Lead Developer of Yum Killed In Hit-and-run 413
An anonymous reader writes "Seth Vidal, a lead developer of Yum, was killed in a hit-and-run accident while riding his bicycle in Durham, NC last night."
The Fedora Project posted a statement. Quoting: "Seth was a lead developer of yum and the update repository system, and a contributor to the CentOS project as well as the original Fedora Extras system. He worked tirelessly on the infrastructure for the Fedora Project to make all systems work well and consistently for our contributors around the world. He was a gifted speaker, a brilliant thinker, a clever wit, a humble and genuinely funny person, and a good friend. The Fedora community owes an enormous debt of gratitude to Seth's dedication to Fedora and other free software projects, his commitment to community values, and his passion for excellence in his work. To say he will be missed is an understatement."
Update: 07/10 00:24 GMT by U L : Local news reports that the driver turned himself in.
When you ride at night, (Score:5, Informative)
wear white.
Re:When you ride at night, (Score:5, Insightful)
White doesn't cut it at night.
Wear reflective.
Re:When you ride at night, (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:When you ride at night, (Score:5, Insightful)
White does not always help. If you ride at night, use bright headlights and taillaights. I commute by bicycle and have lights on regardless of time of day. Too many drivers just do not pay sufficient attention.
In many places hit and run carries a lighter penalty than DUI, so often drivers have an incentive to flee. Hit and run should be a felony.
Re: (Score:3)
In many places hit and run carries a lighter penalty than DUI
... The fuck????
Where? I want to know which communities/states to add to my "Avoid Like the Bubonic Plague" list.
Re: (Score:2)
New York State.
Re: (Score:3)
New York State does not have any offense called 'hit and run'. They (and I assume most other places) have a law called 'leaving the scene of an incident without reporting'. That only covers the 'run' part. If a death was involved, leaving the scene is a class D felony, carrying a two to five thousand dollar penalty.
That still leaves the 'hit' part. Depending on the circumstances, the 'hit' part may be vehicular homicide, which is an additional charge to the 'leaving the scene' charge. That can also be
Re:When you ride at night, (Score:4, Interesting)
You're misconstruing "death by hit and run" with "hit and run" Most hit and runs are in parking lots and the other drivers inside the store. Also, in many states now, DUIs are considered so heinous the punishments in the "insane" category. It's not that hit and runs are lenient, it's that DUI offenses are treated ridiculously harsh. My state has one of the most lax DUI laws in the country and you still get a $2k fine, lose your license for at least a year and likely will get jail time.
Re:When you ride at night, (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, in many states now, DUIs are considered so heinous the punishments in the "insane" category.
I'd love to know which ones. In Wisconsin, where I live, I see people FREQUENTLY getting 4th through 8th DUIs, and I can't help but wonder why the cops are so fucking terrible at keeping these people off the streets(or, you know, doing their job at all). I quickly realized that they don't WANT these people off the streets, as they use it as a revenue generator.
"We give you a real hard slap on the wrist, and take your plastic card, and suddenly you can't drive. Oh wait, you don't follow the law, you'll drive anyway(or pay the exorbitant fines and fees to get your 'sort-of' license reinstated). When you break the law again, we can charge you even MORE and let you go AGAIN!"
If the government actually wanted to prevent DUIs, they would adopt Germany's DUI penalty: First offense - ENORMOUS fine, lose your license(which costs thousands of euros to obtain in Germany), vehicle seized and sold, proceeds donated to any victims or a fund for the same. Second offense - Huge fines, and prison. Lots, and lots, of prison.
DUI kills more people than intentional homicide (Score:3)
18,000 people died in 2006 from DUI crashes.
That's 4,000 more than homicides. So yes, it's pretty "heinous" and should get "insane" punishment. The problem is the punishments aren't insane enough; they sound "insane", but the criminals just get right back in their cars and kill/main more people.
Every time you get behind the wheel and you're drunk/high, you're loading a handgun with a bullet, spinning the chamber, and pointing it at innocent people on the road, and pulling the trigger.
