WTF is wrong with people? 16-yo kid outside Houston tries to "roll coal" on cyclists, runs them over instead; walks free

[midtown 3,348]

1 minute ago, Armybrat said:

No it isn’t. Bikes need to pay for their fair share because their specialized infrastructure  is costing all the taxpayers millions.

We've already covered the fact that people who own bikes also likely own cars, have jobs and buy shit so the already pay taxes for the use of the infrastructure but definitely call your state representative and tell him little timmy needs to pay a bike fee.  Please time how long it takes them to stop laughing at the idiocy of that.  

[Chewbacca 7,787]

4 minutes ago, Captainant said:

and what exactly does that have to do with THIS situation? They weren't riding in traffic. By witness accounts, the criminal made a point to drive dangerously close to the cyclists so he could spray unburnt diesel fumes all over them for HYUKS

There is no disagreement on this situation (kid needs to be arrested and parents need to be sued to Bolivian), so we have moved on to other situations.  Try to keep up.

[Hate 20,150]

I have never blamed any cyclist that has been a victim of a crime as is this case in this instance.  Now, in a situation where a legitimate accident has occurred, ie the driver could not see the cyclist because of the sun or any other number of factors, I don't feel sorry for them.  I feel sorry for their families that they chose to do something so stupid simply because they could and it was legal. 

[F250 28,830]

While this thread has been entertaining can we move on to bashing Dallas?

 

 

[Willfully Horn 8,066]

4 hours ago, 52-80 said:

Bikers don't tailgate, swerve, ( … ) make erratic turns, or do any of the other hundreds of things that other annoying things motorists may do. 

What world do you live in?

[idigTexas 2,293]

19 minutes ago, Hate said:

I have never blamed any cyclist that has been a victim of a crime as is this case in this instance.  Now, in a situation where a legitimate accident has occurred, ie the driver could not see the cyclist because of the sun or any other number of factors, I don't feel sorry for them.  I feel sorry for their families that they chose to do something so stupid simply because they could and it was legal. 

Yes, this is our primary motivation.  So we rank recreational cycling somewhere between climbing Mount Everest and being a Formula 1 driver on the list of activities that warrant no sympathy when someone dies while doing these activities.  We get it.  You personally feel that the risks outweigh all of the actual reasons why countless cyclists choose to do it anyway.  No need to keep repeating it.  

Edited September 30, 2021 by idigTexas
Typing is hard.

[Willfully Horn 8,066]

32 minutes ago, midtown said:

We've already covered the fact that people who own bikes also likely own cars, have jobs and buy shit so the already pay taxes for the use of the infrastructure but definitely call your state representative and tell him little timmy needs to pay a bike fee.  Please time how long it takes them to stop laughing at the idiocy of that.  

Have you put any thought into walking your bike up your steep hill, thereby inconveniencing only yourself, and with proportionately less than half the inconvenience than you are insisting everyone else experience?

Edited September 30, 2021 by Willfully Horn
Claro

[midtown 3,348]

29 minutes ago, Hate said:

Now, in a situation where a legitimate accident has occurred, ie the driver could not see the cyclist because of the sun or any other number of factors, I don't feel sorry for them.  I feel sorry for their families that they chose to do something so stupid simply because they could and it was legal. 

Yup.  And I assume you don't feel sorry for a mother and her three kids who were killed in a car accident when out getting groceries.  They could easily have ordered them for delivery instead of driving just because they can.

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

7 hours ago, idigTexas said:

I had a whole list of things typed in an effort to try to explain why cyclists do many of the things that drivers find annoying, but I know it's not going to make any difference to most of you.  Unless you have ever been a lycra wearing century riding fart smelling bikefag, the explanations are never going to resonate.  

Think of something that you do regularly that isn't just an occasional hobby, but is at the core of your social interaction and a main component of who you are...something that would throw you into the depths of depression if you could no longer do it.  That is what cycling is for many of us, and as someone who can no longer ride due to injury, the depression is real.  You see a group of cyclists and have feelings of disdain and possibly even rage.  I see them and feel sad because I can't join them.

It's easy to judge people for doing things that you have never done.  Sign up for a charity ride and experience cycling from the other side.  See what it is that we love for yourself.  If you need a bike, I'll happily give you a surly discount on one of mine. 

If you won't try it for yourself, then at least trust that your longhorn loving surly brethren must have valid reasons for doing something as idiotic as sharing the roads with the likes of you.  

