BIKEPGH MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVE

"It was still dark out here, it was raining at the time, obviously. This individual was wearing dark clothing, making it a little difficult for him to be seen." Nevermind folks, victim's fault.

They do say he may have been crossing against a light, but it bothers me that the dark clothing info comes first in the story.

"Traffic backed up into Wilkinsburg and on nearby ramps to and from the Parkway East, even after a lane reopened."

Wow, so sorry the killing of a pedestrian caused you to be late! Maybe he can be killed in a more convenient location next time.

He may have been in the crosswalk at the time--you know, where you are supposed to YEILD to PEDESTRIANS

Amazing how all these stories of someone losing their life degrade into a traffic report.

Ever notice how "preliminary investigations" always get mentioned when they might implicate the pedestrian/cyclist to be at fault, but never get mentioned when the driver might have done something wrong?

I guess dead people can't complain to the paper? Maybe all preliminary investigations assign fault to the dead person automatically?

Very sad and lousy reporting. The headline refers to a "pedestrian" hit and in the article a "car" hit him then devolves into the traffic report.

Ardmore Blvd is one main reason my wife and I did not move to Forest Hills. The speed limit is 45mph which means people drive 55. Speed, not visibility is the cause here.

i read this line in the p-g and felt really horrible:

"The collision knocked the victim out of his shoes and flung his body about 30 from impact.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10279/1092985-147.stm#ixzz11bDmtSUm"

ok, seriously? '"It was still dark out and raining," Chief Williams said. "He had been wearing dark clothing. It looks like an accident. It's just sad."'

It looks like an accident. It's just sad. Not punishable, not avoidable, not regrettable, just sad. Whoopsies, somebody died, how sad. They couldn't slow down in the dark, slippery rain - their commute was already an hour with all the traffic! How sad. At least we can be happy that the preliminary investigations has revealed nobody on the victim's side has the means to sue anybody of import, case closed. Oh, wait, that happens six months to a year later, a respectable distance from the funeral.

I gotta stop clicking on these threads. Dback - I don't know how you can stand the news alerts you have. I know head in the sand isn't healthy, but LEO and reporter responses to these things is not good for my sanity either.

from the KDKA Web site:

"Thousands of vehicles travel that stretch of road during the morning rush hour and it looks as though conditions conspired against Boalo and the motorist"

Excuse me, but when did the motorist become a victim in this story?

While I do agree that road conditions outside are on the treacherous side, this is just bad reporting -again.

And bullshit, dark clothing or not, rain or not -a pedestrian is clearly visible at 8am. And he was flung 30 feet? That just sounds like the driver was not paying attention & was probably speeding too.

It is a thought call overall given the weather (hate to admit it), but the pedestrian should not be the only person signaled at fault in here.....

This kind of posts suck....

Template fail. Oh wait, the template IS the fail.

Change the template, both LEO and reporting.

First, condolences to the family.

Next, not every incident resulting in death is as a result of negligence.

The predictable anger-response to these events seems to come in one of three varieties: toward the motor vehicle operator, toward the law, or toward the media.

It feels like some of our rage toward these events is misdirected. Not all of these deaths (unfortunate and tragic as they are) result from malice, rage, negligence or carelessness. And while the response of the law is disappointing, it is a long way from that to the conspiracy that some here have hinted at. Their job revolves around what they can prove, not what's right or wrong. And the media? Why punish the messenger - they churn these "stories" out in minutes - you can't really expect for them to give a whole lot of thought to how it all comes across.

Again, I feel bad for these families, but accidents happen. People die. Some of them are on foot or on a bike. That's life, unfortunately. Are we as a group going to respond to each and every one like a death in the family? Don Parker and Dr. Varacella - I get that, and I feel that.

But this poor guy walking on or near a road, in the dark, wearing dark clothes? And not just any road, but a road widely recognized as dangerous (for vehicles - let alone pedestrians). It's a predictable result, unfortunately.

Could the roads be safer? Could pedestrians and cyclists be more respected and protected? Yes and yes. Do we need to jump on each and every one of these events, I'm not so sure.

Ejwme

What that news alerts gives me an 'around the world' look at what is going on. yeah some of it is depressing, but you also get a feel for public opinion and a view of things that isnt totally bike centric.

and by bike centric I mean look to Mary's comment about the driver. Right now we dont know anymore about the driver than we do about the PED, we don't know what happened at all. but if you read thru the post we are already blaming the driver.

Chances are

the guy didnt intend to hit the Ped

The guy drove the same way every day

If you want to assume the driver was speeding.

then you should assume the Ped crossed against the light.

The Motorist took a life, this is something that will be with him forever. So both of them are victims.

Unless the driver aimed for him I can't see why people are upset him.

