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

251–260 of 424 posts

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

#251

Post by davkan »

bradleybuda wrote: post #112
ThunderSizzle wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People drive with a suspended license all the time. How else are getting to your job? Getting groceries? We pretend like driving is only a privilege, but it's more necessary than most rights that OSHA or other agencies have "discovered".

It’s hard to get your license suspended! You have to severely screw up, usually more than once. If you depend on a personal vehicle for your livelihood, you should avoid it!

You can get your license suspended in many places from nonpayment of parking tickets or even something completely unrelated to operating a vehicle like child support. Its not just getting points on your license from a bunch of speeding tickets.

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

#252

Post by self_awareness »

ks2048 wrote: post #131
rightbyte wrote: post #118

In stories like this... I assume the patient was billed due to some automatic bureaucracy?

In this question, how does "some automatic bureaucracy" differ from simple normal functioning of businesses?

> In this question, how does "some automatic bureaucracy" differ from simple normal functioning of businesses?

If you mean what you wrote, "normal", then I'd say yes -- it does matter a lot, but if you'd mean "healthy", then I'd say that it shouldn't matter at all.

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

#253

Post by viraptor »

tmnvix wrote: post #250
viraptor wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because they chose to drive at a speed beyond their ability to react That's just not possible to solve in practice. Unless you're moving at an extremely slow pace, there's always the lag of noticing + decision + activation. You can drive 10km/h and if someone walks right in front of you, there may be physically no way for you to prevent a collision. Sure, slower speeds prevent many accidents, but always sharing the…

> That's just not possible to solve in practice. It is never a necessity to drive so close to people that 10km/h is too fast to notice someone who may veer into the path of your vehicle without you having the ability to stop. Likewise to drive at a speed at which someone could appear from behind a nearby obstacle leaving you no time to react. It is a convenience that most people assume they are entitled to - largely…

I'm not talking about the cases where you have any choice about what's going to happen or your safety margin. A person jumps from a place fully obstructed by a truck, 1cm in front of your car - it doesn't matter how slow you're going - you're going to hit them before you register what happened.

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

#254

Post by Xylakant »

pornel wrote: post #115
johnnyanmac wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even with cars we have a saying: "graves are filled with people who had the right of way". Physics doesn't care about whose to blame.

It's not about blame. It's about recognizing the need for safe infrastructure: physically separated bike paths, not painted gutters. Physics does care about the difference between crossing a painted line vs hitting a bollard.

“If it doesn’t damage the car, it’s not safe bike infrastructure.” someone said, and they’re right.

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

#255

Post by delta_p_delta_x »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #61
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…

> yet I can see a future where humans are barred from driving Increase the unsupervised driving age to 18 (unless in an area with no robotic transport) and massively increase penalties for driving infractions. As in you lose your license on your second DUI or third at-fault collision, reckless-driving ticket or cell phone violation. (Maybe make a DUI count as two infractions for the second list.)

> As in you lose your license on your second DUI or third at-fault collision,

Sorry, but this is still too lenient.

People should immediately lose their driving licence with a substantial fine for being caught drink-driving—even if it's just the first time, and be permanently barred from ever getting one again. If their driving under influence causes the slightest injury to other people they should receive a substantial jail sentence, and should their driving cause death they ought to receive at least a first-degree manslaughter charge. I know this will sound appalling to Americans, but driving is a privilege, not a right.

If pilots have so much stricter rules about operating their machinery, so should road users.

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

#256

Post by exe34 »

Tade0 wrote: post #235
epistasis wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a pretty weak example; gravity is a physical force of nature and inescapable. Cars are a political choice that we made but don't have to make. But that the comparison seems apt is pretty endemic of how cars are treated: an absolute must, as if they were a force of nature. Never mind that a huge chunk of our population can not drive, and are therefore excluded from society by cars. Car dependency is a very excl…

> Cars are a political choice that we made but don't have to make. Ambulances aren't though. Same with delivery vehicles. Public transport is, but typically one associated with less cars. All of these are both dangerous to cyclists and essential in a functioning city.

over here in the civilised world, we have bicycle lanes.

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

#257

Post by CrimsonRain »

fiala__ wrote: post #247
fetzu wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because you think you don’t pay for your healthcare? As an European, I have probably paid upwards of 150k for healthcare and probably got about 10k worth of it (at what might consider unreasonable prices, mind you). Even in countries with universal healthcare, it’s not free. There is always someone footing the bill. EDIT: a word

The point is, in most of Europe it’s the richer folks that foot the bill for the poorer ones. That’s a system based on solidarity - you contribute to our collective ability to treat our sick and injured, according to your financial means. EDIT: at least that’s how it’s supposed to work in theory. Of course the richest people don’t foot the bill for anyone but themselves.

In practice, it is healthy people making "sacrifices" to not eat shit and do exercise are footing biils for couch potatoes who eat shit all day.

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

#258

Post by MattPalmer1086 »

cj wrote: post #159
throw0101d wrote: post #75

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. 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…

Not controversial as far as I'm concerned. I used to say, only half joking, that all car drivers should have to learn to ride a motorbike.

I stopped riding a motorbike when I had kids. I was a pretty safe rider and still nearly got hit twice by car drivers assuming that, if cars weren't moving, nothing else on the road would be.

Once by someone in stationary traffic deciding he'd had enough and was going to turn and drive the other way without checking his mirrors (I was going slowly enough that I could just about stop although I came off the bike). And once when a driver suddenly shot out of an invisible side road at speed (again, no cars were moving on the main road).

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

#259

Post by scott_w »

Moru wrote: post #245
scott_w wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cyclists make mistakes Stats in the UK show that the majority of car/bicycle collisions are due to driver error, not cyclist error. Given the USA standard of driving is much lower, and policing is much less consistent, I’d put good money on that being higher in the USA. > Cars and bikes don't mix Yes but you’re looking at the wrong category of people making the mistake.

Don't hook up on the wrong thing here. Everyone makes mistakes but the cyclists pay with their life. Is it a well designed system when a little mistake costs your life? The cyclists have a better understanding and overview of the trafic sittuation so from the car drivers view it looks like they take bigger risks.

The car driver’s view is irrelevant when determining who made the mistake, only the facts of the matter. And in the vast majority of cases, it’s the car driver.

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

#260

Post by Fricken »

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…

Cycling isn't very dangerous. The average cyclist will outlive the average driver. The health benefits of regular cycling over a lifetime outweigh the risks.
Post reply on HN