repeatedly shown that a motorist will pull out further away from a cyclist when they have to change position to pass, providing greater clearance. The closer a cyclist is to the road edge, the closer the motorist will pass (again, because in the non-verbal world of right-of-way, the cyclists has communicated to the motorist that he may pass him without changing position).
As a cyclist, is not bravado behavior to control your lane. Rather, it is foolhardy not to.
Post a Comment