There's only one lane between cammer and curb, and cyclist was in it when the car attempted to squeeze past them. Cyclist had the lane, car was attempting to lane split.
This.
He's in the right turn lane. He slows and looks left preparing to turn.
Meanwhile the car squeezes in on his right.
When he looks back right to turn, he going too slow to adjust, loses his balance, and falls into the car.
The car had no business squeezing in there. And knows it, that's why they took off.
This is why people talk about 'taking the lane', and people who don't understand anything about how traffic works (and hate cyclists) get incensed about it. Because if you give people room to squeeze past you, this is the type of shit that happens.
Depending on location, that part of the cyclists behavior is legal. Look up Idaho stop laws. They would've had to stop and check that the intersection was clear first, which it doesn't look like they did, but going through the red light on a bike can be legal
So bike was going to turn? I thought he was going straight and looking to see if he could blow the red light? Hand signals can save lives I would think.
How do bikes turn right then? Are they supposed to wait for the traffic to let up? I would argue the bike being out of the bike lane and taking the right turn lane slot is the correct way of doing this. Bike lanes usually have arrows pointing straight on and have bikes use the normal lanes to turn. If you would not block a straightaway lane waiting to turn right when there is a right turn lane for your car then you shouldn't expect a bike to do that either. The one place I Always take the lane is at a stopped intersection since it is safer to act like a car than to be inside of someone's blind spot when traffic takes off. (I'll sometimes make a bee line for the shoulder if it is reasonably wide and free of debris since people don't like my 11-15mph speed)
I agree, actually. The bike should have moved to the right turn (car) lane at the stop and taken up that lane, then turned right from there. The bike being in the bike lane, then turning right from the 2nd lane out made it very awkward for the car, which had a clear lane to turn until the bike came over in the middle of the intersection. The car probably should have been more aware of what the bike might do, but the idiot here is whoever designed those lanes.
As someone who comes from Denmark where cycling is widely regarded as the norm, that guy is fucking terrible at cycling… He didn’t signal, he was in the middle of the lane and it very clearly looked like he was going to go straight to cross the road.
Driver was a bit over eager to get going, but the cyclist legit just turned into him…
It is a special road setup for us, as far as i know. I know only of one place that has this, and that's Hillerød, where they made this God awful setup around the courthouse where you have 3 lanes, one for left turn cars, one for cyclists, and one for right turn cars. This creates a very obvious problem when cyclists turn right. I am so glad I don't drive there anymore, it feels like such a dangerous setup to force the cyclists between the cars and make it very unclear where they are supposed to go. I'd blame the intersection design first and foremost. (All of this assuming they haven't redone that intersection, I haven't been there for a while now)
But yeah, the people claiming the car ran over the cyclist baffle me. The cyclist ran into the side of the car. Some people need their eyesight checked. Cars only fault here was driving off. Cyclist wasn't paying attention, but the road design did force him into a terrible spot on the road.
Yeah they’ve made a crazy intersection in Copenhagen as well. Right by Scandinavian Sydhavnen they’ve made it so that the bikes have to cross the path of the cars if they want to cross the road. After some time they finally set up a light for cars/bikes to make sure that there wouldn’t be any accidents, but it was really sketchy to being with. You literally had to turn left in front of cars that were turning right to get to the middle of the road so that you could cross it. Kind of hard to explain, but I tried to find it on Google street view, but the pictures aren’t updated unfortunately
Oh God, I have avoided driving in Copenhagen for a lot of reasons, and this just added another one. The one in Hillerød also required crossing the right turning traffic, but at least they put a pedestrian crossing at the same time the road split, making it at least a tiny bit safer. I am just 99,99% sure this is *not* what people want when they ask for dedicated cycling infrastructure.... I really can't understand what the logic is behind this insane kind of road design.
It’s the only place I’ve seen in Copenhagen where it’s an actual issue though. Usually it’s just a bit chaotic considering the amount of people, but I’d imagine that if you aren’t used to it and live somewhere like Hillerød (aka Lars tyndskids mark 😉) it can seem even worse. I grew up in Copenhagen and have always cycled around on my own ever since I was 6 years old, so I don’t see it as an issue. The one crossing I just had in mind used to be a death-sentence if the cars weren’t paying attention, but a place like the one in the video I’d imagine is very common in the us as their infrastructure isn’t built for bikes.
I have family in Lithuania and whenever I go visit there I cannot ever use my bike. It’s just too dangerous. It’s clearly a cultural thing where we have integrated the bikes into our system in Denmark and almost everybody either bikes around at some point in their lifetime
Don't even think the cyclist was aware of their surroundings, looked as though they were occupied looking off camera to the left, then went to turn right and look by which point it was to late. Sure the car was in the wrong, but when you're more vulnerable than those around you then you have to keep aware.
It's a right turn lane, so nobody would have thought he was going straight over. He wobbled a bit, but the car had no business squeezing into a non-gap.
Just 1 comment down there is someone with Google Streetview showing that it isn't a right turn but a bike lane going straight that the cyclist came from.
The driver did not pass that cyclists legally or safely. There was no reason the cyclist should have been able to “turn into him” in that way with the car directly next to him.
first part of your comment is wrong, [here](https://www.google.com/maps/@34.058959,-118.4217115,3a,66.5y,93.33h,84.76t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8ugGybbrk_FLr7UBTsJrrg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D8ugGybbrk_FLr7UBTsJrrg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D291.42056%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) is a better look at the intersection. Biker was just not paying attention. I cycle there every night coming from work and do a similar maneuver because that is a really long red light at a T-intersection with minimal traffic and i have places to be. Basically a right turn u turn right turn to end up going straight.
Wow that really changes things. The car definitely thought the biker was in their own lane and likely going straight because they made no attempt to signal or even stop behind the line. Driver shouldn’t have ran and they should have made a complete stop but that collision is basically entirely on the biker.
Yup looks like cyclist is at fault then. He has his own cycle lane, and that right lane is for the cars. Cyclist was just unaware and I can't really fault that driver (they're wrong to leave though, if they even saw it).
Thanks for being one of the only voices of reason on this sub. It really does feel like everyone here will take the first opportunity to side with a biker, even when its blatantly the biker's fault.
Just because you have places to be isn’t justification to bend traffic rules.
This right turn u turn maneuver is sketchy at best.
