Cyclist intentionally hit by car caught on GoPro camera

Neely is charged with reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon, leaving the scene of an accident with injury, failure to report an accident and leaving the scene without giving aid. He was released from jail on Sunday morning on $11,500 bond.

In other Nashville news, a bicyclist ran a stop sign (so much for the theory they are treated like cars by the law), and ended up in the hospital.

The solution? More bike lanes, they say. (The negative, will cause 4-lanes-to-2 congestion)

http://fox17.com/news/local/cyclist-accident-on-8th-ave-south-renews-call-for-bike-lanes

Poor planning and policy wrote:

Hippy wrote:

So if it was accidental, why did he not stop?

Probably he was scared the whole thing was a setup, and the other "bicyclist" was there to double-team him in the subsequent mugging. Since it was federal land, the driver likely couldn't his bring his gun with him, and so was rendered defenseless against the hoodlums.

I think as the story comes out, we'll see that this is another "gotcha" job by the pro-bike lobby.

Let's look at the facts. How many bicyclists are "rammed" by cars? Not many. And how many bicyclists have a "GoPro" camera partner taping everything (with perfect angle, despite being side-by-side just prior)? Not many. What are the odds that both happen in the same instance? Not many squared....

At this point, it's not clear whether they intentionally chose this guy as the victim, or he was just a random passerby that ended up in their dragnet.

Deadly weapon you say wrote:

Neely is charged with reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon, leaving the scene of an accident with injury, failure to report an accident and leaving the scene without giving aid. He was released from jail on Sunday morning on $11,500 bond.

These violators of the Rules of the Road ("Ride single file and as far to the right as applicable") should not be rewarded. They intentionally made it impossible to legally pass them (no way to give 3 feet cushion even across the double yellow), and then complain when bad things happen? Probably the second guy (who hit him) didn't even see the biking dude who got hit, due to the angle and the first guy (white truck) moving through. Not clear either whether he would have felt it other than just a light bump on the right side of the vehicle, which could easily be some wind effect, particularly with the quick side maneuvers and the other bike.

Don't be advocating silly excuses for the driver. This is a clear cut case of road rage on the part of the driver.

The cyclist, who was a complete douche for taking up the whole lane when it wasn't necessary, precipitated the situation.

Both the driver and cyclist are morons.....a chance meeting of two morons can often end badly.

Why does nearly every cyclist ride around with one or two GoPro cameras on their helmet? IMO, they're hoping and trying to "catch" some motorist committing some imagined slight against them and their precious bike. Yet they do not pay road taxes. If a cyclist cuts you off, hits you and dents your car, then rides off, as they often do, you have absolutely no way to identify him--no license tag. They use the middle of the road and run red lights and stop signs when they feel like it, then retreat to the sidewalks to terrorize pedestrians when that route better suits their needs.

Need more cops wrote:

Your stupidity is amazing wrote:

The cyclist was at most causing an inconvenience which would cost the driver a few seconds of time.

The proper remedy is that the cyclists who act like this ("inconveniently) should be cited, and then banned if they persist. Otherwise you are just encouraging vigilante justice as seen here.

Let's review the tape, second by second.

0:00 Bicycle A (the one who hits the car in the end) can just be seen, right next to the yellow line and side-by-side with Bicycle B the cameraman (illegally, per federal/Tennessee rules about single file and staying to the right).

0:01 Bicycles A (unseen) and B continue their illegal blocking formation down the Parkway

0:02 Bicycle A's wheel flicks into camera view for a couple of frames

0:03 The bicyclists' blockade rumbles on, with a left turn ahead additionally making sight lines difficult.

0:04 Surely the illegally blockading bicyclists should by hear the approaching vehicles by now (and get into single file). Admittedly, just by listening maybe they (bicyclist A in particular) thought it was only one vehicle.

0:05 It's hard to tell from the yaw, but it seems that bicycle B (cameraman) moves slightly more over to the right, as legally provided.

0:06 Indeed, by now bicycle B is almost on the right white line.

0:07 One would expect bicycle A, if acting legally, to have pulled in behind bicycle B by now.

