[sanjuro]

(08-11) 10:35 PST -- A woman who was badly injured when she was struck by a bicyclist in a crosswalk at Mission Street and The Embarcadero last month died this morning, San Francisco police said.

The pedestrian, whose name has not been released by the medical examiner's office, died at a hospital at 5:20 a.m. of the injuries she suffered in the July 15 collision, Officer Albie Esparza said.

Police were called to the intersection around 8:30 a.m. and found the woman suffering from a life-threatening head injury, Esparza said.

An investigation revealed that the bicyclist had run a red light, hitting the woman as she was crossing the street legally, he said. The bicyclist was questioned at the scene before being released.

Esparza said police will present the case to the San Francisco's District Attorney's Office to determine if charges will be filed.

Esparza said after the collision that the bicyclist could face the same legal repercussions as the driver of any car involved in a collision with a pedestrian.

"Every bicyclist in the city should be reminded each and every day that all the laws on the books apply to them, too," Esparza said. "They need to stop at every stop sign and every stop light."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/baycitynews/archive/2011/08/11/pedestrian11.DTL#ixzz1UkRH2o1Q

 

[gonefirefightin]

run a red light, get the max

no excuse for this, D bag needs to fry

manslaughter

 

[stoney]

The same charge you would give someone who ran a red light in a car and hit someone. In California bicycles are considered motor vehicles, it's about time some people learned that. I would assume he's going to get it even worse given that iirc, he was on a brakeless fixie.

 

[jonKranked]

must've been a graduate from the Montasheu Skeul of Ficksed Geer Sikling

 

[Westy]

This person is clearly a menace to society. Life in prison, minimum. Anything less and they will be out on the streets killing more pedestrians. Someone think of the children.


Sad story.

 

[Nick]

The same charge you would give someone who ran a red light in a car and hit someone.

This.

 

[stevew]

zero carbon footprint.

not guilty...saving the world one pedal stroke at a time.

 

[moff_quigley]

I'd be all for them prosecuting the cyclist the same as a car driver when they start treating the death of a cyclist by car in the same manner. "Oh I'm sorry I wasn't paying attention and swerved off the road and killed those biking people. It was an accident."

 

[Sandwich]

vehicular mans laughter.

too bad so sad watch where you're going.

 

[jimmydean]

Outlaw fixies. He would have stopped at the light if he would have had brakes.

 

[Sandwich]

i hope it's a pretty white chick that was riding the bike.

 

[Mr Jones]

Vehicular Manslaughter for sure. If it was a fixie, add reckless endangerment to that.

 

[TheMontashu]

Vehicular Manslaughter for sure. If it was a fixie, add reckless endangerment to that.

What about if he was on a coaster brake? Reckless endangerment too???? They are both equally as effective. Or what if he was on a bike with campy delta brakes, those things SURELY must be reckless.

How about, it doesn't matter what kind of bike he was on. All that matters is the dude killed someone and he needs to be punished as such

must've been a graduate from the Montasheu Skeul of Ficksed Geer Sikling

Nope, he must have been a drop out. It's not possible to run a red illegally when you only make right turns.

 

[4130biker]

How about requiring bikes to be street legal, at a bare minimum, having brakes?? This could help with the hippie fixter epedemic we're having.

 

[Mr Jones]

What about if he was on a coaster brake? Reckless endangerment too???? They are both equally as effective. Or what if he was on a bike with campy delta brakes, those things SURELY must be reckless.

Coaster brakes and Campy Deltas will stop a bike just fine. You're probably an experienced fixie rider and know how maintain situational awareness, control speed, don't run red lights and stop signs, and trackstand when needed. This person (if he was a fixie pixie), may not have been of your riding prowess; or could have been a better rider than you but decided to be a douche nozzle and ran the red.

Give the average person a bike with either a coaster brake or "campy delta's", and I'm sure they can safely stop the bike. Give the average person a fixie... Sure they may be able to get it going, but stopping it safely, that's something youtube worthy.

How about, it doesn't matter what kind of bike he was on. All that matters is the dude killed someone and he needs to be punished as such

^^^ now this I agree to

 

[CrabJoe StretchPants]

Did I miss something.....where in the article did it say the bike didn't have brakes?

 

[Mr Jones]

Did I miss something.....where in the article did it say the bike didn't have brakes?

I blame JimmyDean.

The article never mentioned it. I just added "IF it was a fixie...", then mooshoo got butt hurt.

