For some reason whenever I take my bike out, the trails are full of erratic, oblivious jackasses running all over the path. But whenever I'm out running, all the asshole cyclists come out. Must just be bad timing.
For some reason whenever I take my bike out, the trails are full of erratic, oblivious jackasses running all over the path. But whenever I'm out running, all the asshole cyclists come out. Must just be bad timing.
TrailsNW wrote:
It's only murder if it's intentional. If the cyclist was going too fast, then they are partially at fault, but it does not take much at all to knock over someone who is not paying attention.
Surely the cyclist knew how fast he was going, and saw the runner he was bearing down on ahead of him. If he knew he was going to knock over the runner then he should have slowed way down or stopped.
The jogger however was on the wrong trail, with headphones, and turned without checking if it was safe. Clearly they are to blame.
None of those were reasons for him to run over her.
bottom line, the cyclist was riding way too fast to avoid the collision.
if he was riding a safe speed then this tragedy would have been avoided.
conclusion - cyclist at fault.
Rock Opera wrote:
The woman suffered a severe head injury and died Sunday evening.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/100210dnmetkatyjogger.148b60854.htmlhttp://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/100410dnmetjogger.156702d91.html
apparently when she abruptly turned into a cyclist’s path
Apparently no one knows if she turned at the last minute as reported, or perhaps was already facing the cyclist when he ran into her.
She didn't just "fall down" as some callous people keep posting. She wasn't knocked over by a bird and just happened to die. She was knocked down and killed by the cyclist.
"Those on the trail Thursday night said it was packed."
The trail was packed, and the guy still was going so fast that he didn't have time to stop before running into her.
eb white wrote:
i care about people wrote:She probably did look around when she turned, and there was nothing she could do, or else she would have gotten out of the way. Unfortunately the cyclist was going too fast and killed her.
Headphones or not, the same thing would have happened to any runner, walker, child or adult making a turn at that moment.
I don't get anyone who thinks the deadly crash was caused by the runner. She did not run into anyone. Her actions did not cause the death of anyone. Her death was caused by the cyclist. I am saddened by her death, sad for her friends and family, sad there are people who think it is ok to murder a runner, because they think the runner did not move the right way.
your post makes no sense.
(1) she clearly did not look when she turned around otherwise she would have seen the bike. why are you speculating that she probably did turn around when nothing even remotely points to this?
(2) no headphones and she would have heard the biker. why is that so hard to comprehend?
(3) she actually did run into someone -- the bike. it's no different than running on the side of the road with traffic and then suddenly jumping 3 feet to the left and then getting hit by a car from behind.
(4) her actions caused the death of her.
(5) murder? excuse me? look up the word before you use it incorrectly again.
ok. you now can go back to your grade school homework.
no you are wrong.
the biker's action caused her death. he was riding too fast and slammed into her.
There is always a of of emotion in threads of this nature. I advocate cycling. I am not much of a cyclist, but I ride my bike to work, etc. I am friendly to the cycling community and feel as though they need to be protected.
But...
Something needs to be done about cyclists trying to work out on "bike" paths dedicated to mixed-use activity.
I spent a lot of time in DC and these guys are nutso. I would have packs of bikers roll by me at 25 mph on the Capital Crescent Trail all the time. Just not safe.
As someone mentioned earlier, if you are out running 4;50 pace in a park and run into some kid, it is your fault. Take your training to the right place.
Lady made a dumb move, but she didn't deserve to lose her life.
The speed limit on these multi-use trails is usually 15 or 20 mph. It is entirely feasible to be going well under these limits, and still be unable to avoid a runner who, without any prior warning, turns right into your path of travel. If you are going to run on these MULTI-USE trails, you have to expect to encounter bikes, skaters, walkers and other trail users. It is therefore your responsibility to take reasonable steps to ensure your safety in this environment. That means being aware of your surroundings and other users of the trail.
All that being said, personally, I almost never bike on these multi-use trails, largely for my own safety - hitting someone on your bike hurts the biker as well. I also never run with headphones anywhere where bicycles or cars will be present. It is far too important to be cognizant of your surroundings in these areas.
Paroled from Let's Run wrote:
bottom line, the cyclist was riding way too fast to avoid the collision.
if he was riding a safe speed then this tragedy would have been avoided.
conclusion - cyclist at fault.
What is a "safe speed"? A runner could have run into her if she turned right in front of him; I have seen teammates get knocked over when they turned suddenly and someone behind them wasn't expecting it. Certainly he may not have been able to avoid it if he was going 10 mph and she turned right in front of him.