The difference is that
Re: (Score:2)
Re:When you ride at night, (Score:4, Interesting)
I received Revolights [revolights.com] for Christmas last year.
Of course, they won't prevent me from getting hit, but they sure do help. Cars, pedestrians, other cyclists... they all stop when I go by simply because they are looking at my lights because they look pretty fucking cool.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No kidding. When you're riding day or night visibility is your you friend. The most dangerous person is the spaced out driver driving home on the same daily commute he's been doing for the last decade. You need to make yourself stick out or he'll plow in to you like you're not even there.
Right now I'm at work and I'm charging my serfas thunderbolts. Even in broad daylight they're shockingly visible.
https://www.serfas.com/products/view/669/referer:products|index|lights|tail-lights
That and a 700 lumen front l
Re: (Score:3)
North Carolina is one of those places.
Felony hit and run is a Class H Felony (http://www.nccourts.org/Courts/CRS/Councils/spac/Documents/FelonyChart_12_01_11MaxChart.pdf). With no priors, the maximum you can get is 8 months in prison.
Felony death by motor vehicle (any death from a motor vehicle that is the result of driving while impaired) is normally treated as involuntary manslaughter (Class F, 20 months max with no priors) but can be upgraded to second degree murder (Class B1, 300 months for no prior of
be more visible to people NOT LOOKING....? (Score:5, Informative)
White does not always help. If you ride at night, use bright headlights and taillaights. I commute by bicycle and have lights on regardless of time of day. Too many drivers just do not pay sufficient attention.
Bright headlights and taillights do not always help. If you ride at night, use dayglo clothing, flags, strobe lights, and pyrotechnics. Too many drivers just do not pay sufficient attention.
If they're "not paying attention" (aka not looking at the road), please explain to me how "being more visible" will help....
I've been hit in the middle of the day, I've been doored despite having a very bright headlight, and I've been cut off ("right hooked") by someone who just passed me, again in the day. Visibility has nothing to do with it. It's about drivers thinking they have the right of way over us universally, and it's about drivers not looking.
In most studies, the number of crashes vs time has little to do with daylight, and everything to do with rush hour - ie people driving aggressively, and traffic density.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Or bright yellow with reflective strips (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:When you ride at night, (Score:5, Informative)
blame the victim. i guess you think women in short skirts are asking to be raped?
He's not "blaming the victim," he's pointing out a safety tip for those of you who don't understand the basic physics of how our eyes work, you Fuck.
Re:When you ride at night, (Score:5, Insightful)
No amount of high-vis can protect you from stupid drivers. Given that the driver did not stop, I think we can assume that they place no value on the lives of others.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And no amount of driving skill can protect you from invisible stupid bicyclers.
"I think we can assume that they place no value on the lives of others."
Or they did not want to go to jail for 20 years for a no-fault accident.
Re:When you ride at night, (Score:5, Insightful)
The driver fleeing the scene is a pretty clear indication of whose fault the driver presumed the accident to be. Hint: not the cyclist's.
Re:When you ride at night, (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:When you ride at night, (Score:5, Informative)
He was a black guy with a suspended licence.
Citation, you racist ignorant fuck? (note, recind that last part if you actually *supply* a legitimate citation)
http://www.wral.com/man-charged-in-durham-hit-and-run-that-killed-bicyclist/12644209/ [wral.com]
Re:When you ride at night, (Score:4, Insightful)
"Or he was drunk" - His fault and he was breaking the law
"Or high" - His fault and he was breaking the law
"Or had a suspended license" - Indeed he did, and once again, HIS FAULT for being on the road when he shouldn't have been.
"Or a warrant." - So he's breaking the law 24/7 and should have turned himself in to sort it out.
"Or was an 'undocumented worker'" - You mean someone in the country illegally who hasn't got a driver's license? You mean someone breaking the law by driving a motor vehicle without a license? His fault.
"even if he wasn't the at fault party" - These words do not mean what you think they mean. If any of your conditions you listed for fleeing were true (and one was!) then he should NOT have been on the road, and by choosing to drive he deliberately started a chain of events that ended in tragedy. His fault.