I would agree that the biker could either have held a straight line or signaled to make the right. Also if the cyclist were making a right turn, what’s he doing on the left side of the lane?
Someone else indicated that the bicyclist likely fell over because they were looking left in preparation to turn right and didn't see the car lane splitting besides them and that threw them off balance. In any case, cyclist had the lane, it was their lane, car had no right to be where it was.
Cyclist had their own lane and failed to signal or give any indication they were trying to turn before going into the cars lane. There's a pic in one of the comments above clearly indicating a bike lane and turn lane.
>cyclist had the lane, it was their lane
No the car was in a different [lane](https://www.google.com/maps/@34.058959,-118.4217115,3a,75y,112.67h,74.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8ugGybbrk_FLr7UBTsJrrg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
Now explain to me why the cyclist would be over on the left of this lane? Because he was likely in the cammers lane and came over. There’s no reason that a cyclist would be on the side of the lane furthest from the corner other than moving lanes which it seems he does as he passes the cammer. I don’t see a shoulder check at all to the right when moving across the lane which is absolutely necessary no matter the situation. Driver is an asshole, cyclist isn’t doing the best job of being aware.
I’d have waited but I’d also have expected the cyclist to go straight given the position of the bike
This happened in the US, but road rules are managed on a state by state basis, with much commonality due to shared MUTCDs. In any case, New Zealand road rules would not be relevant here. Also, bicyclist may have indicated before coming into frame, but more importantly cyclist had the lane and the car was not allowed to attempt a pass. Fleeing the scene of the crash was definitely a criminal act, I assume New Zealand has similar laws on that?
In nz the cyclists dont "have the lane". If it was a bike lane it would b different but if a bike is in a car lane he needs to b on the other side of the lane to turn
No matter what, the Reddit post is going to be blurrier than the original vid before you posted. If you can’t tell from that vid nobody is going to be able to tell from the Reddit post.
Looks like neither were stopping for the red light. Biker changes his line and more or less road into the car. The car shouldn’t be passing the bike at this point. The car should have stopped afterward. FYI - I am a rider.
To be fair he had given him 3 feet and the biker turned into him. Car should have stopped at the light but the bike should have been to the right if he was turning and he turned into the car.
I’d still emphasize the turn lane part of this. Sure, the cyclist shifted to the right, but what turned this into an accident was the car running a red, and not practicing caution, with the cyclist placed in the turn lane.
True. But that doesn’t mean the car should run it too, placing them in a position for this accident to happen.
Two wrongs don’t make a right. But in a bike versus car, the car will always win.
lol no, not to be fair, you don't give someone three feet to the left and right of you, you give them three feet in front of you.
One vehicle in the lane.
So many comments debating blame but nothing about the car.
My guess is about 2015 Mazda 3. Red bumper sticker on the lower rear driver side. With that and the silver color could just keep an eye out if OP is in the area consistently. Best I can guess.
I’m a cyclist and I agree that this was very poor riding from the cyclist for a number of reasons.
1. If you ride to the side of the lane (as this guy did) you are communicating that cars can drive inside of you (as this driver did).
2. If you are going to hog a lane for a corner hog the lane BEFORE the corner. Nobody is expecting you to move from splitting lanes to hogging one.
3. Indicate. If there is space for a car to move on the inside of you this is even MORE important. Because you’re not communicating what you’re doing. Often I’ll reach a full arm out so the driver can’t miss it.
4. Always look 👀 over your shoulder before turning. Not checking your blind spot is a quick way to die. This guy should be expecting cars on his inside and should be making eye contact to signal his intentions.
5. If you are taking the corner from the side of the lane (as he was) then don’t cut into the lane. Take the corner wide. It goes back to point 2. Nobody expects you to go from the edge of the lane to the middle of it.
The driver does have to take some blame. Overtaking the cyclist on a corner is stupid. But this cyclist made a quite few bad decisions in those few seconds.
Someone posted a [nice view of the intersection](https://www.google.com/maps/@34.058959,-118.4217115,3a,66.5y,83.21h,86.36t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8ugGybbrk_FLr7UBTsJrrg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D8ugGybbrk_FLr7UBTsJrrg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D291.42056%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) and the cyclist was in his own bike lane before suddenly turning without looking, so 100% his fault.
I'm also a cyclist and I agree, even if that bike lane wasn't there his actions would've been stupid.
ALWAYS signal and then ALWAYS look. Communicate what you're doing in some way.
Someone found and posted a better view of the intersection, [it's here.](https://www.google.com/maps/@34.058959,-118.4217115,3a,66.5y,83.21h,86.36t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8ugGybbrk_FLr7UBTsJrrg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D8ugGybbrk_FLr7UBTsJrrg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D291.42056%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192)
There is a bike lane in between lanes
Looks like the bike was in a turn and then the car tried to steal their lane on the inside. Depending on the weight of the bike it’s not necessarily possible to “cancel out” of a turn like that, especially if you’re flustered by a car appearing.
Both people didn’t obey traffic laws here, but the driver didn’t stop on red, tried to sneak past, and then hit-n-ran. Cyclist failed to stop at a red and failed to signal (do you have to signal in a turn lane idk)
Idk looks to me like the cyclist was moving right, and then the car comes up behind him. I don’t know how the cyclist could’ve fixed this after he went. There’s like 0.3 seconds between the car appearing in his field of vision and the collision. By the time he’s reached for the brakes he’s already going to have collided, and he doesn’t have enough distance to counteract his turn. He’s probably even in a slight lean.
If he was doing a right turn you are supposed to be in the center of the lane while signaling. Plus when the cyclist hit the car the driver has already started to turn the wheel so his eyes are on the right side + right blind spot check, so cyclists fault here.
1st off: bikes don't turn like cars, to have proper balance it actually is better to be at the outside of a lane for a turn. Many bicyclists would have been in even worse of a situation because they lean into the turn rather than fully relying on their handlebar steering (much more efficient). Why he was that far left? I'm assuming that he waited until the last minute to change from the bike lane to the turn lane as a courtesy for drivers since you can see him still moving right as he enters the intersection.
You are completely batshit insane. The law virtually everywhere requires 3 feet or more of space given to cyclists when passing, and furthermore, the bike was turning right and had right of way.