 

[OGRipper]

I am a harsh critic of cyclists behaving badly, and I agree that the cyclist should be held to the same standard as a driver, but come on people. Some of you sound like the comments in the article.

There is just way too much detail we don't know. A brakeless fixie may or may not have been involved. The cyclist may or may not have been a hipster. The cyclist may or may not have been skilled. The cyclist may or may not blown the light. The woman may or may not have been crossing with the light.

The only thing we really know is the crappy but all too common news that there was a traffic accident and someone died.

Side note 1: A fixed gear does not equal a brake. It just doesn't. Being able to skid your wheel is almost useless in an emergency. If I had to choose I'd rather have a front brake and freewheel.

Side Note 2: I once hit a older woman riding through San Francsico. I was moving pretty quickly towards a GREEN light and she stepped off the curb in the middle of road (not a crosswalk) without looking and there was just nothing I could do. She fell, hit her head, there was a lot of blood, a crowd quickly gathered, and there was a lot of hate directed at me even though I had done nothing wrong. I quickly understood the potential of a mob, and I was glad when the cops showed up.

Side Note 3: I once got a ticket in my car for failing to yield to a pedestrian. As I entered an intersection with a green light, I made eye contact with a runner about to cross from the left side of the road, on the far side of the intersection I was already in. He was still on the sidewalk when I entered the intersection. But because he was in the road (two lanes away from me) when I passed his crosswalk, I got a ticket. Turns out a pedestrian had been hit at that intersection recently and I was caught in the follow-up sting. The cop apologized but gave me a ticket anyway. To this day it's the only moving violation I've ever received. /cool story.

 

[stoney]

Did I miss something.....where in the article did it say the bike didn't have brakes?

The original article from a few months ago mentioned something to that extent. Also, on that intersection the majority of people I see riding through are brakeless fixies.

 

[stoney]

What about if he was on a coaster brake? Reckless endangerment too???? They are both equally as effective. Or what if he was on a bike with campy delta brakes, those things SURELY must be reckless.

How about, it doesn't matter what kind of bike he was on. All that matters is the dude killed someone and he needs to be punished as such

1. In California you are required by law to have a mechanical braking mechanism. It doesn't matter if you can stop by locking the wheel with your legs, it must have a mechanical brake.

2. My God, we actually agree on something.

 

[DirtyMike]

My list I would see in this should the DA really want to hammer this person.

vehicular manslaughter
reckles endangerment
running a redlight

If it was indeed on a brakeless fixie
then add to it illeagal use of a vehicle not roadworthy
and illeagal modification of a street use vehicle



My thoughts.... full extent of the law in this one... car or bike doesnt matter, the report is pretty cleat, cyclist ran a red and killed a pedestrian..... laws of the road all apply here as per the california driving code

 

[X3pilot]

Laws is laws...

 

[Rip]

Could have been any kind of bike. Since there are idiots who will blow stop signs or red lights on any kind of bike.

On the fixie thing, I run a brake and stop for lights and signs. Personally I find it incredibly moronic to go brakeless, unless it's a dedicated track bike on a velodrome.

My verdict is, the rider committed multiple violations and should be punished as so.

 

[jdcamb]

Bailiff wack his pepe!

 

[sanjuro]

Was it a fixie? I doubt it. On my regular commutes through the city, I see maybe 1 fixie out of 10 riders.

I wish there was some vid of the rider.

 

[TheMontashu]

1. In California you are required by law to have a mechanical braking mechanism. It doesn't matter if you can stop by locking the wheel with your legs, it must have a mechanical brake.

2. My God, we actually agree on something.

1) it does not specify that it has to be by friction. Cranks, chainring, cog, mechanical device.

2) I still think you're dumb

 

[jimmydean]

Did I miss something.....

Yes, yes you did.

 

[Pesqueeb]

I'd be all for them prosecuting the cyclist the same as a car driver when they start treating the death of a cyclist by car in the same manner. "Oh I'm sorry I wasn't paying attention and swerved off the road and killed those biking people. It was an accident."

This. I'd be all for throwing the book at the cyclist if thats what actually happened to auto drivers, but its simply not the case. If this Jackass had been driving a car it would be a "accident" that the offender would plead down on, get a couple points on his record, and walk away virtually consequence free. Instead what will happen is the cyclist will receive the sh*t end of a major double standard and the woman will still be dead.

 

[Silver]

The same charge you would give someone who ran a red light in a car and hit someone.

Agreed, with a modification: The same charge you'd get if ran a red light in a car and hit someone on a bicycle and killed them.