Upset that it happened, Yes

upset at the people who just assume the ped is at fault, Yes

upset at the fact that the coverage was more about traffic than it was about the accident, Yes

"upset at the fact that the coverage was more about traffic than it was about the accident, Yes"

Yes!

And the media? Why punish the messenger - they churn these "stories" out in minutes - you can't really expect for them to give a whole lot of thought to how it all comes across.

They should be, it's their job. They could have spent one extra minute on that story. A car did not hit this man, someone driving one did.

It's a predictable result, unfortunately.

One that could have been prevented in a number of ways.

@rsprake - my point exactly - it's a dirty world. In a perfect world, journalists would all be named Cronkite, and everybody who drove would do with more care.

"The predictable anger-response to these events seems to come in one of three varieties: toward the motor vehicle operator, toward the law, or toward the media."

My frustration is that it's all about the car -- the traffic, the road closure, and who was late for work because of it. In this case I don't think the police or reporters create that attitude; I think they reflect it.

As for drivers (and let me add that I am one) I think most people lose sight of how much damage a car can cause, or how much attention is required to drive safely. So, yes, my initial response to today's driver is anger and frustration and a very hard time seeing that person as a victim. Perhaps as I learn more my attitude toward that individual will change.

We did a project where we proposed traffic calming measures through the business district there, we wanted to put bump-outs at intersections with side streets, we wanted to install a pedestrian crossing in the middle of a 1000 foot long block, wanted to install some mild speed humps, just to take speeds from, i don't know, from 60 to 40. It's a Penndot jurisdiction, and they say, no, no, heavens no, we can't slow down traffic through there.

PennDot's unspoken message, F peds, they need to stay off the roads.

Take out the car from the equation. If the driver had killed this person any other way, using any other means (gun, falling anvil, horse, bicycle, etc), I can't imagine the story wouldn't be written like this, even if it was purely an accident. Cars kill enough people that our society has accepted that cars kill people and thats just the way it is. It is a road: the car belongs and the person doesn't. If you think that way, the blame seems easy to assign and news stories get written in this way, further perpetuating the idea for all the readers that cars and people driving them are never the problem.

"...our society has accepted that cars kill people and thats just the way it is."

I was having that very thought earlier this morning.

I'd feel more sympathy for drivers of motor vehicles if, in a motor vehicle collision with a bike or ped, the motor vehicle operator had the same chances as the bike or ped.

When I worked for a car company a few years ago, they pushed this statistic on new hires as part of the Safety Culture they were trying to instill/maintain - For every "accident" there were 300 "close calls". Catching and rectifying worker behavior for a "close call" is lest costly and painful than fixing an "accident". As applicable to motoring as to building motors.

I'd considered that the ped may have been jaywalking. But that still means the accident was avoidable - though it was immediately punished. Perhaps if that turns out to be the case the driver (then the standard definition's victim) can sue the ped's estate for damages.

Maybe the ped was on the edge of the street and the driver was paying attention, driving cautiously, legally, and safely, but the car steering malfunctioned at the most tragic moment. Avoidable? Probably, had proper QC been done on the car, had the driver done the maintenance, had the mechanic fixed the problem properly. True, the fault could lie anywhere.

For every accident, there's a cause. For every cause, there's a way to avoid it. Hind sight may be 20/20, and humans are not infallible. We screw up, make mistakes. True.

Does that mean we accept the current state of affairs or, as we've done as a species since prehistoric times, do we attempt to improve things? I'm enraged because the most vulnerable people seem to be the only people who have noticed a situation that can be improved. The others see it as "just sad."

And if it's truly a predictable outcome, and nobody did anything to ensure against it (either in modifying driver or ped behavior), that is culpable responsibility for this death. Spread out over society, though, it's apparently not concentrated enough to spur meaningful action. Just internets rage over an incident that is "just sad."

Why punish the messenger

Because

- they churn these "stories" out in minutes - you can't really expect for them to give a whole lot of thought to how it all comes across.

just to take speeds from, i don't know, from 60 to 40. It's a Penndot jurisdiction, and they say, no, no, heavens no, we can't slow down traffic through there.

The peak rate of traffic flow (pax/hr) would probably increase if the speed was reduced, by reducing the turbulence in the flow and allowing closer spacing of vehicles. Assuming that faster speed == more volume is a novice mistake that I wouldn't expect PADOT to make. The off-peak point-to-point time would be higher with a lower average speed, of course, but with proper signal phasing it would be minimal. If you want higher off-peak speeds, what's wrong with the Parkway?

