Re: Ride with music or not? - Page 3

06-27-2004, 06:55 PM

"Badger_South" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...

> Just be aware, and I say this with all sympathy towards you and prejudice
> towards the person who merged into you - had it come to adjudication, you
> would be the one most likely found at fault, b/c you were allegedly the
> faster and overtaking vehicle. (I presume she was riding also?). If the
> person was on skates or jogging or walking, then it would also be judged
> your fault, as the 'faster vehicle'.

Depends. Some multi-use paths (such as those in some State parks in
Pennsylvania) are legal roadways. Bicyclists are subject to the same rules
as other vehicle operators, including the one banning headset use while
operating a vehicle.

Not something that's often enforced, but a cyclist wearing phones on a
roadway (even one where motor vehicles are restricted) might have trouble
blaming someone else for a collision.

RichC

06-27-2004, 07:27 PM

On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 22:55:46 -0400, "Rich Clark"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
>"Badger_South" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>
>> Just be aware, and I say this with all sympathy towards you and prejudice
>> towards the person who merged into you - had it come to adjudication, you
>> would be the one most likely found at fault, b/c you were allegedly the
>> faster and overtaking vehicle. (I presume she was riding also?). If the
>> person was on skates or jogging or walking, then it would also be judged
>> your fault, as the 'faster vehicle'.
>
>Depends. Some multi-use paths (such as those in some State parks in
>Pennsylvania) are legal roadways. Bicyclists are subject to the same rules
>as other vehicle operators, including the one banning headset use while
>operating a vehicle.
>
>Not something that's often enforced, but a cyclist wearing phones on a
>roadway (even one where motor vehicles are restricted) might have trouble
>blaming someone else for a collision.
>
>RichC

Uh, perhaps, but I'm just imagining the 'lawyer speak' in the courtroom:
'the defendent in attempting to pass my client did so when it was clearly
unsafe to do so. He admits he saw headphones on my client and anticipated
she may not have been able to hear his call of "passing...", but he passed
anyway, striking her and breaking her collarbone...'.

The injured party would be the one getting sympathy from the jurors, and
soforth.

I'm not saying there wouldn't be counter arguments, but it's clearly a
situation you want to avoid, i.e. coming in contact with someone for
whatever reason to avoid liability.

-B

06-27-2004, 07:27 PM

On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 22:55:46 -0400, "Rich Clark"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
>"Badger_South" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>
>> Just be aware, and I say this with all sympathy towards you and prejudice
>> towards the person who merged into you - had it come to adjudication, you
>> would be the one most likely found at fault, b/c you were allegedly the
>> faster and overtaking vehicle. (I presume she was riding also?). If the
>> person was on skates or jogging or walking, then it would also be judged
>> your fault, as the 'faster vehicle'.
>
>Depends. Some multi-use paths (such as those in some State parks in
>Pennsylvania) are legal roadways. Bicyclists are subject to the same rules
>as other vehicle operators, including the one banning headset use while
>operating a vehicle.
>
>Not something that's often enforced, but a cyclist wearing phones on a
>roadway (even one where motor vehicles are restricted) might have trouble
>blaming someone else for a collision.
>
>RichC

Uh, perhaps, but I'm just imagining the 'lawyer speak' in the courtroom:
'the defendent in attempting to pass my client did so when it was clearly
unsafe to do so. He admits he saw headphones on my client and anticipated
she may not have been able to hear his call of "passing...", but he passed
anyway, striking her and breaking her collarbone...'.

The injured party would be the one getting sympathy from the jurors, and
soforth.

I'm not saying there wouldn't be counter arguments, but it's clearly a
situation you want to avoid, i.e. coming in contact with someone for
whatever reason to avoid liability.

-B

06-27-2004, 07:27 PM

On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 22:55:46 -0400, "Rich Clark"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
>"Badger_South" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>
>> Just be aware, and I say this with all sympathy towards you and prejudice
>> towards the person who merged into you - had it come to adjudication, you
>> would be the one most likely found at fault, b/c you were allegedly the
>> faster and overtaking vehicle. (I presume she was riding also?). If the
>> person was on skates or jogging or walking, then it would also be judged
>> your fault, as the 'faster vehicle'.
>
>Depends. Some multi-use paths (such as those in some State parks in
>Pennsylvania) are legal roadways. Bicyclists are subject to the same rules
>as other vehicle operators, including the one banning headset use while
>operating a vehicle.
>
>Not something that's often enforced, but a cyclist wearing phones on a
>roadway (even one where motor vehicles are restricted) might have trouble
>blaming someone else for a collision.
>
>RichC

Uh, perhaps, but I'm just imagining the 'lawyer speak' in the courtroom:
'the defendent in attempting to pass my client did so when it was clearly
unsafe to do so. He admits he saw headphones on my client and anticipated
she may not have been able to hear his call of "passing...", but he passed
anyway, striking her and breaking her collarbone...'.

The injured party would be the one getting sympathy from the jurors, and
soforth.