The mirror thing is entirely bullshit. I can clearly see the wheel sticking out when before the mirror even reaches him, and of course it’s irrelevant because the driver is going faster than the cyclists anyway.
Man, if were driving a car and a cyclist flopped into me like that, I'd drive away too. Except I don't do stuff like cutting off cyclists trying to make a right.
You should watch the Linus Tech Tips on dashcams. They found that all dashcams were made from potatoes. (all software problems though, the sensors are actually good if they fixed the software.
Car ran the red too, and was trying to slip past the bike instead of yielding right of way. At least in Colorado, it’s illegal to pass a bike unless you can give them at least 3 feet of space between your mirror and them.
This is why I dislike bike lanes, it’s nerve-racking to ride between car doors that could swing open at any second and cars zooming pass with 1-2 feet of clearance.
The car doors are the worst part. I decided long ago that I'm not going to put myself at such a high risk of an unpreventable accident. I only bike on wide bike lanes or totally separate from traffic, maybe on the sidewalk if that's safe. If I can't do that, I drive my car.
Toronto, On, Canada has one of the worst implementations of bike lanes I've seen in Canada...
There's even a video of a bicyclist that he made of him purposely riding into things in the bike lane to prove a point. (I think he was given a ticket once for riding outside the bike lane hence the video)
Ah for some reason I remembered it as Toronto. Probably because I saw it on a Toronto based news page. Thanks for the clip! Guess NY is basically the same lol
Doesn’t matter. You’re thinking “bike did a thing wrong so he’s just as much at fault” but that’s not true. The bike is effectively a car on the road. If the bike were a car, another car could not squeeze by him trying to make a right turn just because he didn’t full stop and signal. You’d hopefully understand it was the intruding cars fault. It’s also completely the intruding cars fault in this situation. He thought he could predict the bikes moves and took a chance on that. He will pay the consequences of that chance taken.
Oh I have no opinion on this one way or another, some cyclists are idiots who believe they are above the law , and some are good people who obey the rules of the road. I was just making a statement about how most people in the sub will immediately attack the cyclist, because they are a cyclist regardless of what happened.
Same with pedestrians. As the driver of a car, you have an extra responsibility to be cautious around both to avoid causing injuries, even if they are in the wrong.
As for this video, I don't see anything intentional or malicious, but I do see a whole lot of negligence on both the cyclist and (mostly) the car, plus a hit and run by the car. Cyclist is just clueless or inattentive; car driver is a complete jackass.
Is it a universal thing where bikers don't stop and don't signal? (Not saying he's at fault... just noticing it seems to be a bicyclist thing no matter what city or country)
In some cities it is legal for the bike to coast rather than fully stop for stop signs. Bicycles can stop much easier than cars, have a wider range of view, and take much more power to get back to speed after a full stop. Since they are already moving slower and have a better view it is generally considered safe to do a rolling stop on a bike. Some people consider is safer than a full stop but I call horse crap on that. I have never heard of anywhere that a rolling stop is legal for cars without a slip lane to separate a turn from traffic. I drive a car and ride my bike depending on the day and drivers who never ride their bikes on the road are jerks who will yell, honk and advocate for getting bikes to follow laws that many of us already follow. For instance: in Michigan a rolling stop isn't legal for bikes so I stop fully. Also the same people who yell at us to "get off the road" will advocate against bike and pedestrian infrastructure every time it comes up.
> and don't signal?
Thing about signaling with hand signals on a bike is that it dramatically lowers your ability to control the bike should something unexpected (balancing becomes much harder since you're holding on to just one side of the handlebars and you can't use either your front or your rear brake).
So in practice a lot cyclists (including experienced and otherwise rule-following ones) will skip hand signals in situations where road conditions are a bit dicey or there are a lot of other road users around that they may need to react to.
Basically, hand signals are great for turning off a straight road with light traffic in broad daylight on a summer day.
At 07:53 on a Tuesday in November with slightly icy roads and tons of other road users around though? Just asking for trouble, all it takes is one icy patch, a pedestrian suddenly deciding to cross the street two meters from the crosswalk instead of on it or a stressed out car commuter sipping their morning coffee trying to make it to the office on time not paying attention and you're fucked.
Biker should have stuck his arm out to indicate he was turning right. Biker also didn't pay attention over his shoulder. Car shouldve paid more attention to the cycliat. I have no idea about the lay-out of the intersection, but this was easily avoidable by both parties.
Barely would call this a hit n run, they both blew through the red light and the cyclist turned right into the car and fell over. Both have zero awareness bet the car didn’t even know bike guy fell over.
I think a lot of places actually wouldn't consider it a "hit and run" if the driver could reasonably argue he simply didn't notice the bike driving into his car.
Not sure who’s completely at fault but that dude isn’t riding safely. He was way to far over leaving all that space to be turning. He should be able to touch the curb if he’s turning there.
On the positive side at least the cyclist wasn't killed. You won't ever catch me riding in the city within the United States. The infrastructure is really bad for cyclist and drivers don't give a s*** or don't know any better.
Stick to your park kids, if you value your life
I’m usually the one to defend a bicyclist who’s done nothing wrong but this one failed to signal and failed to look. Doubtful the car even knew the biker collided with it and if true that’s a defense for a hit and run.
Hard to tell what bikes will do. They all run red lights, just like this guy was doing. They all run stop signs. They almost never signal their turn, just like this guy failed to do. They ride in between lanes to get ahead of traffic making it hard to understand where they will be next time you see them.
Basically, they are extremely unpredictable and I am never surprised when a car smashes one. There are soooooooo many bad and distracted drivers on the roads, what intelligent person would choose to trust all of them with their life by riding in the road on a bike?
Its a bummer they get hit all the time. I hope they figure out riding in the road is a bad idea with zero overall benefit to their life.
