Scruit

Dangit, day 2 and I'm already giving up. Well, not giving up, so to speak, but giving up on 270. I live in Delaware and work in Dublin so I'm going trade efficiency for scenery and switch from 270 to riverside drive. It would take my 25min commute to a 40 min commute, and it will have it's own challenges... But I have more confidence that I can mitigate problems in front of me than problems behind me. Multi-lane 75mph may be safe for cages, but if I had been two cars further behind this morning then I'd have been creamed. So, it's not like I'm chickning out, so much as I'm acknowledging that there are safer options.

You know, I've been trying to skip as much backup as possible in these situations - not becuase I'm trying to save time but just because it's too dangerous for me to be in stop and go traffic like that. I think I'm going to be skipping more and more. The problem with that approach is that the closer you get to the turnoff the closer the cars get together - and that is exactly what caused this morning's accident. The extra maneuverability of the bike makes it very easy to get around slower traffic, but there's no place I need to go so urgently that I can't get there safely.

Understood. I had a close eye on the car behind me, but being stop-and-go I was focused more on keeping up and trying to stay stopped as little as possible.

The car behind me had already come to a stop, and so had the car behind it. Its was the guy 3 cars back who hit first. I don't think I can keep track of what's happening 3 cars behind me while maintaning a good watch everywhere else.

Now that my kid is in 1st grade and taking the school bus, I no longer have to drive him to/from daycare. So I'm commuting on my bike. Day 2: Sitting in stationary traffic on the suicide merge just before the 270SB ramp to 161EB on the west side (right under the bridge) and I hear crashing behind me. No time to set off or anything, but I wasn't hit so that's lucky. My question is: How the heck do I avoid getting tangled up in that kind of stuff on the bike? I have to sit in line with everyone else. It wasn't the usual multiple-rear-end where one car pushes the rest together, there where several distinct "Screee-crash" sounds, so the first hit was at the front. Didn't help that the jackass bahind me seemed to make a competition out of seeing how close he could get his bumper to my rear tire as I was stopped. 5 or 6 times he came within a foot of me. So anyway... Do you stop in the middle of the lane? I was stopped close to the left edge of the lane becuase lots of people like to tuck in a space at the last second, and I didn't want to appear like I was a "space". Being so close to the left side I could have accelerated forward alongside the car in front of me if needed. Also, if I park to the left of the car in front of me then if I'm hit from behind then I'm pushed forward *next to * the car in front of me, not *into* it. Thoughts?

Someone needs to invent a proximity-based remote immobilizer. I keep the xmitter, the immobilizer is on the bike. You get more than 1/4 mile away from me (following in car) then the bike shuts off.

Here's the scoop... Rider was at fault. 59yo male. He was riding a '97 Harley, facing northbound at the stop sign on South Old State Road, trying to make a left turn onto 36/37 to head west towards Delaware. He failed to yield to the eastbound traffic and rode right into the rear passenger door of a passing Honda Pilot SUV. His injuries were described as "Non-Incapacitating". There is no entry int he crash report for who transported him, which suggests his injuries were not enough to require an ambulance ride.

The price the bike is offered for sale is different than what it sells at I bought a car once and the dealer showed me a printout of the actual sales price of similarly equipped vehicles in a 3-state area that month - maybe you can ask the dealer if they have access to that prinout?

I'd hate to kickstart that mofo...

Just passed this in the cleanup stages. The front of the bike has damages that appear to match the damage to the passenger-side door of a large black SUV (Durango or similar). Appears that the bike was heading east on 36/37 and the durango turned left from westbound 36/37 to southbound South Old State road. The bike is a cruiser with a black front fairing. The driver of the durango would have been looking into the sun and will probably claim that in their defense. My thoughts go to the biker. Doesn't look too good though - it's a 55mph road and the bike appears to have come to a dead stop into the side of the SUV while still upright.

The American Red Cross doesn't let their nice American blood get muddied by British people.

Right at the end - nearly a race-marshall strike too. The guy running across the track in lo-vis clothing as the bike comes past him an hi-speed...

Not directly.

Recently washed?

So he advertised in a Columbus Craigslist, then went on business to Texas, took his bike to a shipping company there just so that it could be shipped back to columbus? Yes, we all know it's a scam, but I wonder if these scammers know just how stupid their scams sound...

No way that's an Ohio plate.

Ask him for the VIN so you can carfax it.

You do NOT have the RIGHT to see the radar. The officer may show it to you as a courtesy, but that's at his discretion based upon many factors: - Does he feel YOU are safe to be wandering around? (side of a freeway = no way) - Does he feel HE s safe for you to be wandering around? (Acting belligerant = no way) - Did he even lock the speed in? - Does the gun allow the speed to be locked in? - Did he take further readings while you were decelerating, so the latests speed reading was a legal speed? - Are you going to use that as a new argument? ("You just left that speed on there form the last car you pulled over, didn't you?") I've never asked for an officer to show me the reading. I was pulled for speed 4 times in a three year period right after I moved to the US. Two were ticketed, 2 were warnings. One officer offered for me to see the reading out of the blue, and the others didn't. I did accept that one officer's offer as I'm from a cop family and I wanted to see how the US speed gear compared to UK stuff. Otherwise, the numbers on the gun are an irrelevance to me. If it's on the ticket that's all I care about. I was more eager to end the police contact as soon as possible as it is a stressful thing for me. Been clean for 10 years, touch-wood.

