Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ambulance hits cyclist, rushes him to hospital, then sticks him with $1,800 bill

oregonlive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 424 posts

Re: Ambulance hits cyclist, rushes him to hospital, then sticks him with $1,800 bill

#151

Post by 12thhandyman »

warner25 wrote: post #135
AnotherGoodName wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self driving cars are amazing in SF. I cycle there I feel much safer when there’s a self driving car behind me. Waymos, zooxes and cruises never accelerate hard to suddenly cut a turn in front of me rather than waiting behind me to turn across the cycle lane. They never get angry when there is no cycle lane and I’m forced to take up a full lane for a stretch. They have cold machine patience and attitude and to get aw…

> I can see a future where humans are barred from driving. 40k deaths a year in the USA from humans driving and a fear of rightfully using the road for non driving activities due to poor human behaviour. I’m actually pretty hopeful we get there. Yes, I believe that in the distant future humans will look back on the late 20th and early 21st centuries and be appalled that people were ever allowed to operate cars like t…

As seen on a sticker posted at a Topdog in Berkeley, "Do what you're told, it'd be chaos if we all thought for ourselves".

Re: Ambulance hits cyclist, rushes him to hospital, then sticks him with $1,800 bill

#152

Post by alanbernstein »

nextworddev wrote: post #145
2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not symmetric though. In a car your mistake has a much higher ceiling to the negative consequences. And with great power comes great responsibility. I’ve been honked for waiting for a safe way to pass a cyclist. The car behind me then just zooms past the cyclist after I make a manoeuvre. It’s not like all driver are out there trying to be responsible as much as possible.

Most roads aren’t even meant for cyclists but they feel so entitled as to take up entire lanes sometimes.

Depends on the local laws, but mostly likely they are entitled to take the lane.

Re: Ambulance hits cyclist, rushes him to hospital, then sticks him with $1,800 bill

#153

Post by paulproteus »

mmooss wrote: post #143
tagh wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, the system is very badly designed. Cars and bikes don't mix without carefully designed roads that make the lazy/default decision and the safe decision the same thing, because eventual complacency is human nature. > You could say that jumping out of a plane without a parachute isn't dangerous, it's the ground that's dangerous. In that metaphor cars are a force of nature. I've also heard "the laws of physics t…

> When I choose to drive, I have the means to kill someone else and I'm damn well responsible for that risk. I agree, and part of my GP point was, I think almost every driver agrees, even in different words: Drivers are very adverse to hitting humans, whether walking or biking.

I am honestly not so sure. What's the evidence for this claim?

Re: Ambulance hits cyclist, rushes him to hospital, then sticks him with $1,800 bill

#154

Post by mmooss »

nextworddev wrote: post #145
2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not symmetric though. In a car your mistake has a much higher ceiling to the negative consequences. And with great power comes great responsibility. I’ve been honked for waiting for a safe way to pass a cyclist. The car behind me then just zooms past the cyclist after I make a manoeuvre. It’s not like all driver are out there trying to be responsible as much as possible.

Most roads aren’t even meant for cyclists but they feel so entitled as to take up entire lanes sometimes.

If there's not enough room for a car to pass safely (e.g., a wide shoulder, a bike lane, etc.), cyclists are encouraged to ride in the middle of the lane. If the cyclist rides on the side, cars try to squeeze past and eventually the worst will happen. Remember, 99% safety is almost certain death for a regular cyclist.

Re: Ambulance hits cyclist, rushes him to hospital, then sticks him with $1,800 bill

#155

Post by brailsafe »

davidhyde wrote: post #119

Knee jerk reaction about the ambulance service behaviour and general cyclist safety aside, 100k in medical expenses and a 1m lawsuit for a broken nose and other “unspecified” injuries is just mental.

The medical expense amount and every other direct cost is wild, but I guess I wonder how much would someone justifiably invoice to be hit by an ambulance. If it was a celebrity or ceo they'd probably bill quite a lot, but just a random guy?

Re: Ambulance hits cyclist, rushes him to hospital, then sticks him with $1,800 bill

#156

Post by giancarlostoro »

AlotOfReading wrote: post #66
mmooss wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could say that jumping out of a plane without a parachute isn't dangerous, it's the ground that's dangerous. Cyclists make mistakes, make bad judgments, take big risks, just like car drivers. They are human too. You could say cyclists have a bigger incentive to avoid problems, but no driver I know wants to hit someone and injure them, and cyclists I know become inured to the risks after riding for years without i…

I don't think I've ever met a cyclist who's opposed to separated infrastructure for bikes and cars. Every local government project I've ever seen to build this kind of infrastructure runs into issues with drivers who don't think it's necessary or would somehow ruin their lives.

