PhillyTablet Inquirer Daily News
Mobile
Home Delivery
philly.com
email
font size
comments
7
options
 
Saturday, October 31, 2009

Hit-and-run bicyclist a worst-case example
Andre Steed was hit by a bicyclist and fatally injured.

Somewhere in Philadelphia, there’s a hit-and-run driver who needs to face up to the awful consequences of having run down and fatally injured a pedestrian in mid-October.

Anyone walking on a Center City street should keep a wary eye out for him. Description? He’ll be riding a bicycle.
 
How’s that for giving a knock to the normally warm-and-fuzzy image of cycling?
At a crucial juncture — where Mayor Nutter is taking important steps to promote environmentally friendly cycling — the bizarre accident on Oct. 15 at the intersection of 16th and Locust Streets turns the issue of cycling safety on its head.
 
More often than not, it’s bicyclists who risk life and limb at the hands of reckless motorists when venturing out on city streets. But the crash that took the life of Andre Steed, 40, a Center City paralegal, was a reminder that pedestrians face serious risks, too.
 
Indeed, the dangers of riding on city streets perversely leads many cyclists to ride illegally on city sidewalks, swerving around and between pedestrians.
 
A fitting memorial to Steed — in addition to holding the man who struck him accountable before the law — would be to take strides toward making the streets safer for everyone, whether on foot, bicycle, or in a vehicle.
 
With its push for more bicycle use, the city is steering the right course in promoting commuting by bike to reduce congestion and pollution and promote exercise.
 
The recent opening of dedicated cycling lanes along Spruce and Pine Streets as a pilot project means that, for the first time, cyclists can cross Center City with greater safety. If the city establishes a bike-sharing program, even more people will hop on bikes.
 
But these efforts raise the stakes in assuring that cyclists ride safely, and obey the rules of the road just as drivers must do.
 
So it’s good to hear that Nutter officials are planning a two-pronged approach once grant funding is secured: a public-awareness safety campaign, followed by enforcement. In the meantime, the city’s new handheld cell-phone ban for drivers and cyclists alike could reduce dangerous riding distractions.
 
