Michael Bryant in Big Trouble - Page 3

LanterneRouge · 09-09-2009, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockref

Where can this video be seen?

YouTube - ANNOTATED - Toronto Cyclist Sheppard Killed - Bryant on security cameras

YouTube - IMPROVED FOOTAGE - Bryant Rams Toronto Cyclist Sheppard - Security Camera views "Accident"

Milo · 09-09-2009, 03:42 PM

Interesting vids. I'll have to watch them at home, more closely, before commenting in depth. The tags over top do not help to see what happens, but at least it is easy to see who's side they are on . . .

Okay, so I've watched them several times. The car hits the cyclist, and speeds off. According to the annotated video, after the initial contact, the cyclist "calmly approaches the vehicle". I find this comment to be dubious at best. My only question would be, "Why escalate the incident by chasing after the car? I do not see the cyclist grabbing onto the car as it speeds away in either video. Am I just missing it? Or does it occur out of frame?

800OVER · 09-09-2009, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Milo

Interesting vids. I'll have to watch them at home, more closely, before commenting in depth. The tags over top do not help to see what happens, but at least it is easy to see who's side they are on . . .

Okay, so I've watched them several times. The car hits the cyclist, and speeds off. According to the annotated video, after the initial contact, the cyclist "calmly approaches the vehicle". I find this comment to be dubious at best. My only question would be, "Why escalate the incident by chasing after the car? I do not see the cyclist grabbing onto the car as it speeds away in either video. Am I just missing it? Or does it occur out of frame?

Is there any question.....any at all, that Bryant hit the bicyclist intentionally from behind? If so I don't know what video you were watching. And basically it's the cyclists fault he's dead. It's the cyclists fault for the annotations on the video. It's easy to see from your post whose side you're on (doesn't make any sense when I write it either). It's either the cyclist who "attacked" the vehicle or it's his fault for escalating the situation. I don't see you posting about how Bryant should go to jail.

As for your opinion that as many bicyclist are at fault in traffic incidents as cars.....it's just that: opinion. Not based in fact. It goes with my other favourite myth....motorcyclists cause as many of their own deaths as other motor vehicles. 80% of motorcycle incidents involve at fault car drivers (turning left in front of them, pulling out from driveways etc. Why would you think the statistic is different for bicyclist?

Hobbes · 09-09-2009, 08:10 PM

Maybe I am an old man, but I can't make out squat from that typical crappy security camera video. (I did see Jesus though /sarcasm )

The music kind of sickens me

Milo · 09-09-2009, 08:15 PM

I am not on anyone's side. I am merely stating what I could make out while watching the videos. As for the car striking the cyclist from behind, that is true. Intentionally? I am not going to prejudge ANYTHING in this particular case.

As for your assumptions about my opinions re: cars/motorcycles/etc. you are so far off base it is not funny. I said the number of horror stories on each side was equal. I am probably one of the few posters on this site who has had everything from a "G" all the way up to an "AZ" license, including my motorcycle license, as well.

Trust me, most accidents ARE caused by car drivers. Truck drivers are safer drivers than most car drivers simply because their livelihood is at risk if they fuck up too badly. Motorcyclists are safer than car drivers because they pretty much dead otherwise. These are generalities, but I believe them to be fairly representative. So please, do not try and tar me with whatever bias suits your cause.

The videos show a car hitting a cyclist from behind, and then backing up and speeding away. I cannot tell from the video if the cyclist grabs onto the car in those frames, or if it occurs later in the incident. That is all.
The courts will decide what happened that night. It is folly to assume that any of us can do so based on conjecture, and a couple of videos.

Bad cases make bad law. Both sides of the car/cycle debate have chosen to use this incident to further their agendas. That is disgusting. I will say no more on this issue beyond pointing out what I have already said:

The courts will decide the facts of this case. I am content to accept that judgement, regardless of what it is. Can you say the same?

800OVER · 09-09-2009, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Milo

The courts will decide the facts of this case. I am content to accept that judgement, regardless of what it is. Can you say the same?

So OJ is innocent right? (the first time anyway). Karla Homolka got what she deserved?

Judgement and justice are two separate things. I'll be happy if justice is served. I'm not saying throw Bryant in jail for life. But this wasn't an collision that resulted from innattention. The actions were deliberate (on both sides). It should be dealt with more severely than a traffic ticket.

Milo · 09-10-2009, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 800OVER

So OJ is innocent right? (the first time anyway). Karla Homolka got what she deserved?