From the information we have, there is absolutely no question that the runner is at least partially at fault. We would have to know more about the situation to determine where the fault ultimately lies, but given the fact that the cyclist was riding on a path that allows cycling, it probably was not his fault.
i care about people wrote:
The trail was packed, and the guy still was going so fast that he didn't have time to stop before running into her.
I bet if a really fast runner was out tempoing at 5:00 or under he would have ran this woman over. How you can not fault her in anyway is ridiculous.
I live in Seattle and run on the Burke-Gilman all the time. Around UW it's fairly narrow and there aren't separate marked lanes. I wear headphones when I run, so as far as I'm concerned the onus is more on me to be hyperaware. I stay as far right as possible, and always always always look over my shoulder if I'm going to change my line of travel at all, whether it's to move left pass a slower runner or walker, or to make a U turn. There have been at least 5-10 times when I would have been hit if I hadn't checked b/c the bike was right over my left shoulder and I didn't hear anything.
She wouldn't have been killed if she was hit by a runner. I've been hit by both a bike and a car while running, neither of them were going fast and I was fine both times. I was scraped up a bit, but nothing that required professional attention. The bike was far worse! It was like getting hit with a missile. The car just made me roll up onto the hood.
wilfredo wrote:
no reason to be going fast enough to kill someone on a pedestrian path
"no reason to be going so fast on this track that you can't avoid my child following me on his tricycle"
"listen asshole, stop yelling TRACK every time you come around. We don't need to move to the outside."
"I'm not going to stretch out on the tennis courts, the clay will get my sweats dirty"
Amazing how the intended use of a facility changes depending on who's using it.
Yes, But.... wrote:
She wouldn't have been killed if she was hit by a runner.
Why not? Runner going fast, has a lot of momentum, she gets in front and he can't do anything but slam into her, she falls, hits her head on the hard ground and dies. It could happen.
it's happened in football. it's just another stupid comment on here.
Runing, riding a bike, walking, you have to be aware of your surroundings and not underestimate the ignorance of others.
Running while listening to music can be dangerous; the main reason I don't do it and because I can't find any headphones that stay in my ears.
The biker was going too fast if he hit this runner with enough impact to kill her.
I've ran on paths here in Portland with bikers. I've seen them go Mach 12 down the path!
The bikers here in Portland are hostile. Most of them are "hipsters" and are very confrontational, but luckily I welcome confrontation. I had two confront me last week when I was driving. They asked me "if I had a problem?" after I parked. I said "well, now that you're here, I guess I do." I told them they need to watch where they're going, yadda yadda. They weren't having it, they had met a pitbull that was glad they confronted me, eventually, they biked away.
I run all over this city, I've had some near accidents with cars, almost all of the occasions I was aware of the car, but they weren't aware of me. Most times, I'll just wag a finger at them and give them a fake smile.
Be careful out there.
The biker was a female also...that should clear it up for you.
anyone who has run the coliseum in pasadena knows bikers are road-hogging-arrogant-sob's
what happened to this innocent person is no exception
https://www.funnytimes.com/cartoons.php?cotw_id=20100324
Paroled from Let's Run wrote:
your post makes no sense.
(1) she clearly did not look when she turned around otherwise she would have seen the bike. why are you speculating that she probably did turn around when nothing even remotely points to this?
I'm not speculating at all. I'm saying there is no evidence that she "turned around" and therefore could have been ALREADY facing the cyclist when he ran into her and killed her.
(2) no headphones and she would have heard the biker. why is that so hard to comprehend?
She probably did hear him, if he was close enough when he yelled. What probably happened was that he was out of range if he yelled, then ran over her. Or perhaps she did hear him and had no time to move, or did not know in what direction to move. Or perhaps she did move and he ran over her anyway. What everyone does know is that him running into her was the cause of her death.
(3) she actually did run into someone -- the bike. it's no different than running on the side of the road with traffic and then suddenly jumping 3 feet to the left and then getting hit by a car from behind.
She was on a pedestrian trail, not on a road. Had the cyclist been on a road where he should have been, instead of zooming along at 30 mph in the middle of a crowded pedestrian trail, then she would still be alive.
(4) her actions caused the death of her.
Wrong. She had a right to be on the trail and did nothing wrong. He killed her by running into her.
(5) murder? excuse me? look up the word before you use it incorrectly again.
He ran into her and was the cause of her death.
i'm now going back to my grade school homework.
Good luck with that.
Dude, quit trolling a thread about such a tragic subject. Not cool.