Re:When you ride at night, (Score:4, Insightful)
"And no amount of driving skill can protect you from invisible stupid bicyclers."
Try riding a bike for about a year, seriously. You will start to think "what will protect me from blind, stupid car drivers".
"Or they did not want to go to jail for 20 years for a no-fault accident"
Mind made up already? From what I have read, it sounds like the car driver was at fault.
He was hit from behind, and the driver slowed, and swerved
And then drove off. Could be either at fault. With the hit from behind part, it is hard to seriously argue is was the cyclist at fault.
Re: (Score:2)
My mind is not made up at all, I am playing Devil's Advocate with someone who has made up their mind.
You have already made up your mind, and then seeing data that fits your scenario, you claim it gives evidence for your case.
But there is simply no hard data here. I hear "He was hit from behind, and the driver slowed, and swerved", and I can imagine an invisible cyclist at night with inadequate lights and reflectors. I can imagine a driver at full alert level and adequate skill seeing this cyclist without en
Re: (Score:2)
exception = expectation
Re: (Score:3)
And as a followup, this is why I hate biking at night and avoid it when I can, or choose quiet streets with little to no traffic where any cars coming to, from, or across can be seen with plenty of time.
I did once run into a car about a year ago when a car in the lane left of me made a right turn across a bike lane into a driveway. His excuse? "But I had my right blinker on!" As if that excuses cutting across a lane of oncoming traffic. Even if you take precautions you can't avoid any act of negligence! But
Re: (Score:3)
That is pretty sad. And quite true.
How does anyone operate a machine capable of creating so much death and destruction without having a fair idea of it's parameters?
But yeah, I do expect them to follow that guideline. I think in most places, the law would hold them to it also.
My personal opinion is that most people should not be driving. My oldest daughter just started driving, and I hope and believe I have impressed an appreciation that driving is much more than just pointing the car in a given directio
Re:When you ride at night, (Score:4, Insightful)
And no amount of driving skill can protect you from invisible stupid bicyclers.
Actually, it's quite easy, you just have to drive slow enough to be able to brake before hitting anything that is in front of you. That would have avoided most of the accidents I've seen.
Or they did not want to go to jail for 20 years for a no-fault accident.
A no-fault accident is when a biker appears from the side of the road and you can't manage to avoid hitting him. In this case, the biker was hit from behind, so the fault his the driver's, full stop. Moreover, when you have an accident, you don't get to decide whose fault it is. You stay there and help the victim. If you run, you're a criminal, no excuses.
Re: (Score:3)
Riding a bicycle on the sidewalk is both illegal and dangerous. I've actually almost gotten into fights with people because they were riding on the sidewalk and I instructed them to ride in the road.
That could because riding on a sidewalk was not illegal.
That is, it is illegal in some places, but it's far from a universal law. In Washington, D.C., it is legal to ride on the sidewalk in most of the city, excluding a high-traffic area in the downtown. In Northern Virginia it is generally legal unless signed otherwise; in fact some of the trails in Arlington, just outside D.C., are routed over sidewalks.
Whether it's dangerous depends on a lot of things, including the expectations of the other sidewalk use
Re: (Score:3)
Actually riding on the sidewalk is much more dangerous.
As i said, whether it's dangerous depends on a lot of things. There are plenty of places in my area where there are long stretches of sidewalk without driveways or crosswalks. There are people who ride at more or less a walking pace, which incurs no more danger than walking itself. There are places such as open beachfront areas where there are enough cyclists on sidewalks that drivers are conditioned to look for them. There are places where a roadway is grooved, or has badly placed drainage grates that make
Re: (Score:2)
" i guess you think women in short skirts are asking to be raped?"
I say it depends. If she wears it within a cosmopolitan Western city, then no. But she shouldn't try that when traveling through some deeply conservative country where tradition dictates that a woman should cover herself up from head to toe.
you're victim-blaming as well. (Score:5, Insightful)
He's not "blaming the victim," he's pointing out a safety tip for those of you who don't understand the basic physics of how our eyes work, you Fuck.
