Conference noted::bicycle

    Seems pretty clear to me; The cyclist should have had some type of 
    lighting if he/she insists on riding in the dark.  If you can't see
    'em, you can't avoid 'em.
    
    Phil

    
    The law says the cyclist must have a white light on the bike pointing
    forewards and some kind of reflector on the rear (reflector vest,
    attached to the bike type, etc.).
    
    Common sense says that cyclist has a death wish!
    
    Roger

Here in Maryland there is a law that says that a cyclist at
night has to have a lite and reflector. So no prob. here you
would have won.

I have some random thoughts that this note generated:

1. I have always had a really healthy respect for auto's. They 
always win if there is any conflict. I wish someday we get more
rights to use the roads as auto's but til then we need to be 
careful sharing the road with cars.

2. I am amazed at how well some cyclists can be aware of the area 
around them. I've got a rear view mirror and constantly look around 
but I still don't notice cars etc. Once I went riding with our own 
John Ellis while we were riding and gabbing he would move over and
sure enough I'd see a car waaaaaaay back there. I think he could feel
the air molecules being displaced by the car! I probably would have
noticed the car AFTER it ran me over.

3. Its amazing how grumpy some bike riders get when they are on their
bikes. Car drivers have always had this quality its tragic to see 
cyclists make jerks out of themselves when they are so relatively
defensless. Here in Maryland a cyclist was killed when he got into 
an argument with a driver. I can only imagine how easily this kind of
disaster from happening. 

Fred Mudgett  

>2. I am amazed at how well some cyclists can be aware of the area 
>around them. I've got a rear view mirror and constantly look around 
>but I still don't notice cars etc. Once I went riding with our own 
>John Ellis while we were riding and gabbing he would move over and
>sure enough I'd see a car waaaaaaay back there. I think he could feel
>the air molecules being displaced by the car! I probably would have
>noticed the car AFTER it ran me over.

    John Lee,
    
    You've let us in on the drogue chute.  Could you also reveal what
    trick device you use to sense cars at a distance?

    The cyclist was clearly in the wrong.  Whether or not that is
    sufficient to absolve you from blame if you are in Massachusetts
    is something for the insurance companies to say.  (I.e., I think
    they have their own set of rules.)
    
    ed

    
>    You've let us in on the drogue chute.  Could you also reveal what
>    trick device you use to sense cars at a distance?
    
     I *could* claim it was Doppler shift of brain-wave emanations,
     but it's been shown that operation of a vehicle (motor or otherwise)
     doesn't necessarily correlate with the presence of brain waves.
    
     The real answer is plate tectonics... :-)
    
     -john

>     The real answer is plate tectonics... :-)
    
Presumably, that's LICENSE plate tectonics?

         ken

    Gee, you guys can't stay on a subject.

    The biker was riding in violation of the law.

    But...

    In Massachusetts there is a certain minimum coverage by
    the insurance company for injuries in an accident, regardless
    of who was at fault.  (this is according to a BABC pamphlet
    regarding what to do in case of a bike accident.)

    -Jeff


    

    This actually happened to my brother he was the driver of the car.
    
    It was about this time last here around about 06.00 he was pulling out
    of the road on his way to work he had only just past his test so he was
    very cautious about what is coming.
    Nothing seemed to be coming then all of the sudden BANG the next thing
    he sees is a postie rolling across the top of his car.  
    
    The postie had no light clothing on or lights and to make it worse he
    had a personal stereo pluged into his ears.  The damage to the car was
    over eight hundred pounds and as it was a push bike he had no way to
    claim any money from him without taking him to court, he has got a
    writting and signed statment by the postman.  All I want to know is, is
    it worth him taking him to court?
    
    Any answers grattly appreciated
    ABS

    Re:.10
    
    To take him to court or not probably depends on your cost to do so (not
    to mention the probability of winning).  But 800 pounds is a lot of
    money.
    
    Re: .0
    
    I agree with everybody else that the cyclist is wrong.  If contact
    would have been made, your insurance may have to cover some (50% at
    fault??) damage but all you loose is insurance rating (and some $$). 
    It's harder for the cyclist to recover 50% of his brain...
    
    Eric

I too agree that the cyclist was wrong; he should have had proper 
lighting.

However I often ask myself, rather than looking at who was (would 
have been) at fault -- could the situation been PREVENTED.

Is there anyway to have seen this person -- look more carefully, 
avoid a blind spot, etc.

	~Mike