Yeah? Except where I live, we have "bike trails" wide enough, and newly paved looking enough that I could drive my car over them, in fact! The lawncare people for my neighborhood absolutely drive their trucks on them, with enough room to let people pass them by! And yet, I still see people on the regular roads, at the worst times: early morning when most people are trying to get to work, or right as the sun is going down when it is drastically harder to notice a bicycle.

One time I was going up a hill I've been up and down a million times, only to be shocked to find, after sundown, similar road with a BIKE TRAIL, some person riding their bicycle WITH NO LIGHTS, on a road where you're expected to go 45 (its actually 55 when I googled it!) or more, giving me little time to react, I have NEVER seen someone be so careless on this road, or even ride a bicycle on it, because its not a road for bicycles. So no, it's not just the cars that are dangerous, its the carelessness of bicycle riders that is equally dangerous.

Re: Ambulance hits cyclist, rushes him to hospital, then sticks him with $1,800 bill

#157

Post by bradleybuda »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #133
bradleybuda wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not the law. Vehicles take turns at an intersection - there’s no total queuing order based on arrival time. At a contended intersection, it should never be the case that two vehicles coming from the same lane take consecutive turns.

That’s not the law. Vehicles take turns at an intersection - there’s no total queuing order based on arrival time. No, 'taking turns' is not codified in the law or mentioned in the DMV handbook. If the Waymo stopped at the intersection after the bicycle stopped at the intersection, or if the Waymo's path was blocked and it was thus not entering the intersection, the bicycle would not be required to yield. At a conten…

If the Waymo could not see the bicycle then them cyclist could not see the Waymo. So at best the fault lies with each party to make visual contact and determine who goes first.

Re: Ambulance hits cyclist, rushes him to hospital, then sticks him with $1,800 bill

#158

Post by mmooss »

paulproteus wrote: post #153
mmooss wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When I choose to drive, I have the means to kill someone else and I'm damn well responsible for that risk. I agree, and part of my GP point was, I think almost every driver agrees, even in different words: Drivers are very adverse to hitting humans, whether walking or biking.

I am honestly not so sure. What's the evidence for this claim?

Do you see drivers regularly hitting people? You don't think almost anyone would be horrified if they hit a person?

I don't have evidence, but let's not imagine people are the sociopaths they claim to be on the Internet.

Re: Ambulance hits cyclist, rushes him to hospital, then sticks him with $1,800 bill

#159

Post by cj »

throw0101d wrote: post #75
acomjean wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been urban biking for years. It's no doubt dangerous. I don't think you become complacent like you do when when driving. You are pretty aware that these heavy fast moving vehicles are on the same road as you. Part of my commute was on a path off the roads, it was nice. I always leave plenty of time when riding so im not rushing. even when there are separate lanes it's important to stay alert for cars turning ont…

> I've been urban biking for years. It's no doubt dangerous. I don't think you become complacent like you do when when driving. Also: motorcycling. Generally recommended to always assume you're invisible. There's even an acronym for it: SMIDSY, Sorry mate, I didn't see you . * https://www.brm.co.nz/s-m-i-d-s-y-road-craft/ * https://www.webbikeworld.com/scientific-studies-explain-smid...

Exactly this.

Part of the experience of riding a motorcycle is being acutely aware of your surroundings at all times.

I rode a motorcycle as my daily commute for years, and then when I switched to a car it felt oddly strange how little I had to pay attention:

(Possibly controversial belief: riding a motorcycle makes you a better car driver. Motorcycling has made me pick up habits like always looking over my shoulder and not solely trusting my mirrors when changing lanes)

Re: Ambulance hits cyclist, rushes him to hospital, then sticks him with $1,800 bill

#160

Post by zenoprax »

throw0101d wrote: post #75
acomjean wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been urban biking for years. It's no doubt dangerous. I don't think you become complacent like you do when when driving. You are pretty aware that these heavy fast moving vehicles are on the same road as you. Part of my commute was on a path off the roads, it was nice. I always leave plenty of time when riding so im not rushing. even when there are separate lanes it's important to stay alert for cars turning ont…

> I've been urban biking for years. It's no doubt dangerous. I don't think you become complacent like you do when when driving. Also: motorcycling. Generally recommended to always assume you're invisible. There's even an acronym for it: SMIDSY, Sorry mate, I didn't see you . * https://www.brm.co.nz/s-m-i-d-s-y-road-craft/ * https://www.webbikeworld.com/scientific-studies-explain-smid...

I take it one step further: I'm not only invisible but am being actively targeted with prejudice by those who can see me. You very quickly develop a knack for predicting what "cages" will do at any given moment.

As a pilot, there is a sense of "falling behind the aircraft" when your situational awareness diminishes --- getting ahead of the plane by 30 seconds, then 5 minutes, and then 30 minutes translates to non-flying tasks/jobs too. It's a great mindset for "incident management" in any field.

Post reply on HN