Yes, actually, the poster (we don't know it's a "he"...) is perpetuating victim-blaming of cyclists for their injuries and deaths. It's rampant in the US.
1)The cause is unknown (ie, it's not known that visibility was the problem, so how he was dressed is moot) 2)The onus is not on cyclists to dress in a particular way, the onus is on people with the very nice headlights on the front of a very deadly machine to operate that machine properly and be able to avoid a 6 foot tall, 3 foot wide object in the road traveling in the same direction as them 3)In stories like these, people (especially those who don't cycle) take it as an opportunity to condescendingly lecture those of us who do, about how to ride our bicycles. Seth, for example, was apparently an avid cycling advocate, which means he was damn well aware of how to ride "safely", probably knew the laws better than most drivers, and almost certainly had lights, which means he was plenty "visible."
In almost every story about cyclist injuries and deaths, the comments are hateful, vile, and portray the problem as being everything from cyclists merely being present, to how they behave (despite the fact that drivers are at fault in the vast majority of crashes, as numerous studies have proven), to, yes, how they dress. We're apparently at fault if we're not dressed like psycho day-glo clowns.
Let's take a look at some of the comments on TFA, shall we?
Now do you understand why the comment wasn't appropriate? The comparison to rape victims is quite accurate; rape victims used to be blamed for going out at night, or not having a "friend" (male) with them, to not carrying self-defense devices, to being dressed "like that."
I was just struck by a driver recently. The ER doctor finished up his exam by instructing me to "ride defensively" and "bike carefully." I had been operating legally and prudently, and the driver in a split second cut me off and stopped - blocking the road. There was nothing I could do. I was a victim. And the ER doctor was lecturing me, implying it was my fault for not being "careful" enough.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I think it was a word of warning to other cyclists to always do what you can to be seen, not blaming the victim.
Modern feminists have you tricked into thinking you are either fully in control of a situation or you are fully a victim of a situation.
Fortunately, life isn't black and white
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, because bicycling down the middle of a street in complete black and with zero lights or reflectors is not asking to be run over.
This accident very well might of ruined the other guy's life as well, and might of been totally not his fault, for all we know.
Re: (Score:2)
"Yes, because bicycling down the middle of a street in complete black and with zero lights or reflectors is not asking to be run over."
Was he cycling in the middle of the street? Probably not. And if he was?
Was he in complete black? Probably not. And if he was?
Did he have no lights or reflectors? Probably not. And if he was?
I doubt seriously he was asking to be run over. As someone who used to ride seriously, you can make your bike up like a
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure what he was wearing or the lighting conditions in the area he was hit. ... ... You are still an idiot and contributed to your death. ... They are
But if you wear black clothes while riding at night in an area with no streetlights and you get hit by a car
While it might not legally be your fault
With rape. A rapist is always wrong. But if I were a woman I would not go to strange places with strange men and leave my drink unattended.
If you are a parent and you are not teaching children these things then
Re: (Score:2)
if you are walking or riding along the side of a road, choose to walk/ ride on the side that makes you face traffic
in some places this is actually against the law. i still advise the practice
As far as I know it illegal to ride your bicycle in the street against traffic most everywhere and - agreeing with the rabid A/C near-by - is incredibly, fucking stupid. In Virginia the rules are rather specific and one must ride within a certain distance of the right shoulder - except where there's a turn lane - etc...
Having once been clipped by a car while riding my bike, I'm very happy that I wasn't riding in opposition and was able to, subsequently, get mostly out of the way...
So. In the street, wa
Re:additional advice: (Score:5, Informative)
i will be riding and walking against traffic out of self-preservation, and will continue to advise others to do the same
Sure, do whatever you want, but please don't advise others. What you're doing is dangerous and illegal. Here's what others say:
Is it safer for bicyclists to ride with traffic or to ride against traffic? [bicyclinginfo.org]
Bicyclists should ride with traffic. One of the keys to safe bicycling is to be as predictable and as conspicuous as possible so that motorists always know you are there and can predict what you are going to do. By riding against traffic -- especially on the sidewalk -- you make yourself almost invisible to motorists turning at intersections and driveways who may not be expecting or looking for road users coming from your direction. Indeed, as many as one in four bicycle/motor vehicle collisions involve a rider who is either riding against traffic and/or riding on the sidewalk.