  

Yeeeeeeeeeah..... no, sorry things I love doing don't make me a douche to the rest of the world (I may be a douche, but it isn't because my lifes passions make me do shit that would annoy or inconvenience the rest of the world).  I try not to cause other folks issues because of my choices whenever possible. 

Riding or walking on any well traveled road way now makes you kind of Darwinian. (SEE:  cell phones).

 

[52-80 19,272]

12 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

Have you put any thought into walking your bike up your steep hill, thereby inconveniencing only yourself, and with proportionately less than half the inconvenience than you are insisting everyone else experience?

Going slower and taking up wider space. Makes sense 

[Willfully Horn 8,066]

Just now, 52-80 said:

Going slower and taking up wider space. Makes sense 

Was it really necessary to include “off road” in my query?

[Hate 20,150]

2 minutes ago, midtown said:

Yup.  And I assume you don't feel sorry for a mother and her three kids who were killed in a car accident when out getting groceries.  They could easily have ordered them for delivery instead of driving just because they can.

Lol...yep, that's the same thing.  Look, I get it.  Y'all like riding your bikes out on the open road and will use any possible explanation to justify it.  I think it's stupid and reckless. I don't blow exhaust on bikers.  I don't "buzz" them or act in any manner to cause an accident.  I just shake my head as I pass them and think about how much I hate them.  That's it.  Pretty much the same reaction when I see someone wearing Aggy or OU gear.  It is legal to go to either school, but why in the fuck would you? 

[midtown 3,348]

5 minutes ago, Hate said:

Lol...yep, that's the same thing.

They are the exact same thing.  How about little Timmy who gets killed for riding his bike in the neighborhood and a car doesn't see him backing out?  Any sympathy or nah he's just doing something legal but dumb.

[G650 14,278]

As someone who drives 200+ miles a day, there's always two things that strike me about these conversations. Firstly, there is absolutely no worse motherfuckers out than other drivers. It's insanity out there. And amateurs always have the most hilarious opinions. Secondly, and probably more important, is this wild ass assumption that cars on roads is just some natural law that has always existed and everyone else is the problem, which gets articulated as "cyclist are inconveniencing people" whereas "people" are drivers, when in fact everyone on the road is a person. How is the car drivers convenience any more worthy than the cyclist or pedestrians? All these opinions that bikes being on the road is dangerous are built on a false assumption. Why is it the bike or pedestrian that should remove themselves from the situation to make it safer? Why not the car? Bikes, horses and people were literally on the roads for decades before the car existed, millennia in the case of people and horses. The notion that cars have some divine right to the road is insanity.

[Hate 20,150]

They are the exact same thing.  How about little Timmy who gets killed for riding his bike in the neighborhood and a car doesn't see him backing out?  Any sympathy or nah he's just doing something legal but dumb.

Neither of those are even close to the same thing. Not even in the same fucking ball park. Not even in the same fucking galaxy.

[Armybrat 40,941]

1 hour ago, midtown said:

We've already covered the fact that people who own bikes also likely own cars, have jobs and buy shit so the already pay taxes for the use of the infrastructure but definitely call your state representative and tell him little timmy needs to pay a bike fee.  Please time how long it takes them to stop laughing at the idiocy of that.  

Each vehicle you own had to be registered, so bikes should be too. Kids under 16 can be exempt.

 

[F250 28,830]

The notion that bread has a divine right to the toaster is insanity. Open fire cooking has been used for millenia. lulz

 

Edited September 30, 2021 by F250

[G650 14,278]

1 minute ago, F250 said:

The notion that bread has a divine right to the toaster is insanity. Open fire cooking has been used for millenia. lulz

 

Compelling rebuttal.

[Willfully Horn 8,066]

22 minutes ago, G650 said:

How is the car drivers convenience any more worthy than the cyclist or pedestrians?

It’s not. But, that inconvenience can be quantified and attempts made at minimizing the sum total. @midtown has a steep hill that slows his speed to the point where walking is not that much slower.

Also, over two hundred miles a day? You have my sympathy. Be careful, lives are on the line.

[ChickenSandwich 9,856]

1 hour ago, midtown said:

We've already covered the fact that people who own bikes also likely own cars, have jobs and buy shit so the already pay taxes for the use of the infrastructure but definitely call your state representative and tell him little timmy needs to pay a bike fee.  Please time how long it takes them to stop laughing at the idiocy of that.  