0:08 Lo and behold! The wheel of bicycle A again creeps up on the left. Not so close to double yellow line this time, but still across the middle of the lane. Not where it should legally be (behind bicycle B camera, on right shoulder).

0:09 In fact, bicycle A seems to be going somewhat faster than bicycle B, getting more into the picture (Note that headcam on bicycle B did not turn its head!).

0:10 Bicycle A continues to zoom ahead of B, as (mostly unseen) white truck moves to pass on other side of double yellow lines

0:11 White truck completes the pass, with bicycle A rather close to yellow line, and bicycle B not so close to white line as before

0:12 White truck moves ahead 20 or so feet before starting to merge back into the lane blockaded by the illegally positioned bicyclists (notably A)

0:13 White truck starts merge movement back into the lane, while bicyclist A cluelessly watches it (see second comment at 0:04)

0:14 White truck is practically done merging back into the lane, bicyclist A still continues cluelessly on, not taking warning from white truck having to come within 3 feet (legal limit) when passing

0:15 Bicyclist A gets nudged by secondary passing car (black SUV), approximately in a "blind spot" (near right front fender)

0:16 Bicyclist A loses control of bicycle A and topples into path of bicycle B. Meanwhile, white truck completely completes merge back into the lane.

0:17 However, bicyclist B seems (apparently) rather ready for that, and easily slows down and deviates a bit to the right to avoid collision

0:18 Black SUV completes merging maneuver (camera was jiggled a bit here), and continues on since Bicyclist A pops right up

0:19 Bicyclist A glances at black SUV, and starts walking over to right side of road, temporarily leaving bicycle A blocking the lane

0:20 Bicyclist A looks back at friend with camera ("Did you catch that on tape?")

0:21 FIN

Go away spandex mafia wrote:

Why does nearly every cyclist ride around with one or two GoPro cameras on their helmet? IMO, they're hoping and trying to "catch" some motorist committing some imagined slight against them and their precious bike. Yet they do not pay road taxes. If a cyclist cuts you off, hits you and dents your car, then rides off, as they often do, you have absolutely no way to identify him--no license tag. They use the middle of the road and run red lights and stop signs when they feel like it, then retreat to the sidewalks to terrorize pedestrians when that route better suits their needs.

GoPros/cameras are everywhere including on car dashes as well, so this isn't something unique to cyclists.

The whole 'cyclists don't pay road taxes' argument is BS. Most cyclists pay more in taxes than the average car driver - cyclists tend to be more affluent, and are themselves car drivers.

In most incidents where a car is dented in a collision with a bike, the cyclist loses, so your scenario is also BS.

Cyclists have the right to use the road as much as cars do. I agree, it should be in a responsible way.

What's the most cycling friendly big city in USA?You guessed it... Chicago.

San Francisco was ranked second-best bike city, followed by Portland, Ore.; New York City; and Seattle. Minneapolis; Austin, Texas; Cambridge, Mass.; Washington, D.C.; and Boulder, Colo., rounded out the top 10.

When cyclists solve the "gender gap" (particularly in urban areas), then I'll believe they are SJWs. Right now, they are just snobs.

old guy 71 wrote:

I'm not so sure it was intentional.

The cyclist was obviously making no effort to ride towards the right side of the road. He seemed to be riding down the middle of the road as if he were flipping everyone off.

The driver didn't hit him directly. He moved over and bumped him with the side of his front fender. It was almost as if he meant to cut him off and scare him, but misjudged the distance.

I have little sympathy for the clown on the bike. Sorry, I know that's not the PC response.

A SF liberal.

Wrong. The guy in the car should never have been driving a car in the first place. By driving his car he was causing pollution (which causes short term and long term health problems to the public), immediate danger, and was simply taking up too much space to move his body around.

The guy should be banned from driving for life. So should any lawyers defending him.

Flagpole wrote:

I don't think bicyclists or runners should use roads that are well traveled by cars, but the driver of the car was clearly at fault and the bicyclist shares none of the blame.

When the dude doesn't stop, then that's a red flag that he did it on purpose. He should serve jail time.