Judgement and justice are two separate things. I'll be happy if justice is served. I'm not saying throw Bryant in jail for life. But this wasn't an collision that resulted from innattention. The actions were deliberate (on both sides). It should be dealt with more severely than a traffic ticket.

OJ was found "Not Guilty". There is a difference . . . That is why I like Scotland's verdict of "Not Proven" as an option for juries.

Karla got what she was entitled to under the terms of her (BAD) agreement.

To answer your question, yes, I accept the verdicts in both cases, regardless of whether I agree with them or not. I do this because I WAS NOT INVOLVED materially in the process of the trial, so I do not know all the facts. Same with this case. Neither you nor I know all the facts, so I say let the trial figure it out.

As for justice, who decides? You? Me? No thanks . . . that is why we have juries and judges.

roketinpoket · 09-10-2009, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Milo

Or, you could try making a right turn while a cyclist has pulled up through traffic on the right hand side (between the cars and the curb), just so he can get ahead a few car lengths, and then take the verbal abuse that issues forth when "you" cut "him" off.

For every cyclist horror story you care to mention, there are as many egregious auto complaints, ALL equally justified.

More bike lanes are a wonderful idea, if implemented properly. The idea that painting a line on the road is sufficient is ludicrous. My father and older sister went to Holland this summer. Bike lanes are everywhere. But, they paint the entire lane red to differentiate it from the car lanes (when the lane is not physically separated from the car lanes, that is). Physical separation of car and bike lanes is the safest way to do this, but where is the space in the downtown core to put up said barriers?

You are talking about a fundamental shift in policy in terms of how people are going to get around in our cities. You are also talking about a large capital investment to make it happen. The politician with that kind of balls has not been born yet, sorry to say.

Firstly, I hope you agree that verbal abuse pales in comparison to being bumped/almost bumped. There's a fundamental difference between when a bicyclist riding improperly and a motor vehicle driving improperly; that being that when the cyclist rides improperly, they are putting their OWN lives in jeopardy. When I cyclist goes through a red light, if they get hit I say "Tough Shit". Just like when I jaywalk, I know that I'm taking a chance. I don't yell at passing cars and complain. However when I'm crossing on a green light and almost get hit by cars I will if able to confront the driver and show my displeasure. My problem is that most people don't know the rules of the road. They don't know that not only is a cyclist is legally entitled to ride on the road, they are obligated. Are we really surprised that a cyclist ran over a pedestrian?

Secondly, it's very hard to "intentionally bump someone" and then claim that you feel threatened. You couldn't wave a stick in a bouncer's face and legally shoot him when you are being ejected because you feel threatened.

Thirdly, with regards to people moving up while stopped at an intersection. Are you really going to tell me that when you see a bicycle stopped at a red light that you stay behind the bicycle and that you are in the norm by doing so? Are you surprised at being called an asshole? Not trying to say you're an asshole, I don't know you whatsoever. But based on the incident that you described, I don't know how you can be surprised at the cyclist's reaction.

Milo · 09-10-2009, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roketinpoket

Firstly, I hope you agree that verbal abuse pales in comparison to being bumped/almost bumped.

Agreed.

There's a fundamental difference between when a bicyclist riding improperly and a motor vehicle driving improperly; that being that when the cyclist rides improperly, they are putting their OWN lives in jeopardy. When I cyclist goes through a red light, if they get hit I say "Tough Shit". Just like when I jaywalk, I know that I'm taking a chance. I don't yell at passing cars and complain. However when I'm crossing on a green light and almost get hit by cars I will if able to confront the driver and show my displeasure.

Ditto.

My problem is that most people don't know the rules of the road. They don't know that not only is a cyclist is legally entitled to ride on the road, they are obligated. Are we really surprised that a cyclist ran over a pedestrian?

Secondly, it's very hard to "intentionally bump someone" and then claim that you feel threatened. You couldn't wave a stick in a bouncer's face and legally shoot him when you are being ejected because you feel threatened.

Apples/Oranges. You cannot know "intent". See my point on self-defence.

Thirdly, with regards to people moving up while stopped at an intersection. Are you really going to tell me that when you see a bicycle stopped at a red light that you stay behind the bicycle and that you are in the norm by doing so? Are you surprised at being called an asshole? Not trying to say you're an asshole, I don't know you whatsoever. But based on the incident that you described, I don't know how you can be surprised at the cyclist's reaction.

