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

161–170 of 424 posts

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

#161

Post by PittleyDunkin »

mmooss wrote: post #47
nritchie wrote: post #13

As a bicyclist, I'm constantly told how dangerous bicycles are. Usually, I get a blank look when I explain, bicycles are very safe, it is the cars that are the dangerous part of the equation. Now I'll have to add fast billing ambulances to the list of dangers.

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…

Ok so it still seems easier to blame the people forcing bikes onto roads than to blame the people with the least capacity to hurt others.

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

#162

Post by SoftTalker »

mmooss wrote: post #154
nextworddev wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Also though, if a slow-moving vehicle is impeding other traffic, they should pull over at the next safe opportunity and allow traffic to pass.

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

#163

Post by Reason077 »

acomjean wrote: post #68
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'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... Part of my commute was on a path off the roads, it was nice."

Ironically, in 10+ years of cycling in London, the worst accidents I've ever personally witnessed were bike-on-bike crashes on the crowded cycle lanes! Broken bones, possible head injuries, ambulances and police called. I do recall one near-miss involving a bus and a few dooring accidents but nothing the cyclist didn't walk away from.

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

#164

Post by coffeedan »

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.

>>> Most roads aren’t even meant for cyclists

Source?

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

#165

Post by fireflash38 »

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.

You're supposed to take the lane if it's unsafe to pass.

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

#166

Post by rahimnathwani »

bradleybuda wrote: post #157
rahimnathwani wrote: post #133

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. 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.

  If the Waymo could not see the bicycle then them cyclist could not see the Waymo.
If the cyclist cannot see the Waymo, then either:

A) There is no Waymo, and the cyclist need not yield, or

B) There is a Waymo, but its path is blocked by turning lorry, and the cyclist need not yield.

So either way the bicycle has priority, no?

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

#167

Post by sagarm »

mmooss wrote: post #158
paulproteus wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Most drivers are reasonable, but some use their vehicles as weapons to punish cyclists for slowing them down -- even though in SF, you're likely to end up at the same stop light in 30 seconds.

When I bicycle commuted in the city, I had about one incident a week of a driver close passing or cussing me out. In one incident, a driver revved their engine at me and followed me home because I reminded them that they had to give three feet of space when passing. I thought I was going to die when they went for their glovebox. If I ever cycle commute again, it will be with a concealed weapon.

In other contexts, using violence for political ends would be called terrorism. On our roads it's just another day.

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

#168

Post by lazyasciiart »

mmooss wrote: post #158
paulproteus wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The driver who hit me on my bike didn’t give a shit, and only even came back because a friendly motorcyclist chased and caught him. The driver who hit me on foot also didn’t care, and didn’t have insurance, and had multiple previous violations - and both his parents had hit pedestrians before as well.

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

#170

Post by quesera »

slibhb wrote: post #148
Mathnerd314 wrote: post #139

This is one of the common accidents, the "right hook". https://velosurance.com/blog/how-to-avoid-most-common-riding... https://www.fcgov.com/traffic/pdf/bicycle-crashes.pdf I mostly walk these days but when I did bike I had these crash patterns memorized so I could avoid them.

I got hit by a car last weekend. It was the "left cross". Fortunately I wasn't seriously injured -- just a minor concussion -- and my bike wasn't badly damaged. It's a weird situation. The guy who hit me stopped but seemed like a crackhead. There wasn't enough damage to require a police report or involve insurance. But maybe I should have just to create a record of this idiot causing accidents.

> But maybe I should have

Yes, definitely!

For the reason you suggest, but also -- complications from injury sometimes are not evident immediately.

Post reply on HN