In a lengthy article explaining why riding the wrong way against traffic is dangerous, author Ken Kifer explores the three principle dangers:
He also points out that riding with traffic decreases the number of vehicles passing you, and doesn't bring you into conflict with bicyclists who are riding the right way with traffic!
There are many, many others sites with similar information: http://www.capitalbikeshare.com/news/2012/02/24/never-ride-against-traffic [capitalbikeshare.com] or simply Google: bicycle ride "(with|against)" traffic [google.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed and I argued this point effectively with the police officer that taught our biking safety class, he admitted that way too many people are self absorbed idiots while driving and so you probably were safer being able to see them coming while having time to react.
Re: (Score:2)
Walk facing traffic, ride with traffic.
When on foot, you can much easier jump out of the way laterally, possibly over a barrier that may provide protection (which you should probably be behind anyway). On a bicycle, it is difficult to impossible to do this in the amount of time between "oh shit that car will hit me" and it hitting you. On a bicycle, you are better off going with traffic which w
Very short history of yum (Score:5, Informative)
here [duke.edu].
Thank you (Score:5, Insightful)
Thank you for all your hard work. You will be missed.
There have been so many... (Score:3, Insightful)
I really do wonder if we are predisposed to see death as a problem that needs to be solved, because all I can think of are the tragic losses of minds and icons that could be prevented somehow and how valuable that would be to humanity as a whole.
Seth will be missed and hopefully his work will live on.
Re:There have been so many... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
People die all the time in all sectors.
Hit and Run driver turned himself in. (Score:5, Informative)
They caught the guy who did this.
http://www.wral.com/man-charged-in-durham-hit-and-run-that-killed-bicyclist/12644209/
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Hit and Run driver turned himself in. (Score:5, Insightful)
Dude was driving with a revoked license. He needs to go to jail since obviously just taking his license away doesn't seem to be all that effective in curbing his poor judgement.
Re: (Score:3)
So... The guy was knowingly driving with a revoked license. They should throw the library at him.
Re:Hit and Run driver turned himself in. (Score:4, Informative)
He already has a DWI.
http://www1.aoc.state.nc.us/www/calendars.Offense.do?submit=submit&case=3102012061874&court=CR [state.nc.us]
DWI laws in this state are a joke. And when they finally get banned from driving a car (after half a dozen convictions or so), they are still allowed to go and drive a moped on the road.
Hit and runs are NEVER "accidents". (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hit and runs are NEVER "accidents". (Score:4, Insightful)
That is false, it is entirely possible to accidentally perform a hit and run.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, if you hit a cyclist and don't even notice it, which is why you "ran", maybe you should not be driving, accident or not.
Re: (Score:2)
"and run."
Note the last part, you hit a car, then run.
Re: (Score:3)
It is possible to accidentally perform the actual hit. To run afterwards means you either knew you hit the person and then had depraved indifference to the potential to stop and assist and just maybe save that person's life, or that you were so unaware of what you were doing that you had a legal obligation not to drive in that condition, and the depraved indifference enters automatically at that point even if it's before the collision even happened. That's how my state views a hit and run fatality - you can
Re: (Score:3)
I've never been in an accident but once when I was in high school I saw some kids riding a quad in the ditch do an unintentional backflip. Even though it was the right thing to do I hesitated half a second before stopping just because I was worried I'd go out and have to deal with something real traumatic. Fortunately I did stop, more fortunately so did an off duty nurse, and most fortunately all the kids were fine.
Anyway I can kind of understand why the drivers keep going, they didn't hurt the person on pu
Driver turned himself in... (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.wral.com/man-charged-in-durham-hit-and-run-that-killed-bicyclist/12644209/ [wral.com]
Just me or lots of OSS/*nix people dying? (Score:2)
Just seems that there's been a rash of OSS/Free Software/*nix people dying in weird circumstances lately.