Impede traffic by acting like a douche and taking up the entire lane and you are going to incite road rage.

That does not mean I think the driver justified in hitting him. But drivers will do irrational things when provoked, and he was most certainly provoked.

old guy 71 wrote:

I'm not so sure it was intentional.

The cyclist was obviously making no effort to ride towards the right side of the road. He seemed to be riding down the middle of the road as if he were flipping everyone off.

The driver didn't hit him directly. He moved over and bumped him with the side of his front fender. It was almost as if he meant to cut him off and scare him, but misjudged the distance.

I have little sympathy for the clown on the bike. Sorry, I know that's not the PC response.

A SF liberal.

First off, a bike is a vehicle and does not have to "ride on the right-hand side of the lane", so that's not an excuse right off the bat. If there is no bike lane, then the bike has full rights to the lane just like any other vehicle.

Need self-driving bicycles wrote:

These violators of the Rules of the Road ("Ride single file and as far to the right as applicable") should not be rewarded. They intentionally made it impossible to legally pass them (no way to give 3 feet cushion even across the double yellow), and then complain when bad things happen? Probably the second guy (who hit him) didn't even see the biking dude who got hit, due to the angle and the first guy (white truck) moving through. Not clear either whether he would have felt it other than just a light bump on the right side of the vehicle, which could easily be some wind effect, particularly with the quick side maneuvers and the other bike.

It was a no-passing zone, so if bikes are to be treated like cars, he shouldn't have been passing them even if they were riding SF all the way to the right.

Did you even watch the video. They clearly show a sign at 1:50 that states that cyclist have the right to use the full lane and that motorists need to change lanes to pass. It's in a National Park. What's the rush. My guess is he had one too many drinks.

Cyclists are arrogant wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

I don't think bicyclists or runners should use roads that are well traveled by cars, but the driver of the car was clearly at fault and the bicyclist shares none of the blame.

When the dude doesn't stop, then that's a red flag that he did it on purpose. He should serve jail time.

Impede traffic by acting like a douche and taking up the entire lane and you are going to incite road rage.

That does not mean I think the driver justified in hitting him. But drivers will do irrational things when provoked, and he was most certainly provoked.

1) Bicyclist was riding withing the law.

2) If the way that rider was riding causes enough road rage that you decide to hit the guy with your car, then you need some serious anger management therapy. If we hit every bicyclist who was "acting like a douche", there wouldn't be any bicyclists left. Penalty for acting like a douche isn't getting hit by a moving car.

3) After he hit the guy, he didn't stop. He should have to do jail time.

old guy 71 wrote:

I'm not so sure it was intentional.

The cyclist was obviously making no effort to ride towards the right side of the road. He seemed to be riding down the middle of the road as if he were flipping everyone off.

The driver didn't hit him directly. He moved over and bumped him with the side of his front fender. It was almost as if he meant to cut him off and scare him, but misjudged the distance.

I have little sympathy for the clown on the bike. Sorry, I know that's not the PC response.

A SF liberal.

Of course it was intentional you dipshit.

Come see me you'll not find anyone having any sympathy for you either

Helmut wrote:

Give 'em three feet wrote:

TCA 55-8-175 - Riding on Roadways and Bike Paths – Penalty

(2) The operator of a motor vehicle, when overtaking and passing a bicycle proceeding in the same direction on the roadway, shall leave a safe distance between the motor vehicle and the bicycle of not less than three feet (3') and shall maintain the clearance until safely past the overtaken bicycle.

So in other words, if the cyclist made it impossible to pass without the 3-foot buffer by failing to ride as close as practicable to the right, then the driver is not a fault.

No idiot. It means "He shall Not Pass !"

Flagpole wrote:

I don't think bicyclists or runners should use roads that are well traveled by cars, but the driver of the car was clearly at fault and the bicyclist shares none of the blame.

When the dude doesn't stop, then that's a red flag that he did it on purpose. He should serve jail time.

Its the natchez trace. It gets about 3 cars a day. No trucks. Its a scenic ride going to and from no where. Its exactly where cyclists should ride.