Tragedy in Kalamazoo is Indicative of Much Larger Issues

"PotbellyJoe and 42 others" (potbellyjoe)
06/08/2016 at 09:16 • Filed to: Kalamazoo, Cyclists, Bikelopnik

For those of you who are not aware, Kalamazoo, MI was impacted by a tragedy last night. A driver of a Chevy Silverado 2500 hit 9 cyclists, killing 5 and then fled the scene. Follow the link to updating coverage.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

The suspect is in custody and no names have been released of either he or the cyclists, but that is unimportant in the grand scheme of things. What is pertinent is that (if other reports are to be believed) a pickup truck of a similar description was reported to be driving erratically in this area and some reports are saying alcohol was involved.

Regardless of how this pans out, whether drunk or simply distracted (how do you miss seeing 9 cyclists traveling together?), please take this to heart to be better motorists and better road users. This tragedy is unnecessary and has ended the lives of 5 people for no reason other than someone was not following the law.

I know, invariably, some asshole (and that’s what you are) will say, “well, what were the cyclists doing in the road?” or some other form of victim-blaming. Don’t even waste your time on this one. This is not the forum for that. The law is clear that cyclists have the right to be on the road, end of story. They are considered vehicles in MI and therefore are granted access to streets. I also don’t want to hear, “These are the risks you take...” because that tired cop-out is enabling bad driving, drunk driving, and distracted driving by poo-pooing the loss of these five people and minimizing the impact of bad decisions by the operator of a, when improperly controlled, deadly machine. Because let’s be honest, if the laws were followed, our streets would be significantly safer.

So what is the moral of all of this? Be better citizens, everyone to everyone. Now that the summer is here and schools are letting out, children will be playing around parks and cyclists and joggers will be out enjoying their hobbies. As drivers, we have a responsibility to pilot our vehicles in a safe manner, free of distraction or disability that puts others at risk.

I mourn for my hometown today.

DISCUSSION (40)

Party-vi > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 09:26

Do you think DUIs and DWIs would still be a thing if we crushed their cars? Makes sense to me - you’re not responsible enough to drive, so we’re crushing your shit. What if we amputated the right foot of every repeat DWI/DUI offender? It’s hard to drive without a right fucking foot.

vondon302 > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 09:27

Heard this on the way in today. Just ugly. Plus that asshole tried to run WTF. This and the multiple shootings of teens in Detroit makes you wonder about people.

Berang > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 09:28

There are already assholes on that page saying bikes don’t belong on roads b-b-b-ecause I PAY MONEY to register MY CAR!!!!! It’s not FAIR that bicycles are on MY road!!!!!!!!!!1 *begins having hemmoroidal flare up and heart attack*

Probably every one of those cyclists killed owned a car and paid just as much as the red-faced, bloated idiot, who thinks cyclists don’t deserve to use the roads.

zeontestpilot > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 09:29

See, this is why I am always paranoid about people. Also, it sounds like they found the erratic driver? I really hope they did.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > Party-vi
06/08/2016 at 09:31

I have absolutely no idea what penalty would be both fair and adequate to curtail recidivism. I do believe there are many towns in this country who are too lenient on DUI/DWI offenders, but it’s in the culture of some areas to tolerate that behavior. Very sad.

It’s an attitude that needs to change before leaving for the bar, or cracking open that Schaefers. The decision has to be, “I am not driving tonight.” Unfortunately, we live in a well-marketed country that tells us it’s not fun until you have a buzz going and then a transportation system that does not support that behavior by providing safe alternatives to driving.

Flavien Vidal > Party-vi
06/08/2016 at 09:32

Had never thought of the DUI car crushing thing, but that could be good... Though I would not do that to the first time offender or the guy slightly over the limit. It has to be a measure for the actual asshole who either manages to get behind the wheel with 3g of alcohol in his blood or the guy who got caught at least twice with a noticeable level of alcohol. But that could be a great method to deter drunk driving. On the other end, confiscating their car for good and sending it to auction, would be less of a waste.