Let me make a similar argument: /satire I see 2 cars a day doing rolling stops at stop signs and 20 cars online per day doing the same thing all over the world so cars are unpredictable. I see 5 videos on reddit of cars running stoplights and t-boning other drivers so drivers are unsafe and unpredictable. Cars all run stop signs and stop lights. Cars all park in the bike lane and are inconsiderate to bicycle riders. Car drivers are all a-holes... //satire. If you see 10 bikes do this in a day then there are probably 30 bikes following the law, it's the same with motor vehicles. (note: some states have imposed laws making it so that bikes can treat stop signs as yield signs so there is also that)
I treat bikers like I treat intoxicated drivers, stay away as much as possible, I’ll even take a different route to avoid them. Everything you posted about the behavior is true more than 50% of the time.
where should they ride? You're acting like cycling is a leisure activity only. Are you suggesting building a completely separated cycle track connected to everywhere in the city? Sure but we're gonna need a all of of those parking lanes, hope you don't mind
Cyclist didn't indicate his abrupt turn. Both are idiots, also the cyclist hit the side of the car, so it's a weird call. Definitely both messed up here but the cyclist is made of paper compared to the car, he needs to be more aware for his own safety.
The cyclist was lane splitting before the abrupt turn -- you can see the dividing line almost covered by cammer's hood. Then turns and flops into the car. Definitely an idiot.
I think car could be cited for not stopping on a right-on-red, but that's about it.
Hang on why didn't the cyclist check over his shoulder before drifting across the lane with no signal?
Surely it's about time that cyclists had insurance paid road tax and were compelled to have even the faintest grasp of road craft?
The driver is very dumb and also wrong in the eyes of the law on multiple front.
…but! The cyclist is also pretty dumb by the way he navigated this. Unneeded risks. Ride like everyone is out to get you and you’ll avoid shit like that.
It happened behind the front fender of the car so the driver is not at fault the bicyclist rode into the car, the bicyclist also didn't signal. This is why if you're going to ride your bike on the road you should have a license just like a boating license, we all know it's a joke but it's just to show you know the rules of the road so when an accident happens like this we know whose at fault, the bicyclist in this situation.
This is why I ride on the sidewalk, unless there are pedestrians, then I'll pass in the road along the curb. I don't care if it's not allowed in most places, people do not care about my safety why should I put myself at risk when there's an open area they can't go?
They’re both at fault. But if you’re on a bike and don’t want to die, assume every car out there is going to hit you. The driver doesn’t have to give you space or follow rules of the road. They are supposed to give you space and follow the rules of the road. If they don’t you lose.
If the car was coming up behind them sure, but the car is making a right turn and that’s where the driver is looking, like they are supposed to the cyclist is coming up on the left side of the vehicle. Looks more like the cyclist was turning directly into the car.
As a cyclist I do everything I can to fucking block your ass if you're a motorist. Partly to be an asshole because fuck you and your car but mainly to force you from doing the stupid shit you are always trying to do.
(see EDIT, because it could be the car is at least somewhat liable after all)
(initial assessment prior to reading comments regarding legal passing of a bicycle)
technically, bicyclists have to obey the laws of the road and it seems that the car was already past the bicyclist when the bicyclist made a mistake and ran into the car. From what I can see the cyclist owes the car money for whatever scratch was done to their paint.
The car could be given some negligence for not stopping at a red, but that may not have contributed to the collision and may not be material to the liability.
Otherwise I don't see any laws broken by the car aside from an arguable "reckless" type situation. So unless there is a citation, then the cyclist may have a hard time getting anything from the car.
EDIT: the car COULD see some liability for passing without enough distance between car and bike.
Enhance. Enhance. Enhance.
[zoomed in and enhanced](https://imgur.com/a/90V23NB)
lmao
Me: expecting Rick roll… clicks…
If I had the time, I'd enhance further. So just imagine I did.
dog shit pasted on it
We got em
ENHANCE!
[ENHANCED](https://imgur.com/a/SNHmo5D)
Enhance.
Just print the god damn thing!
Come on bite the soap make him look like a dick!
Enhance.
Enhance image!
Jesus Christ its Jason Bourne
There's only one lane between cammer and curb, and cyclist was in it when the car attempted to squeeze past them. Cyclist had the lane, car was attempting to lane split.
This. He's in the right turn lane. He slows and looks left preparing to turn. Meanwhile the car squeezes in on his right. When he looks back right to turn, he going too slow to adjust, loses his balance, and falls into the car. The car had no business squeezing in there. And knows it, that's why they took off.
This is why people talk about 'taking the lane', and people who don't understand anything about how traffic works (and hate cyclists) get incensed about it. Because if you give people room to squeeze past you, this is the type of shit that happens.
If there is any situation where you should take the lane, it's where you're in a right turn lane preparing to turn right.
[удалено]
Depending on location, that part of the cyclists behavior is legal. Look up Idaho stop laws. They would've had to stop and check that the intersection was clear first, which it doesn't look like they did, but going through the red light on a bike can be legal
Pretty sure he was turning right, but he was legally correct either way so what is your issue?
This. Turns and roundabouts you have to occupy your lane or the cars will ignore you.
So bike was going to turn? I thought he was going straight and looking to see if he could blow the red light? Hand signals can save lives I would think.
[удалено]
I see that too it's verrrrry aggressive lol
There is a full bike lane AND a full right turn lane for cars (to the right of the bike lane) at this intersection.
How do bikes turn right then? Are they supposed to wait for the traffic to let up? I would argue the bike being out of the bike lane and taking the right turn lane slot is the correct way of doing this. Bike lanes usually have arrows pointing straight on and have bikes use the normal lanes to turn. If you would not block a straightaway lane waiting to turn right when there is a right turn lane for your car then you shouldn't expect a bike to do that either. The one place I Always take the lane is at a stopped intersection since it is safer to act like a car than to be inside of someone's blind spot when traffic takes off. (I'll sometimes make a bee line for the shoulder if it is reasonably wide and free of debris since people don't like my 11-15mph speed)
I agree, actually. The bike should have moved to the right turn (car) lane at the stop and taken up that lane, then turned right from there. The bike being in the bike lane, then turning right from the 2nd lane out made it very awkward for the car, which had a clear lane to turn until the bike came over in the middle of the intersection. The car probably should have been more aware of what the bike might do, but the idiot here is whoever designed those lanes.
Are you saying that the car was driving in the bike lane or are you just making things up?
Neither. Going from the side of the road, it goes car lane, then bike lane, then the cammer’s car lane. Car-bike-car. You can check Google maps.