Probable Cause is the standard for a search. Reasonable Suspicion is the standard for being pulled over. I believe it's reasonable to assume that the registered owner is the rider, especially if the gender matches. If the registered owner of the bike only has a learner's permit then it's further reasonable to suspect that a law is being broken if there is a passenger. Reasonable Suspicion is a VERY low standard.

She was negligent enough for a civil prosecution, but apparently they don't believe she was negligent enough for a criminal prosecution Had she been speeding too then she would likely have been charged. Sometimes an accident is just an accident though. To be criminally charged the negligence would have to be a substantial departure from the standard of driving that a normal reasonable person would maintain. Everybody makes mistakes, so a single minor driving offense was apparently not deemed by the prosecutor to be such a substantial departure.

@redkow97 A civil suit is almost gauranteed, and they will likely win with ease. Intent is a dodgy area of law, as there are many subtle variations. - If you kill someone completely by accident when there was no intent to do harm or anything illegal or stupid then it's an accident - nothing is charged. Example: Someone runs out between two parked cars and you hit them with your car. - If you kill someone while doing something stupid but without the intent to harm that person then it's likely to be charged as some form of involuntary manslaughter based upon negligent intent or reckless intent. Example: You throw a rock in the air and it hits a passer-by and kills them. - If you kill someone while doing something illegal but without the intent to harm that person then it's likely to be charged as some form of involuntary manslaughter based upon negligent intent or reckless intent. Example: You fire a gun in the air and the bullet retains a low-arc ballistic trajectory and kills someone 3 miles away. (Thanks mythbusters) (Negligence is failing to consider a risk that any normal reasonable person would be aware of. Recklessness is knowing that a risk exists but ignoring it) - If you kill someone while intending to do them harm, but not intending to kill them, then it's going to likely be charged as voluntary manslaughter. Example: You punch someone in the face and they fall and hit their head and die. - If you kill someone while intending to kill them then it's murder. Examle: You shoot someone with the intent to kill them and they die. - If you kill someone whil intending to harm or kill another person then intent would be established by the doctrine of transferred malice. The malice intended for your intended victim is considered intent for the harm done to the deceased. Example: You shoot at me, miss, and the bullet hits and kills a bystander.

Anyone who get a traffic ticket for violating a traffic law should be classified into intentional violators (I ran the stop sign because nobody was coming / I pulle dout from the side street because I wanted to get in front of the person on the main road) and accidental violators (I ran the stop sign because I didn't see it / I pulled out from the side street because I didn't see the person on the main road). Intentional violators should lose their license for 7 days for ANY traffic offense. They should be given 14 days lead-up to the suspension to allow them to make preparations for having no license for 7 days, to ensure they can keep their jobs etc, ie take vacation or arrange rides / work-from home etc. If the offense resulted in an accident then they should pay triple damages to the victim and there should be a 30 day suspension with no lead-time. Accidental violators should be suspended immediately and given 30 days to get re-tested. As soon as they pass a re-test they can get their license back. If they don pass a re-test in 30 days they must start the licensing process over again with a fresh learner's packet. If the violation resulted in an accident they should pay double damages, and they cannot re-test for the first 30 days. Any person found driving under suspension should be jailed for 7 days. Dobled on all subsequent offenses. (2nd=14days, 3rd=28days etc)

Under Ohio law to be charged criminally in the death of another motorist there has to be more than a simple traffic violation. There has to be either a combination of minor offenses or at least one major offense (DUI etc). It can either be vehicular manslaughter (A misdemeanor: no intent to do harm, but more than one minor traffic offense) or vehicular homicide (A felony: Must prove intent, DUI / Street racing etc can be considered intent) I suspect that state has a similar law. Not than I'm saying it's ok for the lady to only get a $20 ticket... But western juducial systems punish the intent, not the result. How many of us can say we've never drifted over the double-yellow line, run a stop sign, run red light or exceeded the speed limit in a moment on inattention? (or intentionally?) Should you have gone to jail for that? The level of intent is the same regardless of if there is an accident - the only thing that is different is the result. Again, Western judicial systems punish the intent, not the result. If someone runs into the road between parked cars and you hit/kill them then are you responsible for their death? It's a horrific result, but did you have the intent? No, you would not be charged. Western judicial systems punish the intent, not the result. What if you intentionally drive your car at a crowd of people. You wanted to kill someone but they all got out of the way. The result is nobody hurt, but your intent was to kill. Should you be charged? Heck yeah... Western judicial systems punish the intent, not the result. In this case there is no good outcome, only the least bad. Flame suit on.

Unerase it then. There's forensics tools out there that can do that unless they did a multiple-overwrite delete.