Town Square

Post a New Topic

Letter: Change riding rules so cyclists face traffic?

Original post made on Jul 10, 2007

Editor:

Read the full story here Web Link

Comments (7)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Brielle Johnck
a resident of Menlo Park: The Willows
on Jul 10, 2007 at 12:31 pm

Ron:
First off, if you believe that Mr. Smith made a U-Turn at the top of Sandhill Rd. you probably believe that mosquitos spread AIDS. It seems that the County Sherrif's Department made up the cause of Mr. Smith's death. It has been that department's M.O. for years to find any way it can to blame the cyclist and let the driver off the hook. Mr. Smith was hit while riding in the shoulder area that was marked by a solid white line. The bicycle skid marks showed that Mr. Smith was hit and shoved violently forward within the shoulder area.

Secondly, if you think bicycle riding on the left side of a road is wise, I suggest you try it on Westridge from Alpine over the hill to Portola Rd. and back. My guess is that if an auto was traveling down Westridge to Alpine, you wouldn't live past the first left curve.
D.O.A. for Ron Wilson. There's a reason that the DMV rule is that in the USA, we all (drivers and cyclists) stay to the right.

You may think you have a better idea but, I'd say it is counter intuitive, silly and dangerous. When the Almanac prints wacky thoughts like yours, a disclaimer stating the danger and illegality of your suggestion should be added by the editor. I hope No One takes you seriously.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Ben
a resident of Menlo Park: South of Seminary/Vintage Oaks
on Jul 11, 2007 at 10:38 pm

Judging by Mr. Wilson's letter and his prior statements about the wisdom of cyclists' riding against traffic, I believe that he is sincerely concerned about this issue and believes in this position. I happen to strongly disagree with his position.

It also appears that Brielle is sincerely concerned about cyclist safety. But why anyone has to deride someone else for his ideas ("wacky thoughts like yours") is beyond me. Do you think, Brielle, that others can't analyze and come to reasonable conclusions about unconventional ideas? Do you really think the Almanac must assume the "Father Knows Best" role and protect those who read these posts from **dangerous** ideas? Do you think we are simpletons? Please, Brielle, show some respect for the intelligence of others. Don't insult us.

By the way, Brielle, did you go out and inspect the accident site? If you or anyone else has evidence that the sheriff's department is fabricating the story of what really happened on that tragic day, please state the evidence. These accusations with no supporting evidence don't do anyone any good. My mind's not made up. Tell us what you know.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Editor
a resident of Menlo Park: University Heights
on Jul 12, 2007 at 1:11 am

The California Highway Patrol, not the Sheriff's Office, investigated the Rodney Smith fatality. Here is the link to the story on the CHP's conclusions: Web Link


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Steve
a resident of another community
on Jul 12, 2007 at 1:03 pm

Unfortunately a person who has the courage to post a real name runs the risk of becoming the focus of personal attacks or becoming a distraction from the immediate issue. Sad but true, "Ben".

In bicycle/automobile collisions, not only does the cyclist always suffer greater harm, but contract law enforcement in Woodside and Portola Valley does have a history of adding insult to injury by favoring motorists in determining fault. As San Carlos Councilmember Matt Grocutt recently noted, none of the tragic bicyclist fatalities of the past decade in San Mateo County have resulted in vehicular manslaughter charges against the motorist involved.

Based on my inspection of the Sand Hill Road fatal accident site, the cyclist was struck well to the right of the shoulder stripe and was traveling parallel to the line. Did the CHP investigators rely on a self-serving account of the driver more than the observation of skid marks and other evidence at the scene? What?

In regards to Mr. Wilson's suggestions for a change in the vehicle code, "wacky" is a charitable description of the idea. It's not unreasonable to suggest that readers be reminded that by anyone who prints this stuff, that the practice is illegal and dangerous. Who knows, someone might start thinking that it's a bad idea for bicyclists to ride with traffic, or that horn honking is an adequate substitute for steering or braking as a response to a hazardous situation.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Ben
a resident of Menlo Park: South of Seminary/Vintage Oaks
on Jul 12, 2007 at 9:47 pm

Thanks for the info, Steve. I can understand why people who have seen the skid marks might be suspicious. Do you know if anyone is challenging the CHP's findings? I'm not even sure how that might be done. The DA's office, maybe?

Regarding the first sentence of your post, I'm not sure what to make of it. You seem to imply that I made a personal attack on Ms. Johnck, although I was merely challenging her for a rather severe and caustic (toxic?) response to someone else's expression of opinion. I believe that people can disagree, but still be respectful of the person who has expressed an idea in sincerity. And I also believe that cyclists don't need to be told that the law mandates that they ride with traffic. If they don't know that, they shouldn't be riding a bicycle. I give people more credit than you seem to think they should be given.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Bob Shanteau
a resident of another community
on Jul 13, 2007 at 12:48 pm

If it hasn't been done already, someone needs to go out to the accident site and document the evidence there, including measuring and photographing skid marks and any gouges or scrapes. I am an expert traffic engineer, and in the personal injury lawsuits in which I have been involved, a private investigator working for the attorney representing the victim's heirs will document the site, particularly if the attorney is retained right away. If the evidence is not documented soon, it will disappear and all that will be left is the CHP collision report.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Steve
a resident of another community
on Jul 14, 2007 at 9:08 am

The accident site is on eastbound Sand Hill at the top of the first hill west of the I-280/Sand Hill interchange. There is an improvised shrine near the point of impact. Maybe "Ben" and Bob Shanteau should check it out. They may find the investigator's paint marks and a skid mark made by Mr. Smith's rear tire as he was struck by the motorist's car. The CHP's version of this terrible event seems highly implausible.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Sneak peek: Bradley's Fine Diner in Menlo Park
By Elena Kadvany | 4 comments | 3,313 views

Marriage Underachievers
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,631 views

A Surprise!
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 1,524 views

Best High Dives to Watch the Game
By Laura Stec | 4 comments | 1,186 views

Measure M-- I am not drinking Greenheartís expensive potion
By Martin Lamarque | 32 comments | 989 views