And "...our society has accepted that cars kill people and thats just the way it is."

yes, that.

edmonds59, I always think about what a shame it is that the Forest Hills business district isn't more friendly for people walking, it could have a real impact on the community. There is also a lot of potential for a path in the median, it goes on for miles! Imagine a nice bike / exercise path all the way up the middle of Ardmore. Pull the speed limit down to 35, you don't make the lights doing 45 anyway, slow drivers down with speed devices through the business district... so much potential.

What a mess. I ride to work down Ardmore every morning so this is really harrowing news.

I agree, Forest Hills has a lot of potential to become more livable. The sidewalk doesn't even extend all the way up Ardmore.

Friday night I was looking something up on the Trib site and of the top ten most read stories FIVE of them were about people being killed or maimed in car crashes. Five people are dead.

In the Pittsburgh area, 5 people died in car crashes, a woman was trapped upside down in a Volvo and then flown to the hospital in a helicopter (it's not known if she'll make it), and two others were hurt in that same crash.

It is so commonplace for people to die from motor vehicles whether they are pedestrians, bicyclists, drivers or passengers, that it seems people just ignore it now.

What if any other modern invention we depended on killed so many people? Would we accept it if people died all the time when using CAT scans in the hospital, or blenders, or refrigerators? Wouldn't there be a demand for a recall?

I can't think of any other tool that we use in the modern world that the very slightest operator error or distraction can kill or maim one or a number of people.

I'd like to know more about the exact trajectory the guy was traversing when he got hit. Exactly what happened? This morning at 8, it was universally grey so neither the sun nor darkness were factors. He must have been visible. Things I want to know: Did the car have lights on? Condition of wipers, i.e., do they make streaks?

Most importantly, was the guy in the driver's blind spot? If he was in that median, just crossing the 2nd half of the street, he may just not have seen the car coming, if its lights were not on (which is wrong), and the driver truly could not see him well or at all because of streaky glass and/or the roof post in the way.

I guess this is what the CSI folks do for a living. It would be interesting to see what their report says.

@ Lolly It is so commonplace for people to die from motor vehicles whether they are pedestrians, bicyclists, drivers or passengers, that it seems people just ignore it now.

I think the ignorring of traffic deaths is dramatically aided by the fact that all of our news media are largely supported by car ads. TV, for example will not show gruesome car accident footage on every newscast, although they could.

What public forum will ask the question "Is it appropriate to have our current car use killing 35,000 people per year?"

Lolly, the argument could be made that modern conveniences are killing people, by turning them into lazy, isolated, lumps, dying of obesity, heart disease, diabetes, etc. But it's a slow, pathetic death, not a violent, dramatic one, so, no news headlines there. So it's acceptable.

EL

you asked me why I have the google alert, here is something that popped up on the alert today

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/east-central/201307-jail-for-drink-drive-motorist-who-kileld-cyclist/

in jail for 5 years and banned from driving for ten years. I'm sure there are some who wont be satisfied with that but considering what I see in the alerts everyday it is a breath of fresh air.

"I can't think of any other tool that we use in the modern world that the very slightest operator error or distraction can kill or maim one or a number of people."

I work around at least thirty of them. And their perpetuation wields almost as much political power.

"Ardmore Blvd is one main reason my wife and I did not move to Forest Hills. The speed limit is 45mph which means people drive 55. Speed, not visibility is the cause here. "

...I'd say speeds are more like 65-70 during non-peak hours.

I work around at least thirty of them.

Are you with city government, or county?

"And their perpetuation wields almost as much political power."

Neither.

@morningsider

I'm not quite sure what this means:

"I work around at least thirty of them. And their perpetuation wields almost as much political power."

I work in "Heavy Industry" that has lots of tools (albeit a far stretch from modern) that if not controlled could cause a huge number of fatalities. The fact is, these industries provide the governments that are supposed to regulate them with lots of tax revenue and campaign support. So my point is that they are not going away. And until cyclists can provide a significant percentage (not sure what that is) of this "power," we are on our own on the roads and have to be on the defense.

I thought you were going to say you worked with robots...

at Cyberdyne Systems?

Don't laugh. I saw this on a ride out east last year:

One of the labs I considered for my stint in Japan is at Cyberdyne systems, where they're working on HAL: http://www.cyberdyne.jp/english/robotsuithal/index.html

Is it my imagination, or have there been more fatalities and accidents this year?

There may be, but it might be due to the greater number of bicyclists out on the roads in comparison to last year--at least I think there are more people out there than last year. With more bicyclists there's probably an uptick, unfortunately, in the number of accidents. Ironically though, more bicyclists makes me a safer driver. I don't know about the rest of the city though. I've seen some stupid driving in the past week.

edit: FAIL on my part. I'm a bit tired, so I read pedestrian as bicyclist. Wow. Time for bed for me.