Imagine the guy who gets caught with 3g of alcohol in his blood while driivng his 250GTO. Do you really want to be that guy crushing the car?? :)

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > zeontestpilot
06/08/2016 at 09:33

Yes, he’s been arrested.

Party-vi > Flavien Vidal
06/08/2016 at 09:34

lol as if anyone with a 250GTO would be driving it.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > Berang
06/08/2016 at 09:36

I agree and even if they didn’t, the laws are clear, they’re allowed to be there and cars must operate safely around them. This “The cyclists held up traffic.” is garbage, they ARE traffic. If a cyclist held you up (for less time than you waited at a red light) this morning, that’s legal, you need to not see homicide as an alternative to a delay in your schedule, right?

Needmoargarage > Party-vi
06/08/2016 at 09:37

I wish they took that approach. Though I tend to think most individuals getting repeat DUIs/DWIs are too stupid to even take a moment to consider the consequences regardless of severity.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > vondon302
06/08/2016 at 09:39

No wondering here, people are a fallen and depraved species. A person is nice, but as people we are terrible.

Flavien Vidal > Party-vi
06/08/2016 at 09:39

Hey, you’d be surprised :)

Come to Japan, people don’t see those cars the same way. Here it’s an investment that has to live. ;)

To the point that some poeple made road legal cars out of cars that could never be road legal anywhere else

Berang > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 09:42

Well also, a vehicle has a steering wheel and a brake pedal for reasons - if somebody doesn’t want to use them, they have no right to be on the road.

zeontestpilot > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 09:46

Awesome. I don’t want him on the road anymore. It seems alcohol may of been an issue, but not much info has been released from what I can tell.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > zeontestpilot
06/08/2016 at 09:52

Details are scant and I’m not really sure why. NYC/NJ media is never this kind to potentially intoxicated, hit-and-run drivers (they let the courts issue the slaps on the wrist) unless they are connected to law enforcement or political power players. Kalamazoo is just conscientious of all parties until all details are in place.

zeontestpilot > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 09:56

In hindsight, that is good. Worst case scenario, they arrested the wrong person. Don't want the wrong persons name released.

190octane > vondon302
06/08/2016 at 10:03

I’m good with the crushing of the car and extensive fines. If someone is being threatened with their car being crushed and having to pay $10k in fines, maybe they won’t be so stupid.

Someone will I'm sure make some comment about how this is barbaric and think about how life changing it would be for someone... but that's the point. When you make the decision to drive drunk, you aren't considering how life changing it could be for the person you hit so why should the same consideration be given to you?

vondon302 > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 10:03

Well said.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > Needmoargarage
06/08/2016 at 10:05

NYC has had a law on the books of impounding the car driven in DWI cases with the intent of forfeiture. Then no cars get smashed for bad operator behavior. Also, any cars sold after the fact pay into the police retirement fund.

shop-teacher > Party-vi
06/08/2016 at 10:06

I like where your head is at, but sadly I think it would still be a thing. I had an uncle who drank a case of beer a day for decades, I never once saw him sober. Nothing could or would stop him. He destroyed plenty of cars all on his own. Fortunately he never hurt anybody but himself, and he’s no longer around endangering us all.

TheRealBicycleBuck > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 10:06

I also heard about it on the way in this morning. You saved me a google search.

It is a tragedy and unfortunately, it will incite great rage against the cyclists while the jackhole behind the wheel will get all the sympathy. Human nature favors the group that is more “like me”. In this case, there are more motorists than cyclists, so the “like me” group is going to side with the guy in the truck.

I tell my kids to think of cyclists like tractors. A driver may get mad that a tractor is on the road, slowing him down, but he wouldn’t try to squeeze past one, and he certainly wouldn’t want to hit one. Eventually, there will be a place to pass or the cyclist will move over. As much as the driver doesn’t want the cyclist in front of him, the cyclist doesn’t want the driver behind him.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > TheRealBicycleBuck
06/08/2016 at 10:12

Exactly.