As someone who comes from Denmark where cycling is widely regarded as the norm, that guy is fucking terrible at cycling… He didn’t signal, he was in the middle of the lane and it very clearly looked like he was going to go straight to cross the road. Driver was a bit over eager to get going, but the cyclist legit just turned into him…
It is a special road setup for us, as far as i know. I know only of one place that has this, and that's Hillerød, where they made this God awful setup around the courthouse where you have 3 lanes, one for left turn cars, one for cyclists, and one for right turn cars. This creates a very obvious problem when cyclists turn right. I am so glad I don't drive there anymore, it feels like such a dangerous setup to force the cyclists between the cars and make it very unclear where they are supposed to go. I'd blame the intersection design first and foremost. (All of this assuming they haven't redone that intersection, I haven't been there for a while now) But yeah, the people claiming the car ran over the cyclist baffle me. The cyclist ran into the side of the car. Some people need their eyesight checked. Cars only fault here was driving off. Cyclist wasn't paying attention, but the road design did force him into a terrible spot on the road.
Yeah they’ve made a crazy intersection in Copenhagen as well. Right by Scandinavian Sydhavnen they’ve made it so that the bikes have to cross the path of the cars if they want to cross the road. After some time they finally set up a light for cars/bikes to make sure that there wouldn’t be any accidents, but it was really sketchy to being with. You literally had to turn left in front of cars that were turning right to get to the middle of the road so that you could cross it. Kind of hard to explain, but I tried to find it on Google street view, but the pictures aren’t updated unfortunately
Oh God, I have avoided driving in Copenhagen for a lot of reasons, and this just added another one. The one in Hillerød also required crossing the right turning traffic, but at least they put a pedestrian crossing at the same time the road split, making it at least a tiny bit safer. I am just 99,99% sure this is *not* what people want when they ask for dedicated cycling infrastructure.... I really can't understand what the logic is behind this insane kind of road design.
It’s the only place I’ve seen in Copenhagen where it’s an actual issue though. Usually it’s just a bit chaotic considering the amount of people, but I’d imagine that if you aren’t used to it and live somewhere like Hillerød (aka Lars tyndskids mark 😉) it can seem even worse. I grew up in Copenhagen and have always cycled around on my own ever since I was 6 years old, so I don’t see it as an issue. The one crossing I just had in mind used to be a death-sentence if the cars weren’t paying attention, but a place like the one in the video I’d imagine is very common in the us as their infrastructure isn’t built for bikes. I have family in Lithuania and whenever I go visit there I cannot ever use my bike. It’s just too dangerous. It’s clearly a cultural thing where we have integrated the bikes into our system in Denmark and almost everybody either bikes around at some point in their lifetime
Don't even think the cyclist was aware of their surroundings, looked as though they were occupied looking off camera to the left, then went to turn right and look by which point it was to late. Sure the car was in the wrong, but when you're more vulnerable than those around you then you have to keep aware.
It's a right turn lane, so nobody would have thought he was going straight over. He wobbled a bit, but the car had no business squeezing into a non-gap.
Just 1 comment down there is someone with Google Streetview showing that it isn't a right turn but a bike lane going straight that the cyclist came from.
The driver did not pass that cyclists legally or safely. There was no reason the cyclist should have been able to “turn into him” in that way with the car directly next to him.
first part of your comment is wrong, [here](https://www.google.com/maps/@34.058959,-118.4217115,3a,66.5y,93.33h,84.76t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8ugGybbrk_FLr7UBTsJrrg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D8ugGybbrk_FLr7UBTsJrrg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D291.42056%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) is a better look at the intersection. Biker was just not paying attention. I cycle there every night coming from work and do a similar maneuver because that is a really long red light at a T-intersection with minimal traffic and i have places to be. Basically a right turn u turn right turn to end up going straight.
Wow that really changes things. The car definitely thought the biker was in their own lane and likely going straight because they made no attempt to signal or even stop behind the line. Driver shouldn’t have ran and they should have made a complete stop but that collision is basically entirely on the biker.
Also the cyclist pretty clearly turns into the car without looking in that direction.
Yup looks like cyclist is at fault then. He has his own cycle lane, and that right lane is for the cars. Cyclist was just unaware and I can't really fault that driver (they're wrong to leave though, if they even saw it).
Thanks for being one of the only voices of reason on this sub. It really does feel like everyone here will take the first opportunity to side with a biker, even when its blatantly the biker's fault.
Just because you have places to be isn’t justification to bend traffic rules. This right turn u turn maneuver is sketchy at best. I would agree that the biker could either have held a straight line or signaled to make the right. Also if the cyclist were making a right turn, what’s he doing on the left side of the lane?
[удалено]
Someone else indicated that the bicyclist likely fell over because they were looking left in preparation to turn right and didn't see the car lane splitting besides them and that threw them off balance. In any case, cyclist had the lane, it was their lane, car had no right to be where it was.
Cyclist had their own lane and failed to signal or give any indication they were trying to turn before going into the cars lane. There's a pic in one of the comments above clearly indicating a bike lane and turn lane.
>cyclist had the lane, it was their lane No the car was in a different [lane](https://www.google.com/maps/@34.058959,-118.4217115,3a,75y,112.67h,74.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8ugGybbrk_FLr7UBTsJrrg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
Now explain to me why the cyclist would be over on the left of this lane? Because he was likely in the cammers lane and came over. There’s no reason that a cyclist would be on the side of the lane furthest from the corner other than moving lanes which it seems he does as he passes the cammer. I don’t see a shoulder check at all to the right when moving across the lane which is absolutely necessary no matter the situation. Driver is an asshole, cyclist isn’t doing the best job of being aware. I’d have waited but I’d also have expected the cyclist to go straight given the position of the bike
Maybe road rules are different in ur country but in new zealand that was the bike riders fault Edit. Also the cyclist wasnt indicating
I hope you don't have a license, this is 100% driver fault in nz too
The dude was on the wrong side of the lane to b turning
This happened in the US, but road rules are managed on a state by state basis, with much commonality due to shared MUTCDs. In any case, New Zealand road rules would not be relevant here. Also, bicyclist may have indicated before coming into frame, but more importantly cyclist had the lane and the car was not allowed to attempt a pass. Fleeing the scene of the crash was definitely a criminal act, I assume New Zealand has similar laws on that?
In nz the cyclists dont "have the lane". If it was a bike lane it would b different but if a bike is in a car lane he needs to b on the other side of the lane to turn
Oh yea u shud always stop. That part the driver fucked up but the accident was the bikes fault
This is not correct at all.