So, nothing, basically.

 

[Westy]

Agreed, with a modification: The same charge you'd get if ran a red light in a car and hit someone on a bicycle and killed them.

So, nothing, basically.

Doing something stupid that results in a death needs to be dealt with. The odds of killing someone while breaking the law driving are significantly higher than than when riding a bike. Why should the punishment be the same? Pretty much everyone breaks some laws based on certain risk assessments. Punishments should reflect those risks when the cause is an accident.

 

[DirtyMike]

1) it does not specify that it has to be by friction. Cranks, chainring, cog, mechanical device.

2) I still think you're dumb

That is incorrect... in CA, fixed gears are NOT a braking device..... ALL bikes in California MUST have an actiavated braking system... that means hand brakes, or coaster brakes...... Soooo YES, there must be some type of friction brake on the bike to be legal.




Oh, and if that isnt clear enough........ by definition, a braking system is a friction device...

 

[stoney]

That is incorrect... in CA, fixed gears are NOT a braking device..... ALL bikes in California MUST have an actiavated braking system... that means hand brakes, or coaster brakes...... Soooo YES, there must be some type of friction brake on the bike to be legal.




Oh, and if that isnt clear enough........ by definition, a braking system is a friction device...

Thank you.

 

[TheMontashu]

That is incorrect... in CA, fixed gears are NOT a braking device..... ALL bikes in California MUST have an actiavated braking system... that means hand brakes, or coaster brakes...... Soooo YES, there must be some type of friction brake on the bike to be legal.




Oh, and if that isnt clear enough........ by definition, a braking system is a friction device...

"Brakes

No person shall operate a bicycle on a roadway unless it is equipped with a brake which will enable the operator to make one wheel skid on dry level clean pavement (Ref Sec 21201(a)). "


http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist9/bicycle/Bike_Laws.html

Braking system? Where does the law say braking system?

Then what is by definition a jake brake? Or am I unclear on them working off the engine???? Much like a fixie.......

Thank you.

You're welcome.

 

[johnnypop]

If that's the case, then why would a BMXer get a ticket for riding brakeless when a foot in the back wheel does the trick?

 

[stoney]

You're arguing semantics now, but missed the key note here: "equipped with a brake".

There was a big hooplah about it 3-4 years ago when the SFPD started issuing tickets to messengers who ran brakeless fixies. They messengers tried to fight it but lost. From the court's perspective the standing argument was if a random person were to ride the bicycle in question, could they make it skid? If the answer was no, then it did not have a brake.

And a jack brake is not a bicycle brake. You are comparing apples to oranges.

 

[stoney]

If that's the case, then why would a BMXer get a ticket for riding brakeless when a foot in the back wheel does the trick?

Because a random person riding the bike could not stop it, therefore it has no brake.

 

[TheMontashu]

You're arguing semantics now, but missed the key note here: "equipped with a brake".

There was a big hooplah about it 3-4 years ago when the SFPD started issuing tickets to messengers who ran brakeless fixies. They messengers tried to fight it but lost. From the court's perspective the standing argument was if a random person were to ride the bicycle in question, could they make it skid? If the answer was no, then it did not have a brake.

And a jack brake is not a bicycle brake. You are comparing apples to oranges.

Ummm can you cite that? I have a few friends who were messengers at the time, and they never mentioned it. I've also got off more than once citing that law.

He said a brake "on principal" works on friction, and i was pointing out it isn't true. I know I'm comparing 2 totally different things

 

[sanjuro]

Ummm can you cite that? I have a few friends who were messengers at the time, and they never mentioned it. I've also got off more than once citing that law.

He said a brake "on principal" works on friction, and i was pointing out it isn't true. I know I'm comparing 2 totally different things

I believe the no brake rule is unenforceable, which is why you don't hear about it.

It is not like no car taillights, which is very easy to enforce.

 

[MikeD]

blah

I can slow my car down by downshifting, even to the point of causing a rear-wheel skid, then stall it to a stop. I couldn't make a case that this fact alone means it has brakes.

The law quoted requires a bike to be equipped with a brake. A brakeless bike has no brake, even if it can slow down and stop by other means.

People who are saying it doesn't matter what kind of bike it is would most likely object to someone driving a brakeless car or motorcycle on a public road.

Showing reckless disregard for others' safety could constitute a charge in and of itself, or at least be a contributing factor to sentencing.

 

[jonKranked]

what if it was a recumbant?