I hate having cars behind me unless it’s a road where I am maintaining the speed of traffic. God forbid I fall and the car behind me is too close (which they often are).

In my town the roads are relatively flat and smooth with street parking, so traffic doesn’t always do 25 mph, and I am more than capable of keeping up with 20-25 mph for a few blocks, I still get people mad at me for “blocking the road” as I will hear it at stop lights. I had an incident two weeks ago where I was doing 26 by my speedometer leaving town in a 25 and trying to get through an intersection where the lanes widen on the other side, and guy tore around me and honked the entire time. It’s like, if I were a car, you wouldn’t even have considered that and quite frankly, I’m pretty sure I would have been going slower in my Pontiac.

Sam > TheRealBicycleBuck
06/08/2016 at 10:25

I always ALWAYS pass a cyclist by completely entering the opposing lane. Even if the cyclist is on the edge of the lane of travel. Never know if they are going to fall over or make an erratic move. I don’t really know the law in regards to passing extremely slow moving traffic over a double yellow, but I’ll do it anyways if it’s in a safe spot (i.e. not on a curve or a blind hill) pretty much every road here is a double yellow, even though they are completely flat and straight country roads.

Urambo Tauro > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 10:45

It seems to me that it’s impossible for a driver (who is paying sufficient attention) to somehow not notice even one cyclist in an encounter like this.

Some claim that motorcycles are “hard to see”, and that it’s even worse trying to spot bicycles. But I have never been able to relate to such a notion. Being unaware of another valid user of the road (especially right in front of you) seems to indicate a fundamental failure to watch the road.

And that’s why I believe that even similar offenses that don’t cause death should nevertheless result in revocation of the guilty party’s license. Make the driver start from scratch, learning how to drive all over again.

jariten1781 > Party-vi
06/08/2016 at 10:50

Nah, that won’t work...doubt that would be any different over the current penalties. The problems with not allowing registration, high cost insurance, taking licenses, etc. is that for most people independent transportation is so necessary for minimal living that they will risk jail time, financial penalties, etc. because their other option is becoming destitute. It’s why illegal immigrants on one side and habitual DUIs on the other just drive outside the law when the ability to drive is restricted/removed. It would help with the retribution piece, so I’m not opposed (because fuck those folks), but I wouldn’t expect it to noticeably decrease incidence of poor behavior.

So...you need to still have capable independent transportation that is not so penalizing that you force the bad actors outside the system. Proposal: new class of autocycles (3 or 4 wheels)that have a maximum weight (say 800 lbs), maximum speed (say 60 mph), maximum seating (say 2), and no required safety regulations. DUI offenders get car yanked, registration privileges demoted to autocycles only, and license derated to autocycles only. Carnage they can deal is lessened (not removed, not happening) and personal risk in a wreck is greatly increased, but they aren't forced to retreat to outside the law behavior that continues otherwise at high risk.

TheRealBicycleBuck > Sam
06/08/2016 at 10:50

You sir, are in the minority. It is notably rare for a vehicle to move completely out of my lane to pass. Most give me three feet or so. A few pass close enough for me to tweak their passenger mirror. Thankfully, those are fairly rare too.

TheD0k_2many toys 2little time > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 12:03

I live less than 5 min away from where it happened. Its a hilly area and its possible that if they were just over the hill (dont know the exact spot he hit them) he could not have seen them. (also a 50mph speed limit there as well). Still doesnt make fleeing the scene right at all.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > TheD0k_2many toys 2little time
06/08/2016 at 12:17

From the reports, they were climbing the hill. I have ridden this road. My parents are in Richland and I grew up in Portage/Kalamazoo before heading to the East Coast. We ride this way toward the Kal-Haven when we ride from Gull Lake to Lake Michigan in the summer. We meet people along D Ave and then head down eventually to getting on the KalHaven at Douglas.