The bike lanes aren't free.  The car lanes they confiscate were not free to create.  All drivers subsidize your exercise hobby.

[sheeeit 129]

18 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

December 8, 1941. USA.

(Responding to @Sawbonz).

Within hours of the attack people were blaming Roosevelt and spreading conspiracy stories about every little thing.  Many politicians still did not want to engage in the war.  The difference is they didn't have twitter or a Cloak Room.  Human nature doesn't change.  We are still the same.

[midtown 3,348]

I own a gas guzzling truck. I've paid my taxes. But if you want to start this line of logic then you should throw out the entire system of how public funds are used to fund public projects.

[fattyflattie 4,638]

1 hour ago, midtown said:

If you want to use this then all you electric vehicle driving people should not be allowed to use the roads at all.

All you?  They can pay taxes, too. 
 

 

[F250 28,830]

17 minutes ago, G650 said:

Compelling rebuttal.

Did you read your post?

You gave a brief description on the evolution of travel and then ended with a statement predicated on the idea that the primary function of roads are not for driving cars.

[Jkwellborn 6,752]

I’ll say the same thing I tell my family. Don’t swerve to dodge something you can run over. If it’s a bigger vehicle than you, it has the right of way.

[Willfully Horn 8,066]

8 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

Within hours of the attack people were blaming Roosevelt and spreading conspiracy stories about every little thing.  Many politicians still did not want to engage in the war.  The difference is they didn't have twitter or a Cloak Room.  Human nature doesn't change.  We are still the same.

I spoke to the “huge percentage” of humanity that was referenced. Not to a state of human perfection. My belief stems from the numbers of citizens who answered their country’s need.

Human nature is a spectrum, not a template. 
 

Folks who act without regard for others are not due the cover of “all people act that way.”

[sheeeit 129]

6 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

I spoke to the “huge percentage” of humanity that was referenced. Not to a state of human perfection. My belief stems from the numbers of citizens who answered their country’s need.

Human nature is a spectrum, not a template. 
 

Folks who act without regard for others are not due the cover of “all people act that way.”

I don't disagree, and this is way off topic but I still believe the vast amount of people are good.  I dont think the percentage of people who "act without regard for others" is any bigger today than in 1941.  We just live in a time where everyone has a platform.  There have always been crazies on the fringes but for some reason we have chosen to respond to the crazies as if they are mainstream.

[fattyflattie 4,638]

30 minutes ago, midtown said:

I own a gas guzzling truck. I've paid my taxes. But if you want to start this line of logic then you should throw out the entire system of how public funds are used to fund public projects.

So since I pay registration on my truck, the other 3 shouldn’t need it?  Boat too?  What about the RV and the other trailers?  I’ve paid my taxes on the truck after all.  If you’ve got the money for a carbon fiber bike, you can register it and pay to use the roads like literally every other thing with tires that touch pavement (including trailers).  

[midtown 3,348]

2 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

So since I pay registration on my truck, the other 3 shouldn’t need it?  Boat too?  What about the RV and the other trailers?  I’ve paid my taxes on the truck after all.  If you’ve got the money for a carbon fiber bike, you can register it and pay to use the roads like literally every other thing with tires that touch pavement (including trailers).  

If it will stop this insane line of thinking and will get motorists to acknowledge the laws they agree to abide by I will happily pay my 25 cents to register my bike.  Go ahead and get this on the next docket.  Ill be waiting for this great idea to become law

Edited September 30, 2021 by midtown

[atomheartbevo 89,863]

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Waller-police-report-says-teen-was-blowing-16500059.php

He's going to cost his parents a shitload of money in lawsuits.  An intelligent person would have just driven past them, but he was blowing exhaust on them and then calling his daddy for whatever reason.  And apparently it was caught on video by multiple cyclists, which is not surprising, since filming themselves riding is a popular hobby.

Quote

The teenage driver of a pickup truck that plowed into a group of bicyclists on Saturday was intentionally blowing exhaust on the riders, and was reaching for his cell phone at the time of the crash that injured six people, according to the Waller Police crash report.

The teen “driver stated he was reaching for his cell phone to call his dad and struck the bicyclists before he could react,” Waller officer Charles Mistric wrote in the report, written Monday.

Quote

Four cyclists were taken to the hospital, two by helicopter, following the crash Saturday morning as cyclists were on a training ride along U.S. 290 Business west of Waller. Neither the teen nor a 17-year-old passenger in the truck were injured. Both remained at the scene of the crash.