Yum (Score:3)
A very useful tool, and indispensable to users of Fedora, CentOS, Scientific Linux. Yum did for rpm what apt-get did for dpkg.
Thank you, Seth.
As a sysadmin who cares for lots of RHEL/CentOS.. (Score:3)
Re:Probably a prank gone wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
I have seen drivers of vehicles in the USA perform an act which looks like a deliberate "nudge" to a random cyclist before driving away at high speed.
If I had an always-on dash-mounted video camera, I would be tempted to post videos of people doing such nonsense.
So sad.
You should - vehicular assault is a serious offence, and if your video can be used to prove malice, those sociopathic pricks will be confined to a cell where they belong.
I've been wanting a dash cam for the opposite reason - a lot of the cyclists around here are either stupid or have a deathwish, judging by how flagrantly they violate right-of-way laws.
Re: (Score:2)
"a lot of the cyclists around here are either stupid or have a deathwish, judging by how flagrantly they violate right-of-way laws"
Stupid, I think.... But I, as a former cyclist, have been seeing more of this around me, and I hate it.
Just remember all, not all cyclists are like that, as not all car drivers are like the ones who commit vehicular assault.
yeah, the police get right on those cases (Score:5, Insightful)
You should - vehicular assault is a serious offence, and if your video can be used to prove malice, those sociopathic pricks will be confined to a cell where they belong.
BWHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA. I had someone sideswipe me and then intentionally "brake check" me (looked in his mirror right at me, glaring, and slammed on his brakes, with nothing in front of him, no intersection, etc.) I gave the cops a complete plate and description and they said there was nothing they could do, because I hadn't been injured - even though the driver, in side-swiping me, had caused a "collision" and by leaving, a hit-and-run - and by stopping in the middle of the road, driven recklessly.
I've been wanting a dash cam for the opposite reason - a lot of the cyclists around here are either stupid or have a deathwish, judging by how flagrantly they violate right-of-way laws.
No, "a lot" of cyclists don't have deathwishes nor are they stupid. You just think they do, because they're a minority outgroup - so you exaggerate negative attributes. The vast majority of cyclist crashes are caused by drivers operating recklessly or illegally. And what right-of-way laws would those be, by the way? Let me guess: you think that you have a right of way over someone on a bicycle, right? Yeah, you don't, actually.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually you're not required to have turn signals. You are required to signal your intention though (hand signals work).
Re: (Score:2)
Seen cars do that too. Yes, cyclists need to obey the rules of the road. Where I am , that is the law.
I would like to gently suggest you reconsider what appears to be prejudgment of cyclists as "bad".
Yes, there are bad cyclists, there are bad car drivers, there are bad manicurists, etc.
There are good ones also.
Re: (Score:2)
If a car blows through an intersection, and a cop sees it, it's ticket-time, and probably an arrest.
if a bike blows through an intersection, and a cop sees it, I doubt they'd expend the effort to track the bicyclist down.
I didn't say that all cyclists are bad. I said this one was.
Re: (Score:2)
Some areas definitely nudge a little more in one direction than another... I live in the boston area, and don't drive (I'm 30, I just never needed to), and im a heck of a lot more scared of cyclists than cars. When I moved here, within 2 weeks I witnessed 3 distinct accidents where the cyclist was clearly at fault, ramming in cars that were stopped at a red light, one going full speed in an eldery woman crossing the street in broad day light at a major intersection (if he hadnt hit the lady, he would have b
Re: (Score:2)
All the cars stopped. The people walking in the crosswalk were nearly drilled by some jerk on his bike. Just kept riding, then rode through the next red light.
They want full access to the roads, taking a whole lane? Fine. Then they need to meet all of the same rules we do.
- No rolling red lights.
- No cutting between cars in their lanes.
- Turn signals
- Etc.