Chan - Mid-engine with cabin fever > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 12:42

For a country of the developed world, urban ‘Murica has very little sense of community and unity. Hit-and-runs happen all the time.

TheD0k_2many toys 2little time > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 12:42

missed that part. yea no reason for him to hit them then if he was coming up behind them.

BigBlock440 > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 13:44

Just because a slow moving vehicle is traffic, it doesn’t mean the can’t also hold it up. A left lane camper is traffic, but they still are holding up traffic.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > BigBlock440
06/08/2016 at 13:55

Careful where you tread with this one. I’m not advocating a cyclist sit out in the lane and go 10 in a 45 zone for no reason other than to hold up traffic, but there are myriad instances where a cyclist needs to take the lane and is well within their rights to do so despite it causing a driver to have to use their brakes.

BigBlock440 > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 13:58

I’m not taking it anywhere. Just that yes, they can, in fact, be holding up traffic even if they are a part of it.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > BigBlock440
06/08/2016 at 14:01

The concept of “holding up traffic” would infer there is something improper about it. That’s what I am refuting. If they are acting as a part of traffic and following the rules, drivers have to deal. Regardless, raging at them, as I was inferring was happening in the initial post, is the incorrect response even if their actions are illegal at the time. We are not the law.

facw > jariten1781
06/08/2016 at 14:22

How to deal with the fact that many Americans “need” a car is one question, but it does seem like computerized license plate readers and even face detection may put an end to the lawless driver problem. Right now you can drive without license/registration/insurance without much chance of being caught, but that could change dramatically as new tech goes out there (assuming police actually act on reports).

BigBlock440 > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 14:29

No, we’re not the law, that means we can’t enforce it. It doesn’t mean we can’t be pissed at people who are breaking it, or people who are inconveniencing us. Also, raging against DUI’rs is the incorrect response, even if their actions are illegal at the time. We are not the law.

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > BigBlock440
06/08/2016 at 14:39

Totally different level between a cyclist in a lane of traffic and a DUI. Go home. We’re done. And if you’re justifying the wish of harm to a cyclist, or justifying an attack on them over them slowing you down slightly, that’s ridiculous. Getting pissed over minor infractions is never a correct response.

This is over. Go yell at clouds somewhere, maybe it will get your rage out.

BigBlock440 > PotbellyJoe and 42 others
06/08/2016 at 14:43

Getting pissed at somebody and actually attacking them are different things. I was just using your own advice about the DUI, which you apparently don’t want to follow. How do you differentiate which laws are ok to get pissed about and which ones are not?

PotbellyJoe and 42 others > BigBlock440
06/08/2016 at 14:52

If you can’t see the veritable chasm between a cyclist improperly in a lane and a DUI then I don’t know how you expect to have a reasonable debate on this.

I think the majority of it has to do with actual risk to your personal harm. I think that’s incredibly reasonable to ascertain as a limit to when you should or shouldn’t act toward another person. Someone else not wearing a seatbelt doesn’t mean you can scream at them, or dream of punching them in face. Now them doing a burnout in a Mustang, as they leave a C&C event, yes that merits a yell, or a call to the authorities.

I’m ashamed for you that I even had to spell this out.

jariten1781 > facw
06/08/2016 at 17:25

Oh there’s a million technologically feasible ways to do it today. Back in the 90s some magazine (Popular Science or something) was proposing that in 5-10 years we’d be keying ignitions to an embedded chip in our wrist that’d be coded with our driving restrictions. With nearly ubiquitous cell coverage a system like that could be updated on the fly. Wouldn’t even be all that expensive to implement...probably similar in base price increase to the forced implementation of backup cameras today.

Problem there is you run into personal freedoms issues and the general principle of not punishing the whole for the faults of the few.