I'm not saying there wouldn't be counter arguments, but it's clearly a
situation you want to avoid, i.e. coming in contact with someone for
whatever reason to avoid liability.

-B

06-27-2004, 07:27 PM

On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 22:55:46 -0400, "Rich Clark"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
>"Badger_South" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>
>> Just be aware, and I say this with all sympathy towards you and prejudice
>> towards the person who merged into you - had it come to adjudication, you
>> would be the one most likely found at fault, b/c you were allegedly the
>> faster and overtaking vehicle. (I presume she was riding also?). If the
>> person was on skates or jogging or walking, then it would also be judged
>> your fault, as the 'faster vehicle'.
>
>Depends. Some multi-use paths (such as those in some State parks in
>Pennsylvania) are legal roadways. Bicyclists are subject to the same rules
>as other vehicle operators, including the one banning headset use while
>operating a vehicle.
>
>Not something that's often enforced, but a cyclist wearing phones on a
>roadway (even one where motor vehicles are restricted) might have trouble
>blaming someone else for a collision.
>
>RichC

Uh, perhaps, but I'm just imagining the 'lawyer speak' in the courtroom:
'the defendent in attempting to pass my client did so when it was clearly
unsafe to do so. He admits he saw headphones on my client and anticipated
she may not have been able to hear his call of "passing...", but he passed
anyway, striking her and breaking her collarbone...'.

The injured party would be the one getting sympathy from the jurors, and
soforth.

I'm not saying there wouldn't be counter arguments, but it's clearly a
situation you want to avoid, i.e. coming in contact with someone for
whatever reason to avoid liability.

-B

06-27-2004, 07:27 PM

On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 22:55:46 -0400, "Rich Clark"
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>
>"Badger_South" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].. .
>
>> Just be aware, and I say this with all sympathy towards you and prejudice
>> towards the person who merged into you - had it come to adjudication, you
>> would be the one most likely found at fault, b/c you were allegedly the
>> faster and overtaking vehicle. (I presume she was riding also?). If the
>> person was on skates or jogging or walking, then it would also be judged
>> your fault, as the 'faster vehicle'.
>
>Depends. Some multi-use paths (such as those in some State parks in
>Pennsylvania) are legal roadways. Bicyclists are subject to the same rules
>as other vehicle operators, including the one banning headset use while
>operating a vehicle.
>
>Not something that's often enforced, but a cyclist wearing phones on a
>roadway (even one where motor vehicles are restricted) might have trouble
>blaming someone else for a collision.
>
>RichC

Uh, perhaps, but I'm just imagining the 'lawyer speak' in the courtroom:
'the defendent in attempting to pass my client did so when it was clearly
unsafe to do so. He admits he saw headphones on my client and anticipated
she may not have been able to hear his call of "passing...", but he passed
anyway, striking her and breaking her collarbone...'.

The injured party would be the one getting sympathy from the jurors, and
soforth.

I'm not saying there wouldn't be counter arguments, but it's clearly a
situation you want to avoid, i.e. coming in contact with someone for
whatever reason to avoid liability.

-B

06-28-2004, 04:35 AM

On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 16:27:10 -0400, Badger_South <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Just take a cheapo digital camera with you. I have a sub $100 Vivitar
3315 that will take about 5 minutes of video with a 128 Meg SD card,
no sound of course, and it fits in my levi jeans pocket. No Lycra since
I go stomping and hiking off road trails that I can't take a bike on.
Hence the mountain bike. A video of the dog chasing you with the intent of
biting should convince the police no matter how thick headed they are.
Most places with lease laws also mandate that the dog be locked up in
the owners property. Just because they live in the country does not give
them the right to get out and chase bikes. I once turned around and chased
a dog all the way back into its yard, yiping all the way.
Turning the tables often changes their mind.
Bill Baka

> Last week, some woman's dogs came after me and she says 'they think
> you're
> going too fast and don't like it'. What? Huh? I was going like 4 mph and
> actually stopped as her dog rushed in front of my bike and turned
> broadside. SHe then orders me off the trail and says if I sprayed her
> menacing dogs she'd call the dog catcher on me? Again, Huh? What? She was
> the scofflaw with pets off leash on leash day, and with menacing growling
> dogs. I hardly think animal control would fault -me-, but I wouldn't put
> it
> past the biatch to lie somehow and of course she'd put the leash she was
> carrying on the dog while awaiting the AC officer, dammit.
> <\rant>
>
> Currently I have an email into the chief asking him about the liability
> and
> backing of the responding officer if I had to use the 'Halt'. But more
> than
> ever, I'm trying avoid these hassles. Just want to keep out of trouble
> with
> these maniacs. ;-)
>
> -B
> (Jeeze, I guess I need a dashboard camera to record everything to back up
> my innocence.)
>
>