Quote

In Texas, a 16-year-old on the second phase of the state’s graduated driver’s license program can operate a car or truck with one passenger in the vehicle that is not a relative. The rules for teen drivers also forbid them from using a wireless device, except in case of emergency.

Quote

All of the riders, Mistric said in the report, were riding two abreast. One constant criticism by drivers in Waller County is cyclists who spread into the road, but there is no evidence that was the case when the crash occurred. Bicyclists, while encouraged to stay in the slowest lane of traffic and to the right, can and do ride side-by-side in many settings.

Quote

“The lead prosecutor on this case is in communication with the Waller Police Department and gathering information from them as they make it available,” Mathis wrote. “We are also aware of the identity of the juvenile and can guarantee that from the perspective of this office he will receive no favorable or unfavorable treatment based upon who his family may or may not be.”

Mathis earlier this week noted his office secured a life prison sentence for Victor Tome for killing two cyclists in a 2017 crash, also during a training ride. Tome, who witnesses described as acting erratically after he fled on foot, was arrested hours after the crash and taken to the Waller County Jail.

 

[atomheartbevo 89,863]

So for the 44% of Surly who are lawyers, was it a good idea for the driver's lawyer to admit he was a new and inexperienced driver?  I mean it was smart to say he's a young man in high school with college aspirations, but to then go on and say he was new to driving and inexperienced, that seems kind of like it could help with the cyclists' lawsuits.

I mean, we'll find out he was probably a C student headed to aggy, but still.

 

[Jkwellborn 6,752]

I find it hard to believe that people wouldn’t assume that because of his age anyway.

[Jkwellborn 6,752]

I find it hard to believe that people wouldn’t assume that because of his age anyway.

[atomheartbevo 89,863]

You can say that again.

[Captainant 27,863]

11 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Waller-police-report-says-teen-was-blowing-16500059.php

He's going to cost his parents a shitload of money in lawsuits.  An intelligent person would have just driven past them, but he was blowing exhaust on them and then calling his daddy for whatever reason.  And apparently it was caught on video by multiple cyclists, which is not surprising, since filming themselves riding is a popular hobby.

so a teen assaulting people with his truck, using a cell phone while striking cyclists who were riding on a 4 lane road, properly following the rules of the road (!!!!!!) doesn't get arrested for aggravated assault.... because? 

Fucking cops.

Edited September 30, 2021 by Captainant

[fattyflattie 4,638]

4 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

So for the 44% of Surly who are lawyers, was it a good idea for the driver's lawyer to admit he was a new and inexperienced driver?  I mean it was smart to say he's a young man in high school with college aspirations, but to then go on and say he was new to driving and inexperienced, that seems kind of like it could help with the cyclists' lawsuits.

I mean, we'll find out he was probably a C student headed to aggy, but still.

 

I would call every cyclist I could to the stand. Jury would let this kid walk rather than listen to more condescending bullshit from the muh bike freedom Tour de France crowd. I’d wager it would take 3 of them to fully alienate the entire courtroom. 

[atomheartbevo 89,863]

2 minutes ago, Captainant said:

so a teen assaulting people with his truck, using a cell phone while striking cyclists who were riding on a 4 lane road, properly following the rules of the road (!!!!!!) doesn't get arrested for aggravated assault.... because? 

Kudos to those cops for making this a national-interest story and making their bosses/prosecutors/etc. have to field a shit-ton of calls from the national media.  I'm sure their bosses are very pleased with that.

[atomheartbevo 89,863]

2 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I would call every cyclist I could to the stand. Jury would let this kid walk rather than listen to more condescending bullshit from the muh bike freedom Tour de France crowd. I’d wager it would take 3 of them to fully alienate the entire courtroom. 

Yeah, that's now how this works.  The cyclists that were run over by this idiot were all obeying the rules of the road, were not hassling anybody, the kid was deliberately slowing down and fucking with them and blowing shit into their faces rather than going on about his day, and he was on his phone when he ran over the six, which he admitted to when he talked to the cops.

Most people on a jury have had to deal with some entitled asshole teenager at some point in their lives.

 

[Samson's Wig 3,195]

2 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Yeah, that's now how this works.  The cyclists that were run over by this idiot were all obeying the rules of the road, were not hassling anybody, the kid was deliberately slowing down and fucking with them and blowing shit into their faces rather than going on about his day, and he was on his phone when he ran over the six, which he admitted to when he talked to the cops.

