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

361–370 of 424 posts

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

#361

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#362

Post by epistasis »

jart wrote: post #269
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…

Saying cars are a political choice assumes we live in a command and control society. Saying "we" in this context assumes you have political power.

The omni-presence of cars in US is from "command and control" through laws and the legal system, and in particular the planning system. Our planning system mandates all sorts of things about the built infrastructure that a purely market based society would not choose on its own. This sort of command and control mandates the exact number of parking spaces required for a shoe store versus a bowling alley, versus any other type of land use.

In nearly all of the US it is literally illegal to build out infrastructure with out prioritizing cars and car infrastructure over everything.

This was a political choice that we made, as we do live in a representative democracy.

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

#363

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#364

Post by epistasis »

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.

Of course they are a political choice that we can make or not make.

And we can have ambulances (or not have them!) with or without car-dependent infrastructure. It turns out that non-car-dependent areas also have ambulances and get people to medical care quickly.

And we could get rid of ambulances and even still keep rapid emergency response by having mobile doctors distributed close to people.

Plus, ambulances are not dangerous to bicyclists. Come on. The danger is distracted drivers without blaring sirens on top of them.

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

#366

Post by epistasis »

jart wrote: post #303
freeone3000 wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do have political power; if you’re in the US, you had the opportunity to exercise it in the last week. Your local elected officials make the plans for roads and bike lanes and zoning and parking lots and variances; and they are usually quite responsive to the voting public.

lol that voting is power. double lol if you think local elected officials plan anything.

Local elected officials decide whether or not individual apartment buildings are allowed.

It's all there in the public record, easy to find.

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

#367

Post by Arainach »

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…

>no driver I know wants to hit someone and injure them

Spend any time at all on social media and you'll see how untrue this can be. If you think people are lying about their daydreams of assaulting cyclists, just go on YouTube for days of content of drivers swerving at cycliste, throwing things at them, dumping pollutants into their lungs, intimidating them, assaulting them, and more.

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

#368

Post by Moru »

mitthrowaway2 wrote: post #353
Moru wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You put a sign at the start of the road. "Bike street". This means cars allowed but at bike speeds. You have different paint on the street too, to make it very different from a normal road. I have seen them popping up here and there and it works very well in the towns I bike in. [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/bicycling/comments/e0qxxz/we_just_g...

As reasonable as that sounds, I think this would fall into the GP's complained-of category of "making that road significantly slower and worse for cars", and does not meet their ask for "a separated infrastructure grid for pedestrians and bicycles". I remain very curious to hear their vision!

You don't need to make every street a bike street. It's enough if there is a way of getting safely close to your destination. Both for cars and bikes. The car drivers can drive on the next street unless this is their destination location. Works just fine in other big cities so it's just a question of getting used to a slightly different road to work/home.

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

#369

Post by mitthrowaway2 »

Moru wrote: post #368
mitthrowaway2 wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As reasonable as that sounds, I think this would fall into the GP's complained-of category of "making that road significantly slower and worse for cars", and does not meet their ask for "a separated infrastructure grid for pedestrians and bicycles". I remain very curious to hear their vision!

You don't need to make every street a bike street. It's enough if there is a way of getting safely close to your destination. Both for cars and bikes. The car drivers can drive on the next street unless this is their destination location. Works just fine in other big cities so it's just a question of getting used to a slightly different road to work/home.

To be clear, I definitely agree with you, I just don't think ThunderSizzle would. So it's ThunderSizzle's ideal that I am confused about, and trying to clarify. I think ThunderSizzle has asked for a (to my imagination) impossible-to-reach standard, and you have provided a very practical compromise, but exactly the sort that they would probably reject as infringing too much on existing car infrastructure.

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

#370

Post by ryandrake »

fetzu wrote: post #229
fy20 wrote: post #169

As a European, the fact that you have to pay for emergency transport in an ambulance is enough internet for today.

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

This is such a tired, pedantic retort. Nobody believes that taxpayer-funded services are "not paid for". OP obviously meant "pay for fully by the individual at the point of sale."

And yes, as an American, it also boggles my mind that we have to pay for emergency health services including ambulances[1]. My wife, who is not from a stone-age civilization like ours, didn't realize it either the first time we needed to hit up the emergency room. Thankfully I was able to convince her to not call for an ambulance, and I drove myself to the hospital.

1: individually, just so I'm clear

Post reply on HN