No. The cyclist has not cut me off, either.
No.
Hell no, have you seen the responses to some of my posts?

I never said the cyclist's response was surprising (I don't think). I just feel that, in a car/bike confrontation, the bike will lose everytime, so what is the point? Take down license #'s for grievous offences, and file a complaint. "Never take a knife to a gunfight."

See above. For the record, when it comes to cars/bikes, I have never been involved in an incident, from either perspective. I have merely put forth the idea that, for every car horror story, a driver can post a bike tale. He said/she said . . .

I am officially done with this thread . . . I hope.

800OVER · 09-10-2009, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Milo

See above. For the record, when it comes to cars/bikes, I have never been involved in an incident, from either perspective. I have merely put forth the idea that, for every car horror story, a driver can post a bike tale. He said/she said . . .

I am officially done with this thread . . . I hope.

Have you ever ridden a bicycle?

MidnightMike · 09-15-2009, 04:54 PM

Thirdly, with regards to people moving up while stopped at an intersection. Are you really going to tell me that when you see a bicycle stopped at a red light that you stay behind the bicycle and that you are in the norm by doing so? Are you surprised at being called an asshole? Not trying to say you're an asshole, I don't know you whatsoever. But based on the incident that you described, I don't know how you can be surprised at the cyclist's reaction.

if this quote was related to my comments plaease re read. I said "in your blind spot" and yes if a bicycle is stopped at an intersection ahead of me and is providing me with the proper arm up at a 90 degree angle indication of a turn, then yes, I am aware they are making a right hand turn and yes i yield to them. If a bike sneaks up on the curb in my blind spot after i have stopped and am fully aware of the vehicles stopped around me and doesnt give me any rights to my lane how can you try to use this as justification? Then the random bicycle vehiclist throws a fit at you and hits your car with their hand calling you an asshole. That was my point.

no vehicle should be sneaking up at any stop in traffic as far as I am aware.

I still would like to see video from what led up the incident recorded. Something tells me that we arent getting the full picture.

MidnightMike · 09-17-2009, 02:36 PM

i have now looked at the biased videos posted above. It still seems as unclear as ever, and in fact at first glance appears that the bicylcist rode up (in the lane at a stop light, as indicated in the video, illegal as far as i am aware) then decided to park himself in front of the car at the stop light. The light turned green and the bicyclist did not move, from what the video captions say. My feelings have always been that there is more to this story, and I feel that something happened prior to this video that we are seeing, and that it was the cause of the events. I do wish to note how the bicyclist completely disobeyed the rules of the road as clearly seen on the video and thank who ever posted it on you tube for helping prove that bike couriers in Toronto want their cake and to eat it too. I have no issue with following the rules of the road as long as its an even playing field for all on the road. How can a person ever report bad bike driving? maybe they should have a liscense plate so it can be noted and reported if need be.

hmmm.

LanterneRouge · 09-17-2009, 04:07 PM

Let's agree that Sheppard was likely guilty of an illegal pass. Do you not agree that Bryant is (at the very minimum) guilty of either:

a) moving his car forward on a green light without first looking straight ahead to ensure the road was safe and clear of pedestrians/cyclists/animals/whatever
b) intentionally hitting a cyclist with his car

and that either of those possibilities equates to a much more serious and dangerous infraction?

-

This unfortunate story is still big enough to generate an article from US-based Bicycling Magazine. This is only on their website right now, but Bob Moinske has a monthly column in the print issue - so it might also show up there as well in a couple weeks.

When Worlds Collide
by Bob Mionske
Bicycling Magazine, Sep. 16, 2009

MidnightMike · 09-17-2009, 07:46 PM

i completely agree that the driver in the video is wrong in the "bump". What i am saying is that when this all blew up i think a lot more was going down or had already gone down, and we are only seeing a small percentage of the whole thruth.

800OVER · 09-17-2009, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MidnightMike

i I do wish to note how the bicyclist completely disobeyed the rules of the road as clearly seen on the video and thank who ever posted it on you tube for helping prove that bike couriers in Toronto want their cake and to eat it too. I have no issue with following the rules of the road as long as its an even playing field for all on the road.

hmmm.

How many bicyclists disobey the rules of the road? How many cars? This isn't an issue of the "problem cyclists" it's a problem of road rage (from the cyclist or the car driver). Have you seen the drivers in Toronto? You make it sound like a forest of honest drivers and maniac cyclist buzzing around.