There are bad cyclists and bad drivers, and no excuses for either.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Witnesses told police that the car, a late-1990s or early 2000s model, slowed quickly and swerved before hitting Vidal and continuing north on Hillandale Road.
It certainly sounds like a sad "prank" as you said. WTF? I've never heard of this but I know Americans (as I am one) hate bicyclists with a passion, but this phenomenon (if generally true like you suggest) is fucking crazy...
Re: (Score:3)
Holy shit! From the article:
Witnesses told police that the car, a late-1990s or early 2000s model, slowed quickly and swerved before hitting Vidal and continuing north on Hillandale Road.
It certainly sounds like a sad "prank" as you said. WTF?
Depends; did they swerve towards or away from the cyclist? TFA seems to have missed that not-so-minor detail.
My guess is (assuming the driver swerved away) is that the driver didn't see him until it was too late, and tried to avoid by slamming on the binders and swerving.
IMO, That part makes sense, and is perfectly reasonable; The "Oh shit I think I hit that guy so I'm GONE" reaction is where the driver went from "human who made a mistake" to "worthless piece of shit that deserves hard time in fed-max."
Re: (Score:2)
If the order of events is correct in TFA, the driver slowed, then swerved.
Still could be swerving away, but if the driver slowed in reaction to seeing the cyclist, why was he/she/it close enough to need to swerve?
Re: (Score:2)
The "Oh shit I think I hit that guy so I'm GONE" reaction is where the driver went from "human who made a mistake" to "worthless piece of shit that deserves hard time in fed-max."
Driving away is a surprisingly common reaction, and in a lot of cases no link is found to being drunk or other "rational" reasons for doing so. I can understand why you advocate fed-max, but the fed-max prisons will be even more overcrowded if we somehow detect everyone who could do a hit-and-run and round them up.
Luckily most of us will never have to discover how we react in such a horrendous situation.
Re: (Score:3)
Sadly, this behaviour is not limited to America. Some people just get crazy once inside a car.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tempted? You'd have a moral if not legal duty to provide copies of that evidence to police.
I, for one, am eagerly anticipating the so-called sousveillance future, which Google Glass and dash-cams are merely the beginning of.
Re: (Score:2)
In my short, but ignominious career on a bicycle, I have had
A couple drivers chase me all over the place, deliberately trying to hit me
Several incidences where cars tried to nudge me around ( one I caught and explained things to ( no, really, rationally and all that ), response was "oh, I see" ), including one where the car ( a taxi, in this case ) actually hit the rear wheel of my bike with his fender. I am super lucky I didn't fall ( with the additional push from the car ) i
Re:Probably a prank gone wrong. (Score:5, Informative)
Which is why you carry one of those emergency hammers designed to shatter tempered glass. It gets their attention. And when asked how I hit them with the hammer I asked how they were within arms reach when the law states there is a minimum 3' passing distance.
Re: (Score:2)
For a while, I was thinking of purchasing a gun and putting it in a holster so it would be visible to people coming up on me from behind.
I honestly believe that that would have been effective, the thought being "wow, he is more than just some squishy thing I can run over".
Re: (Score:2)
You should follow up with one of these [wikipedia.org] in their face.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:This is why... (Score:5, Insightful)
If someone on a bike runs a red light or stop sign and they get hit, that's their bad and that's on them; they'll get no sympathy from me.
If you treat someone on a bike like shit because you saw a random biker run a red light or a stop sign once (or twice, or 1000 times, it doesn't matter), that makes you a dick, and that's on you.
--Jeremy
Re: (Score:3)
If someone on a bike runs a red light or stop sign and they get hit, that's their bad and that's on them; they'll get no sympathy from me.
Go hang out at a stop sign one day and count the percentage of cars you see actually stop. Pot, kettle, black.
http://washcycle.typepad.com/home/2008/07/the-myth-of-the.html [typepad.com]
Re: (Score:3)
From your link:
So bikers complied with stop signs at a rate nearly 1/20th of the average of all vehicles. And you were trying to disprove them about bikers consistently riding through stop signs?