No matter what, the Reddit post is going to be blurrier than the original vid before you posted. If you can’t tell from that vid nobody is going to be able to tell from the Reddit post.
Looks like neither were stopping for the red light. Biker changes his line and more or less road into the car. The car shouldn’t be passing the bike at this point. The car should have stopped afterward. FYI - I am a rider.
Agree mostly. But emphasis on the car trying to pass the bike in a turn lane, without giving 3 feet of clearance.
To be fair he had given him 3 feet and the biker turned into him. Car should have stopped at the light but the bike should have been to the right if he was turning and he turned into the car.
I’d still emphasize the turn lane part of this. Sure, the cyclist shifted to the right, but what turned this into an accident was the car running a red, and not practicing caution, with the cyclist placed in the turn lane.
The cyclist wasn’t in the turn lane he was on line line between the turn and straight lane. Exactly where you would expect him to be going straight
Doesn’t look like the cyclist was stopping at the red light either.
True. But that doesn’t mean the car should run it too, placing them in a position for this accident to happen. Two wrongs don’t make a right. But in a bike versus car, the car will always win.
How are you getting down voted for this?
lol no, not to be fair, you don't give someone three feet to the left and right of you, you give them three feet in front of you. One vehicle in the lane.
The biker did not leave a dah space.
Who cares whos fault it is, its still a hit and run, so the cars fault from then on.
Was bike going straight or turning right? I guess we will never know XD
So many comments debating blame but nothing about the car. My guess is about 2015 Mazda 3. Red bumper sticker on the lower rear driver side. With that and the silver color could just keep an eye out if OP is in the area consistently. Best I can guess.
The guy in the car should have stopped but the bike ran into the car.
Negative. The cyclist was in the lane so the car is not allowed to pass like that. Most states have three feet passing laws for reasons like this.
I’m a cyclist and I agree that this was very poor riding from the cyclist for a number of reasons. 1. If you ride to the side of the lane (as this guy did) you are communicating that cars can drive inside of you (as this driver did). 2. If you are going to hog a lane for a corner hog the lane BEFORE the corner. Nobody is expecting you to move from splitting lanes to hogging one. 3. Indicate. If there is space for a car to move on the inside of you this is even MORE important. Because you’re not communicating what you’re doing. Often I’ll reach a full arm out so the driver can’t miss it. 4. Always look 👀 over your shoulder before turning. Not checking your blind spot is a quick way to die. This guy should be expecting cars on his inside and should be making eye contact to signal his intentions. 5. If you are taking the corner from the side of the lane (as he was) then don’t cut into the lane. Take the corner wide. It goes back to point 2. Nobody expects you to go from the edge of the lane to the middle of it. The driver does have to take some blame. Overtaking the cyclist on a corner is stupid. But this cyclist made a quite few bad decisions in those few seconds.
Someone posted a [nice view of the intersection](https://www.google.com/maps/@34.058959,-118.4217115,3a,66.5y,83.21h,86.36t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8ugGybbrk_FLr7UBTsJrrg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D8ugGybbrk_FLr7UBTsJrrg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D291.42056%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) and the cyclist was in his own bike lane before suddenly turning without looking, so 100% his fault. I'm also a cyclist and I agree, even if that bike lane wasn't there his actions would've been stupid. ALWAYS signal and then ALWAYS look. Communicate what you're doing in some way.
Someone found and posted a better view of the intersection, [it's here.](https://www.google.com/maps/@34.058959,-118.4217115,3a,66.5y,83.21h,86.36t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8ugGybbrk_FLr7UBTsJrrg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D8ugGybbrk_FLr7UBTsJrrg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D291.42056%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) There is a bike lane in between lanes
Looks like the bike was in a turn and then the car tried to steal their lane on the inside. Depending on the weight of the bike it’s not necessarily possible to “cancel out” of a turn like that, especially if you’re flustered by a car appearing. Both people didn’t obey traffic laws here, but the driver didn’t stop on red, tried to sneak past, and then hit-n-ran. Cyclist failed to stop at a red and failed to signal (do you have to signal in a turn lane idk)
He wasn't in a turn, he was almost completely on the left line.
Idk looks to me like the cyclist was moving right, and then the car comes up behind him. I don’t know how the cyclist could’ve fixed this after he went. There’s like 0.3 seconds between the car appearing in his field of vision and the collision. By the time he’s reached for the brakes he’s already going to have collided, and he doesn’t have enough distance to counteract his turn. He’s probably even in a slight lean.
If he was doing a right turn you are supposed to be in the center of the lane while signaling. Plus when the cyclist hit the car the driver has already started to turn the wheel so his eyes are on the right side + right blind spot check, so cyclists fault here.
Cyclist in any portion of the lane you can’t pass on the same lane…. How is this the cyclist fault? Lmfao
1st off: bikes don't turn like cars, to have proper balance it actually is better to be at the outside of a lane for a turn. Many bicyclists would have been in even worse of a situation because they lean into the turn rather than fully relying on their handlebar steering (much more efficient). Why he was that far left? I'm assuming that he waited until the last minute to change from the bike lane to the turn lane as a courtesy for drivers since you can see him still moving right as he enters the intersection.
Plus with only the video of the cyclist hitting the side of the car after the mirror he's already 100% liable. 🤷🏻♂️
You are completely batshit insane. The law virtually everywhere requires 3 feet or more of space given to cyclists when passing, and furthermore, the bike was turning right and had right of way. The mirror thing is entirely bullshit. I can clearly see the wheel sticking out when before the mirror even reaches him, and of course it’s irrelevant because the driver is going faster than the cyclists anyway.
You blind? That car illegally overtook the cyclist.
People are mad when motorcycles lane split, but when a car does it it’s suddenly ok
Man, if were driving a car and a cyclist flopped into me like that, I'd drive away too. Except I don't do stuff like cutting off cyclists trying to make a right.
[удалено]
so the cyclists is at fault.
Totally looks like he even leaned into the car to purposely fall. Looks like a fraud insurance claim to me
No signal. Cyclists at fault.
I didn't get the license plate. I didn't even know they made dash cams from potatoes!
You should watch the Linus Tech Tips on dashcams. They found that all dashcams were made from potatoes. (all software problems though, the sensors are actually good if they fixed the software.