Everyone in the city has a stake in making cycling safer.
Posted by Inquirer Editorial Board @ 4:00 AM  Permalink | 7 comments
Comments   
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 12:25 PM, 10/31/2009
    Amen to more cyclists riding according to the State Vehicular Code and the City Code -- on the street, obeying the law. But bike-sharing? Not so much. In Paris, the Vélib program is already in trouble (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/31/world/europe/31bikes.html). And the Kryptonite lock company rates Philadelphia as THE worst city in America for bike theft. Better to focus efforts on converting retired parking meter posts into workable stands where we cyclists can secure the bikes we already own.
    — Jen
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 2:40 PM, 10/31/2009
    Whoa, nelly. First of all, are we sure that the cyclist was even riding on the sidewalk? Initial reports states that the cyclist swerved to avoid a car that had veered into his path, not that he hopped up on the sidewalk somehow. This accident appears to have happened when Steed stepped into the street. Also, are we sure the cyclist is at fault, and therefore must "face up" to the "awful consequences" of this accident. Was Steed wearing ear buds? Did he look first before stepping into the street? Was Steed crossing at a crosswalk? There honestly sounds like culpability on the part of the pedestrian, and though tragic, it's not as simple as the editors would like to make it. There are not criminal charges pending from what I understand, and cops don't treat these kinds accidents as "hit and runs" because it doesn't involve a motor vehicle. Is there anything to be gained from the civil suit that will result of the cyclist being taken to court? Is it even possible to prove in court what happened? Can it be firmly established? The editors haven't done their work yet. What does case law tell us about accidents like this in PA and in Philly? What is the operating principle cyclists must adhere to? Cyclists must yield to pedestrians. But if they're own life or injury is threatened, they are allowed to avoid that injury such as a car coming into their path. That is the law. Witnesses stated that to police, earlier reports stated. What the editors haven't clarified is what happens next if they find the cyclist. But what likely happens is an expensive court case with no result.
    — CleanupPhilly
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 2:46 PM, 10/31/2009
    The paper has to fully consider what was reported about this case. The take home message from what I've gathered is that if you jay walk into the path of cyclists in traffic in the city in rush hour, you could get killed. Don't assume cyclists can avoid you. This underscores the need for bike lanes so that even pedestrians understand, not just drivers, that here's where the bikes are that go fast too. People seem not to understand the physics of an object moving 15 mph. That's slow on a bike, but I sure can kill you if I hit you doing that, so don't walk in front of me out of the blue. Pedestrians have to follow the rules too, so that bikes can avoid them.
    — CleanupPhilly
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 2:49 PM, 10/31/2009
    Philadelphians treat jaywalking as a non-crime, but jaywalking will get you killed. Police have to start enforcing it here. The city needs the money anyway.
    — CleanupPhilly
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 3:06 PM, 10/31/2009
    Sorry meant to type: Cyclists must yield to pedestrians but if your own life is threatened, you are allowed to avoid that threat, and the resulting accident you are judged not liable for. Witnesses reported that the cyclist swerved to avoid a car that came into his lane (note need for bike only lanes here) and Steed had just stepped off the curb into the street. It's a horrible accident that can only be prevented with better enforcement of all traffic laws, including pedestrians, and more bike lanes. Also, ear buds on pedestrians are should be illegal. You may as well wear a blindfold and walk around CC in rush hour. I scare peds everyday with ear buds and phones or ipods. They are completely unaware of their surroundings as they walk into the street. And no, I don't dare run red lights in CC. I'm avoiding pedestrians even as I have the green. And their dogs. People, if you love your dog, don't jaywalk with it. Keep your dog tight on your heel if your crossing the street or walking on a path with bike traffic. Every year someone has a dog killed as they cross in front of Tour de France cyclists with a dog. We can't avoid you without hitting a car or something to either side of us, so don't assume we can go around you or your dog. Sorry to sound blunt, but pedestrians are even more oblivious to the law than Philly drivers. There does have to be a crack down on the people who are at the most risk of injury -- pedestrians.
    — CleanupPhilly
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 3:14 PM, 10/31/2009
    The paper is guaranteeing that some pedestrian will get killed again by avoiding the side of the discussion that reviews what pedestrians are legally required to do. You must cross at a cross walk, because it is likely that even a motor vehicle won't be liable if you don't and they hit you. All of these laws exist because of some terrible accidents that put them into place. Why is Philly so anti-law enforcement? It's a city, not a shopping mall.
    — CleanupPhilly
  • 0 like this / 0 don't   •   Posted 10:32 PM, 11/04/2009
    to cleanupphilly i'am going to pray for you, not only are you being inconsiderate of this family you are being down right cruel, you really need God in your life, but maybe you should ask your self if it was your family member would you see this accident different, have some compassion for the person that past away because of this and you should be adult enough to know that the person responsible might have to answer to a court of law but he will have to answer on judgment day, and if this was his family member wouldn't he have wanted to know who and why did this happen, i think you should apologize to the family of the deceased and ask your God for forgivness your self , because it could have been you or maybe your child.
    — one4dalord


7 comments
About The Inquirer Editorial Board
Welcome. You're reading the Inquirer Editorial Board's Say What? opinion blog. We hope you enjoy commentary from the Editorial and Commentary pages, in addition to up-to-the-minute opinion postings that appear here for the first time. Here are thumbnail bio sketches and contact information for the editors and writers who produce the newspaper's opinion pages, as well as an archive of recent cartoons by Tony Auth. (Our blog roll follows the ad below.) Please check out the videos from our One Great Idea project. And don't miss our daily online reader polls.
Join on Facebook    Follow on Twitter

Advertise Here