I don't think you read the essay very thoroughly. The point was not that cyclists do not run stop signs; it is that pretty much everyone runs stop signs. The difference is that, when a cyclist does it, it's very rarely dangerous to anyone, and when it is dangerous, the danger is usually to the cyclist. But a cyclist running a stop sign has a much better read on the situation because he can actually see and hear what is around him. Similarly, people jaywalk constantly but very rarely get killed, because they
Re: (Score:3)
If he hadn't, even though the accident would be the biker's fault, it is still going to mess up the driver psychologically. You can tell me all you want that the biker has the right to be stupid because he is the one that pays the cost. However, you overlook that the driver pays as well.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been practicing ways to make my fellow cyclists pay more attention to their dick behaviour.
My most recent attempt is to yell "confirmation bias" whenever I see one of us doing something like ignoring a stop sign or blowing a light. The idea is that, when they come back (and normally get aggressive thinking I was cussing them out) I explain that every dick move they make makes all of us look bad.
That leads me to you drivers: you see those of us who cut you off and blow the light. You see the ones who
Re:This is why... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yea, OK, so if you and your cyclists buddies want to get together and raise the money to pay for dedicated bike paths, I'll support using public land to build them.
However, if you're like many of the d-bags around these parts who want their private bike streets paid for with my road and fuel taxes... You can go piss up a rope.
You know that most cyclists have cars, and drive, too, so they're paying fuel taxes right alongside you, right? But when they're riding their bikes, they're using up a lot less space on the roads, reducing congestion and leaving more room for you to get around. Compared with cars, bikes contribute virtually no wear on roads, and areas paved for bike traffic cost a fraction of what regular rated roads cost, because of the dramatically reduced load requirements. When cyclists get where they're going, they will lock up to a bike rack that fits 20 vehicles in the area of a parking space, leaving more parking for you to put your car in. They're also reducing gasoline demand, which might slightly lower the price you pay at the pump. As a driver, you stand to gain in numerous ways from others' cycling.
And fuel taxes don't cover the cost of the roads, anyway, mainly because they've been essentially stagnant while the cost of fuel increased fivefold. Drivers' use of the roads is heavily subsidized now by general taxation, so you don't get to point at cyclists and say they're the freeloaders.
http://dc.streetsblog.org/2013/01/23/drivers-cover-just-51-percent-of-u-s-road-spending/ [streetsblog.org]
http://www.uspirg.org/reports/usp/do-roads-pay-themselves [uspirg.org]
about those taxes (Score:5, Interesting)
Dear Richard Allen Black,
"my road and fuel taxes"
There's no such thing as a road tax, and fuel taxes don't pay for roads. Not even close, because they haven't been adjusted for fuel efficiency nor for inflation since before you were born. In almost every country, roads are paid for by property and income taxes.
Second, your car (especially if you drive an SUV or pickup) causes wear and tear on the road. My bicycle does not. Your state has one of the highest highway death rates in the country, so while my bicycle doesn't cause property damage, injury and death...your car sure as hell does, and at great cost to others and the state.
Third, you live in Montana, which is in the top ten in terms of states which take the most in federal taxes relative to what the federal government spends on you. You're leeches, by a ratio of 2:1; you pay $4k in taxes and the federal government spends $8k on your stupid, ignorant ass. Those roads you drive on? You didn't pay for them, hick.
Where's my rebate check from you and your road-damaging, federal-tax-leeching "d-bags"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a coincidence? Just what are you proposing to be the link between the two incidents?
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a coincidence? Just what are you proposing to be the link between the two incidents?
Clearly the momentum. Damn those physicists!
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a coincidence? Just what are you proposing to be the link between the two incidents?
Clearly the momentum. Damn those physicists!
Perhaps quantum entanglement would have been funnier.
Not that there's anything funny about quantum entanglement... or having one's life prematurely ended by a Neanderthal with a revoked license.
Re: (Score:3)
Delta RPMs for one.
Re: (Score:2)
Amen to that - he was a very sharp and gifted fellow.
I'm going to miss arguing with him about the yum patch I need to send in that adds sub-version support to .repo files. :(