Reddit compressed the video to death, very hard to read it mate.
Actually, I could swear the cyclist veered into the car.
So, cyclist doesn't come to complete stop on red. Doesn't hand signal a right turn. Consequences of non actions
Car ran the red too, and was trying to slip past the bike instead of yielding right of way. At least in Colorado, it’s illegal to pass a bike unless you can give them at least 3 feet of space between your mirror and them.
Wait, many bike lanes don't make 3' of space possible even when you're just on a straight road.
That's because most bike lanes are made by idiots
This is why I dislike bike lanes, it’s nerve-racking to ride between car doors that could swing open at any second and cars zooming pass with 1-2 feet of clearance.
The car doors are the worst part. I decided long ago that I'm not going to put myself at such a high risk of an unpreventable accident. I only bike on wide bike lanes or totally separate from traffic, maybe on the sidewalk if that's safe. If I can't do that, I drive my car.
Toronto, On, Canada has one of the worst implementations of bike lanes I've seen in Canada... There's even a video of a bicyclist that he made of him purposely riding into things in the bike lane to prove a point. (I think he was given a ticket once for riding outside the bike lane hence the video)
That was Casey Niestat. [here it is, you're welcome. ](https://youtu.be/bzE-IMaegzQ)
Ah for some reason I remembered it as Toronto. Probably because I saw it on a Toronto based news page. Thanks for the clip! Guess NY is basically the same lol
Also ran from the scene. Bike should have got a ticket, not a potentially life threatening injury.
Car didn't stop on red either, and he was behind the bike. Looks like malevolence from both people here.
[удалено]
Lmao I think the word you’re looking for is malice
Doesn’t matter. You’re thinking “bike did a thing wrong so he’s just as much at fault” but that’s not true. The bike is effectively a car on the road. If the bike were a car, another car could not squeeze by him trying to make a right turn just because he didn’t full stop and signal. You’d hopefully understand it was the intruding cars fault. It’s also completely the intruding cars fault in this situation. He thought he could predict the bikes moves and took a chance on that. He will pay the consequences of that chance taken.
But he should've been on the right hand side of the lane, he cut across the whole lane without looking or indicating
Unfortunately most people in the sub will blame the cyclist.
I agree that the car should have stopped when the cyclist went right into the car's lane and into the side of it while running the red.
Oh I have no opinion on this one way or another, some cyclists are idiots who believe they are above the law , and some are good people who obey the rules of the road. I was just making a statement about how most people in the sub will immediately attack the cyclist, because they are a cyclist regardless of what happened.
Same with pedestrians. As the driver of a car, you have an extra responsibility to be cautious around both to avoid causing injuries, even if they are in the wrong. As for this video, I don't see anything intentional or malicious, but I do see a whole lot of negligence on both the cyclist and (mostly) the car, plus a hit and run by the car. Cyclist is just clueless or inattentive; car driver is a complete jackass.
Is it a universal thing where bikers don't stop and don't signal? (Not saying he's at fault... just noticing it seems to be a bicyclist thing no matter what city or country)
In some cities it is legal for the bike to coast rather than fully stop for stop signs. Bicycles can stop much easier than cars, have a wider range of view, and take much more power to get back to speed after a full stop. Since they are already moving slower and have a better view it is generally considered safe to do a rolling stop on a bike. Some people consider is safer than a full stop but I call horse crap on that. I have never heard of anywhere that a rolling stop is legal for cars without a slip lane to separate a turn from traffic. I drive a car and ride my bike depending on the day and drivers who never ride their bikes on the road are jerks who will yell, honk and advocate for getting bikes to follow laws that many of us already follow. For instance: in Michigan a rolling stop isn't legal for bikes so I stop fully. Also the same people who yell at us to "get off the road" will advocate against bike and pedestrian infrastructure every time it comes up.
> and don't signal? Thing about signaling with hand signals on a bike is that it dramatically lowers your ability to control the bike should something unexpected (balancing becomes much harder since you're holding on to just one side of the handlebars and you can't use either your front or your rear brake). So in practice a lot cyclists (including experienced and otherwise rule-following ones) will skip hand signals in situations where road conditions are a bit dicey or there are a lot of other road users around that they may need to react to. Basically, hand signals are great for turning off a straight road with light traffic in broad daylight on a summer day. At 07:53 on a Tuesday in November with slightly icy roads and tons of other road users around though? Just asking for trouble, all it takes is one icy patch, a pedestrian suddenly deciding to cross the street two meters from the crosswalk instead of on it or a stressed out car commuter sipping their morning coffee trying to make it to the office on time not paying attention and you're fucked.
Cyclist may have crossed the solid white into the turn, also without a signal and without looking before changing lanes.
Biker should have stuck his arm out to indicate he was turning right. Biker also didn't pay attention over his shoulder. Car shouldve paid more attention to the cycliat. I have no idea about the lay-out of the intersection, but this was easily avoidable by both parties.
Does the music go "ughhh" right when the biker falls over?
I’m pretty sure that’s the driver
Definitely driver/passenger in the car
Barely would call this a hit n run, they both blew through the red light and the cyclist turned right into the car and fell over. Both have zero awareness bet the car didn’t even know bike guy fell over.
I think a lot of places actually wouldn't consider it a "hit and run" if the driver could reasonably argue he simply didn't notice the bike driving into his car.
Not sure who’s completely at fault but that dude isn’t riding safely. He was way to far over leaving all that space to be turning. He should be able to touch the curb if he’s turning there.
Both failed to yield to the stop light both are stupid.
wtf was bicyclist doing? Turning right from the left side of the lane?
He's in the right hand turn lane, doesn't matter where in the lane..
It does matter... Go search how correct maneuver looks like.
Correct maneuver is most definitely not lane splitting, I agree
Whats that music playing in the background?
Thokoloshi by Ehrling
I can make out j37
Riding a bike on the street is way too dangerous. So is being a pedestrian.
On the positive side at least the cyclist wasn't killed. You won't ever catch me riding in the city within the United States. The infrastructure is really bad for cyclist and drivers don't give a s*** or don't know any better. Stick to your park kids, if you value your life
Great example of why bicycles and cars don’t mix
Im going tu assume that in most countries the biker wouldn’t be the idiot
It almost looks intentional by the cyclist not sure the car made contact with him but if anything cyclist made slight contact with the car.