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

06-28-2004, 04:35 AM

On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 16:27:10 -0400, Badger_South <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Just take a cheapo digital camera with you. I have a sub $100 Vivitar
3315 that will take about 5 minutes of video with a 128 Meg SD card,
no sound of course, and it fits in my levi jeans pocket. No Lycra since
I go stomping and hiking off road trails that I can't take a bike on.
Hence the mountain bike. A video of the dog chasing you with the intent of
biting should convince the police no matter how thick headed they are.
Most places with lease laws also mandate that the dog be locked up in
the owners property. Just because they live in the country does not give
them the right to get out and chase bikes. I once turned around and chased
a dog all the way back into its yard, yiping all the way.
Turning the tables often changes their mind.
Bill Baka

> Last week, some woman's dogs came after me and she says 'they think
> you're
> going too fast and don't like it'. What? Huh? I was going like 4 mph and
> actually stopped as her dog rushed in front of my bike and turned
> broadside. SHe then orders me off the trail and says if I sprayed her
> menacing dogs she'd call the dog catcher on me? Again, Huh? What? She was
> the scofflaw with pets off leash on leash day, and with menacing growling
> dogs. I hardly think animal control would fault -me-, but I wouldn't put
> it
> past the biatch to lie somehow and of course she'd put the leash she was
> carrying on the dog while awaiting the AC officer, dammit.
> <\rant>
>
> Currently I have an email into the chief asking him about the liability
> and
> backing of the responding officer if I had to use the 'Halt'. But more
> than
> ever, I'm trying avoid these hassles. Just want to keep out of trouble
> with
> these maniacs. ;-)
>
> -B
> (Jeeze, I guess I need a dashboard camera to record everything to back up
> my innocence.)
>
>

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

06-28-2004, 04:35 AM

On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 16:27:10 -0400, Badger_South <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Just take a cheapo digital camera with you. I have a sub $100 Vivitar
3315 that will take about 5 minutes of video with a 128 Meg SD card,
no sound of course, and it fits in my levi jeans pocket. No Lycra since
I go stomping and hiking off road trails that I can't take a bike on.
Hence the mountain bike. A video of the dog chasing you with the intent of
biting should convince the police no matter how thick headed they are.
Most places with lease laws also mandate that the dog be locked up in
the owners property. Just because they live in the country does not give
them the right to get out and chase bikes. I once turned around and chased
a dog all the way back into its yard, yiping all the way.
Turning the tables often changes their mind.
Bill Baka

> Last week, some woman's dogs came after me and she says 'they think
> you're
> going too fast and don't like it'. What? Huh? I was going like 4 mph and
> actually stopped as her dog rushed in front of my bike and turned
> broadside. SHe then orders me off the trail and says if I sprayed her
> menacing dogs she'd call the dog catcher on me? Again, Huh? What? She was
> the scofflaw with pets off leash on leash day, and with menacing growling
> dogs. I hardly think animal control would fault -me-, but I wouldn't put
> it
> past the biatch to lie somehow and of course she'd put the leash she was
> carrying on the dog while awaiting the AC officer, dammit.
> <\rant>
>
> Currently I have an email into the chief asking him about the liability
> and
> backing of the responding officer if I had to use the 'Halt'. But more
> than
> ever, I'm trying avoid these hassles. Just want to keep out of trouble
> with
> these maniacs. ;-)
>
> -B
> (Jeeze, I guess I need a dashboard camera to record everything to back up
> my innocence.)
>
>

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

06-28-2004, 04:35 AM

On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 16:27:10 -0400, Badger_South <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Just take a cheapo digital camera with you. I have a sub $100 Vivitar
3315 that will take about 5 minutes of video with a 128 Meg SD card,
no sound of course, and it fits in my levi jeans pocket. No Lycra since
I go stomping and hiking off road trails that I can't take a bike on.
Hence the mountain bike. A video of the dog chasing you with the intent of
biting should convince the police no matter how thick headed they are.
Most places with lease laws also mandate that the dog be locked up in
the owners property. Just because they live in the country does not give
them the right to get out and chase bikes. I once turned around and chased
a dog all the way back into its yard, yiping all the way.
Turning the tables often changes their mind.
Bill Baka

> Last week, some woman's dogs came after me and she says 'they think
> you're
> going too fast and don't like it'. What? Huh? I was going like 4 mph and
> actually stopped as her dog rushed in front of my bike and turned
> broadside. SHe then orders me off the trail and says if I sprayed her
> menacing dogs she'd call the dog catcher on me? Again, Huh? What? She was
> the scofflaw with pets off leash on leash day, and with menacing growling
> dogs. I hardly think animal control would fault -me-, but I wouldn't put
> it
> past the biatch to lie somehow and of course she'd put the leash she was
> carrying on the dog while awaiting the AC officer, dammit.
> <\rant>
>
> Currently I have an email into the chief asking him about the liability
> and
> backing of the responding officer if I had to use the 'Halt'. But more
> than
> ever, I'm trying avoid these hassles. Just want to keep out of trouble
> with
> these maniacs. ;-)
>
> -B
> (Jeeze, I guess I need a dashboard camera to record everything to back up
> my innocence.)
>
>

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]