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

401–410 of 424 posts

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

#401

Post by palmfacehn »

Mawr wrote: post #378
palmfacehn wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a former bicycle messenger I'm opposed to it. The trails are filled with baby strollers and inline skaters moving in and out of lanes. typically there is no right of way when crossing roads or entrances to parking lots. Blind corners with overgrown vegetation are par for the course. Riding in traffic is an absolute pleasure when you know how to draft vehicles. The suction created by larger box trucks can actually…

Of course you are opposed, you are not the target audience. Bike infrastructure is there to let your average person bike at 10mph to work/school/the grocery store. It's not supposed to be a racing track. > Riding in traffic is an absolute pleasure when you know how to draft vehicles. The suction created by larger box trucks can actually pull you along with minimal effort. Well, I chuckled ;) Just FYI, if you're "draf…

>Be prepared to weave to the inside if the vehicle slows.

Box trucks are good for beginners because you do not need to be nearly as close. Slightly ahead of the boundary area of the aerodynamic turbulence feels optimal. In dusty conditions you may be able to visually observe this. Also, they generally cannot stop as quickly. Truck drivers know their routes and will more likely hit all of the lights at a uniform speed. You'll more easily hear their motor and gear shifts.

Yes, there are idiots who will try to brake check you, but they are mostly driving cars. A slight turn allows you to pass on the inside. The entire maneuver happens faster than braking. Braking is actually a mistake here, because you can loose traction and the ability to avoid obstacles.

For the rest of your comment, casual cyclists should prefer lower traffic streets and routes. By working incrementally they can build up their comfort levels. Again, the idea that they shouldn't gain the ability to ride in traffic or should have an expectation to never encounter traffic is a recipe for disaster.

It isn't about racing or being the fastest, but learning to cycle, feeling comfortable, interacting with traffic safely and not making a pest of yourself. That can only happen with the right set of expectations. Separate infrastructure doesn't help novices develop the necessary skills.

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

#402

Post by ThunderSizzle »

mitthrowaway2 wrote: post #369
Moru wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I said roads, not streets. I've seen high-speed highways that have been modified to add a bike lane to the middle of no where for miles on end.

This is beyond useless, and is very dangerous as your combining high speed vehicle travel with bikes and pedestrians. The typical response is to then convert the road to a street (e.g. lower the speed limit, reduce lanes, etc) instead of moving pedestrian traffic away from roads. The traffic is still there, because it's the only route, but now you've added the occasional brave and stupid bicyclist or pedestrian.

Beyond that, it's more inefficient for pedestrians, because road layouts tend to follow inefficient directions that add unnecessary travel time for pedestrians.

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

#403

Post by ddoeth »

Tade0 wrote: post #275
exe34 wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

You ignore the existence of intersections. Last year in my neighborhood we had a cyclist die from making a sharp left turn straight into a tram. It was a track x cycle lane intersection and between the tracks and cycle lane parallel to it from which he turned there's a strip of pavement, so unless you really cut that turn, the tram should be in your field of vision. Also there's a yield sign for cyclists, but obvious…

There are ways that this would not happen. There are ways to not have cars and cyclists on the same level as each other for example, then you don't have to worry about that. Or just kick all the cars off the street.

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

#404

Post by HDThoreaun »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #292
xeornet wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are riding on roads made for cars - you are an afterthought. Whether it’s the cars fault or not - cycling on the road is dangerous.

We probably should fix the roads. Blame the engineers who made it this way.

The roads are working as intended. If you want to change them you need political control. Will be tough seeing as most people do not want them changed.

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

#405

Post by HDThoreaun »

anal_reactor wrote: post #274
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.

The entire discussion about cycling can be avoided by simply taking a look at the Netherlands and designing infrastructure and laws like this. It's literally that simple.

Americans dont want to live in the Netherlands or like people in the Netherlands, It's really that simple.

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

#406

Post by [deleted] »

ryandrake wrote: post #370
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

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 hi…

[deleted]

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

#407

Post by mitthrowaway2 »

ThunderSizzle wrote: post #402
mitthrowaway2 wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I said roads, not streets. I've seen high-speed highways that have been modified to add a bike lane to the middle of no where for miles on end. This is beyond useless, and is very dangerous as your combining high speed vehicle travel with bikes and pedestrians. The typical response is to then convert the road to a street (e.g. lower the speed limit, reduce lanes, etc) instead of moving pedestrian traffic away from ro…

Oh that makes sense. Yes, I keep seeing proposals to add bike lanes to highways and I just think, who wants to ride a bike next to all those high speed vehicles with no shade?

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

#408

Post by dang »

bitcharmer wrote: post #395
_DeadFred_ wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rocky mountain west American here. Our local (non-air) ambulance company went out of business. The local city and county government were forced create a government ran service and everyone was upset they were doing it (people literally argued we should just have nothing at city/county meetings). Our new government system works so much better, is cheaper, and is actually thriving with us even getting new stations for…

[flagged]

We've banned this account for repeatedly posting flamebait comments and ignoring our many requests to stop.

If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

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

#409

Post by monkeyfun »

shkkmo wrote: post #354
usrusr wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"But even those try not to hit people, and they go around more people than they hit!" - that's how I read GP's post and that's how I think they believe that they are right. They think it's a glass half full/glass half empty situation. When the glass is a rocket fuel tank and you want to go to the moon.

One time when I stopped to let a pedestrian cross at a crosswalk with button activated flashing lights that were flashing. While stopped, I watched not one, but fifteen freaking cars proceed through the crosswalk without stopping...in a 15 mph speed zone..with a giant box truck stopped in the opposite lane waiting...with flashing lights that clearly indicate tou are required to stop. I was absolutely blown away. Then…

I wonder if too much of the workforce would essentially be incapable of getting a new driver's license just if standards were made closer to Germany's.

If that's the case, then so long as most of the economy needs tons of replaceable, underskilled, underpaid drivers IN ADDITION to virtually everyone requiring a car for basic autonomy in most of the country, i see perfectly why there'd be so little enforcement -- it's just perhaps very cynical.

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

#410

Post by saagarjha »

lillecarl wrote: post #291
cj wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

You don't get a Swedish license if you don't turn your head when switching lanes. It's weird that the country of driving has so low requirements and quality of driving

This is true in the US as well. It's just that people don't always drive like they do during their test.
Post reply on HN