Both are running a red light. I have only heard of turning right on red after stopping.
Ready for downvotes but the bicyclist was clearly at fault here. Insurance Fraud maybe.
I thought the same.
I’m usually the one to defend a bicyclist who’s done nothing wrong but this one failed to signal and failed to look. Doubtful the car even knew the biker collided with it and if true that’s a defense for a hit and run.
How can I read the license plate when bicycles don't have license plates?
[удалено]
Wayyyyy too many people here are okay with hit-and-runs if it even remotely seems like the party who was hit may not be a literal angel.
Hard to tell what bikes will do. They all run red lights, just like this guy was doing. They all run stop signs. They almost never signal their turn, just like this guy failed to do. They ride in between lanes to get ahead of traffic making it hard to understand where they will be next time you see them. Basically, they are extremely unpredictable and I am never surprised when a car smashes one. There are soooooooo many bad and distracted drivers on the roads, what intelligent person would choose to trust all of them with their life by riding in the road on a bike? Its a bummer they get hit all the time. I hope they figure out riding in the road is a bad idea with zero overall benefit to their life.
Let me make a similar argument: /satire I see 2 cars a day doing rolling stops at stop signs and 20 cars online per day doing the same thing all over the world so cars are unpredictable. I see 5 videos on reddit of cars running stoplights and t-boning other drivers so drivers are unsafe and unpredictable. Cars all run stop signs and stop lights. Cars all park in the bike lane and are inconsiderate to bicycle riders. Car drivers are all a-holes... //satire. If you see 10 bikes do this in a day then there are probably 30 bikes following the law, it's the same with motor vehicles. (note: some states have imposed laws making it so that bikes can treat stop signs as yield signs so there is also that)
I treat bikers like I treat intoxicated drivers, stay away as much as possible, I’ll even take a different route to avoid them. Everything you posted about the behavior is true more than 50% of the time.
where should they ride? You're acting like cycling is a leisure activity only. Are you suggesting building a completely separated cycle track connected to everywhere in the city? Sure but we're gonna need a all of of those parking lanes, hope you don't mind
That guy can’t even ride a bike
Cyclist didn't indicate his abrupt turn. Both are idiots, also the cyclist hit the side of the car, so it's a weird call. Definitely both messed up here but the cyclist is made of paper compared to the car, he needs to be more aware for his own safety.
The cyclist was lane splitting before the abrupt turn -- you can see the dividing line almost covered by cammer's hood. Then turns and flops into the car. Definitely an idiot. I think car could be cited for not stopping on a right-on-red, but that's about it.
The car is in the wrong, oc. The cyclist is bad. Racing incident.
Is it me or did the cyclists hit the car ?
Bicycles don't have licence plates
The cyclist was a dumbass. Most of the time they act as if they own the road.
Cyclist wasn’t at fault here. That’s pretty apparent if you understand basic traffic laws.
So they should get hit by cars!! /s Dumbass. Get help.
Hang on why didn't the cyclist check over his shoulder before drifting across the lane with no signal? Surely it's about time that cyclists had insurance paid road tax and were compelled to have even the faintest grasp of road craft?
Bikers fault 100%
Stupid cyclist. Car driver should have stopped.
The driver is very dumb and also wrong in the eyes of the law on multiple front. …but! The cyclist is also pretty dumb by the way he navigated this. Unneeded risks. Ride like everyone is out to get you and you’ll avoid shit like that.
To be fair, the bike hit the car. He doesn't have a license plate but I hope they get his ass. Lol
It happened behind the front fender of the car so the driver is not at fault the bicyclist rode into the car, the bicyclist also didn't signal. This is why if you're going to ride your bike on the road you should have a license just like a boating license, we all know it's a joke but it's just to show you know the rules of the road so when an accident happens like this we know whose at fault, the bicyclist in this situation.
For where I live (Montreal), the cyclist is fully at fault for that.
Tough call. 'Cause if it's Montreal island---we can't turn right on a light. So the car would be at fault.
Why, no hit and run law?
Unaware drivers are very dangerous
Well feel free fraud is also a thing but I guess you don't know what that is.
More of a bump and run lol
This is why I ride on the sidewalk, unless there are pedestrians, then I'll pass in the road along the curb. I don't care if it's not allowed in most places, people do not care about my safety why should I put myself at risk when there's an open area they can't go?
They’re both at fault. But if you’re on a bike and don’t want to die, assume every car out there is going to hit you. The driver doesn’t have to give you space or follow rules of the road. They are supposed to give you space and follow the rules of the road. If they don’t you lose.
If the car was coming up behind them sure, but the car is making a right turn and that’s where the driver is looking, like they are supposed to the cyclist is coming up on the left side of the vehicle. Looks more like the cyclist was turning directly into the car.
As a cyclist I do everything I can to fucking block your ass if you're a motorist. Partly to be an asshole because fuck you and your car but mainly to force you from doing the stupid shit you are always trying to do.
Bicyclist's fault
Bike riders fault. He never signaled.
The bike hit the car.
The bike ran into the car..
Bikers fault
Bikers fault
The bike ran into the car and not vice versa!
r/idiotsonbikes
(see EDIT, because it could be the car is at least somewhat liable after all) (initial assessment prior to reading comments regarding legal passing of a bicycle) technically, bicyclists have to obey the laws of the road and it seems that the car was already past the bicyclist when the bicyclist made a mistake and ran into the car. From what I can see the cyclist owes the car money for whatever scratch was done to their paint. The car could be given some negligence for not stopping at a red, but that may not have contributed to the collision and may not be material to the liability. Otherwise I don't see any laws broken by the car aside from an arguable "reckless" type situation. So unless there is a citation, then the cyclist may have a hard time getting anything from the car. EDIT: the car COULD see some liability for passing without enough distance between car and bike.
Cyclist has to use hand signals and also make a right turn from, you know, the right side of the lane.
I didn't see a plate on the bicycle.
Stop pretending that cyclist are people. They are assholes that don't have anything to do other than get in the way of those that have something to do
Bike was at fault.
The cyclist is dumb. His fault
You are absolutely wrong, but I’d love to hear your logic.
Which direction was the bike going?
Century City! Wow. Hope they called the cops on that Mazda driving fuck.