Most people on a jury have had to deal with some entitled asshole teenager at some point in their lives.

 

Counterpoint: Most people on a jury have had to deal with being stuck behind an entitled asshole cyclist at some point in their lives.  

 

/you're right, and I'm kidding.

[G650 14,278]

1 hour ago, F250 said:

the idea that the primary function of roads are not for driving cars

This is my entire point. Why do you assume this? Because that is not the case. There's a reason bicycle and horse usage of roadways is codified in law. Several reasons actually, but one is because the laws are actually older than cars very existence. 

 

I mean you can either articulate why you think the best usage case for roads should be car only, or just admit that you like to drive and want other road users to bend to your will.

 

Infrastructure usage is a wildly complex topic. There's been volumes of research and study globally over centuries about it and the average motorist hasn't got a clue to be honest. If it were up to me I'd can all personal vehicles in mnay areas, because they are the most insanely inefficient method of moving individual meatsacks around while completely fucking over commerce at the same time by choking our highways. All because everyone is a special snowflake whose fee fees get hurt if they have the slightest inconvenience, as evidenced by all the posts in this thread.

 

My companies contractors license is heavy highway. Ie. I literally build roads for a living. This doesn't make me omnipotent or infallible, but if you are going to have an opinion on how our Infrastructure is supposed to work you better be informed before making inane assertions, no matter how commonly held they may be.

[G650 14,278]

1 hour ago, Willfully Horn said:

Also, over two hundred miles a day? You have my sympathy. Be careful, lives are on the line.

Tell me about it man. The stories I could tell. Dump trucks on fire off the shoulder of I 64. I watched fire engines glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate....

[NAVY 6,747]

8 minutes ago, G650 said:

Tell me about it man. The stories I could tell. Dump trucks on fire off the shoulder of I 64. I watched fire engines glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate....

Nexus 6 labor or combat model? What’s your inception date?  

[G650 14,278]

1 minute ago, NAVY said:

Nexus 6 labor or combat model? What’s your inception date?  

Have to be combat to go out on the interstate these days

[52-80 19,272]

The demographic of bicyclists have higher income than that overall US general pop. 
 

That implies bicyclist pay more taxes and have more claim to use of the road. 
 

People pedaling a $5000 bike on the weekend probably have money for cars and its associated fees too. 

[elfenix 34,344]

2 hours ago, G650 said:

As someone who drives 200+ miles a day, there's always two things that strike me about these conversations. Firstly, there is absolutely no worse motherfuckers out than other drivers. It's insanity out there. And amateurs always have the most hilarious opinions. Secondly, and probably more important, is this wild ass assumption that cars on roads is just some natural law that has always existed and everyone else is the problem, which gets articulated as "cyclist are inconveniencing people" whereas "people" are drivers, when in fact everyone on the road is a person. How is the car drivers convenience any more worthy than the cyclist or pedestrians? All these opinions that bikes being on the road is dangerous are built on a false assumption. Why is it the bike or pedestrian that should remove themselves from the situation to make it safer? Why not the car? Bikes, horses and people were literally on the roads for decades before the car existed, millennia in the case of people and horses. The notion that cars have some divine right to the road is insanity.

some history about that:

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26073797

[G650 14,278]

5 minutes ago, elfenix said:

some history about that:

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26073797

Indeed. I actually have a pretty good book that goes in depth on a lot of the early 20th century auto lobby actions, but the title is escaping me at the moment.

[ABSR 5,326]

On 9/28/2021 at 3:49 PM, Biff Tannen said:

This thread went exactly as I thought it would.  The only other sure thing is a Dallas vs Houston thread.

We need a Dallas bicyclists vs Houston bicyclists thread.  

[conVINCEd 21,473]

Just now, ABSR said:

We need a Dallas bicyclists vs Houston bicyclists thread.  

Are you trying to break the internet?

[Biff Tannen 45,751]

Just now, ABSR said:

We need a Dallas bicyclists vs Houston bicyclists thread.  

Pretty sure that would open up a rift in space time and Gwar would come out. 

[F250 28,830]

47 minutes ago, G650 said:

I mean you can either articulate why you think the best usage case for roads should be car only,

Roads are primarily designed for driving cars. You know this everyone knows this.