Support BikePortland

Police investigating car in north Portland hit-and-run

Posted by on September 11th, 2015 at 1:02 pm

Screenshot of tweet by @BluTarp.

Portland Police are investigating a hit-and-run case after a woman was struck while bicycling on North Skidmore last night.

According to the PPB, a call came in at 6:26 pm and officers and medical personnel arrived on the scene shortly thereafter. They found a 24-year-old woman who was on the ground with several injuries, including lacerations to her face. The woman told them she was hit and that the person driving the car did not stop. The woman was taken to a nearby hospital and is expected to make a full recovery.

Thanks for reading BikePortland.

Please consider a $10/month subscription or a one-time payment
to help maintain and expand this vital community resource.

PPB spokesman Pete Simpson said police investigators found a “blue American car” located at N Kerby and Cook Street just a few blocks from the collision. The car was towed and is part of the ongoing investigation. The person driving the car has not been found. He has been described as an elderly male.

If you have any information about this incident, please email CrimeTips@portlandoregon.gov.

Also this week the PPB arrested a man who they say ran over a 14-year-old girl who was riding her bike in southeast Portland. According to coverage by The Oregonian, witnesses saw a man come to a stop at the I-205 off-ramp at SE Holgate and fail to look both directions before proceeding. “The witnesses said Rutledge briefly stopped, then drove away, running over Gaiovych and her bike and dragging the teen 10 or 15 feet under the pickup,” The Oregonian reported. He claimed to have blacked out during the crash and was booked into jail on assault and other charges.

Please support BikePortland.

NOTE: We love your comments and work hard to ensure they are productive, considerate, and welcoming of all perspectives. Disagreements are encouraged, but only if done with tact and respect. If you see a mean or inappropriate comment, please contact us and we'll take a look at it right away. Also, if you comment frequently, please consider holding your thoughts so that others can step forward. Thank you — Jonathan

176 Comments
  • PaulaF September 11, 2015 at 1:06 pm

    Again, injury(plus) hit and run s/b automatic felony with no “I panicked” defense. This is just inexcusable!

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Chris I September 11, 2015 at 3:56 pm

      How can people be so cowardly? Seriously, how do they live with themselves?

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • q`Tzal September 11, 2015 at 4:53 pm

        They know that if they run the chances of them being identified, prosecuted or found guilty are almost nil.
        Only helmet cameras have had any significant effect on this historical trend.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Todd Hudson September 11, 2015 at 1:13 pm

    Will the driver be charged with failure to perform duties of driver to injured persons? Ride cameras need to be ubiquitous.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • 9watts September 11, 2015 at 1:21 pm

    Cars are a bad fit for homo sapiens. We’re just terrible at living up to the responsibilities the automobile demands of us.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Brian Willson September 11, 2015 at 2:20 pm

      This cannot be stressed enough! The private auto is one of the worst human inventions ever, along with TV, and high tech weapons. What is astonishing is to realize that what humans have created they can uncreate, and choose to start on another path. Not likely, perhaps, but indispensable if we earnestly seek to survive as a species.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Hello, Kitty
        Hello, Kitty September 11, 2015 at 2:28 pm

        I think you might be overstating things just a tad…

        Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Todd Boulanger September 11, 2015 at 3:54 pm

        For urban areas the car has not really not improved the overall quality of life (net net) vs. but for rural areas it is a much different outcome since 1920.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • are September 11, 2015 at 4:35 pm

          it is not the automobile per se, but its application to many uses to which it is not suited — in part because the technology is beyond the skill of the average person to handle

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • q`Tzal September 11, 2015 at 5:05 pm

            The Car™ is the proverbial hammer used to solve every problem especially the problems that benefit least from a hammer.

            Even the author of CarFree Cities admits that outside of cities the automobile’s safety issues evaporate and heavy mass transit infrastructure is highly inefficient to sparse rural destinations.

            Oddly the car companies’ advertising departments have been right all along: the only safe place to use their products is on empty rural roads in the middle of nowhere.

            Recommended Thumb up 0

            • Adron Hall September 15, 2015 at 2:42 pm

              Rural areas actually have some pretty significant safety issues with cars. Namely the fatality rate skyrockets because of a number of reasons. Just look at all that “red state” territory and then look at the fatalities in those areas. All of a sudden cities are pretty safe by comparison. A lot of it is simply people driving, inattentively, and slamming into trees, etc. It’s a sad story really. Albeit it is true that rural life has improved dramatically with the advent of the automobile, but it definitely still leaves a dangerous element in day to day life there too.

              Recommended Thumb up 0

  • pixelgate September 11, 2015 at 1:25 pm

    Guys calm down. The driver just wanted to make sure he got all the alcohol out of his system before heading to the police station to receive his slap on the wrist.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Justin Gast September 11, 2015 at 1:40 pm

    I hope the girl is OK and the motorist actually receives a punishment.

    Looking at the pic, though, and judging by the blood trail, I’m assuming she wasn’t wearing a helmet. Use of helmets should be a mandatory law, regardless of age.

    In my opinion, I truly believe one doesn’t value their safety and well-being if they’re going to travel on the same streets with cars and not wear a helmet.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Paul Atkinson September 11, 2015 at 1:50 pm

      Meh. I don’t think there should be a law about helmets. I do think people protect their brains as much as they feel their brains deserve. Who am I to contradict them?

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Bella Bici September 11, 2015 at 1:50 pm

      Grrroooaaannnn…

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • jeff September 11, 2015 at 2:19 pm

        yeah, brain injuries are cool.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • pixelgate September 11, 2015 at 2:36 pm

          Yes, because car accidents never result in head trauma. Excellent logic there, sir. If you want to be the big helmet champion, lets start by bullying all drivers and pedestrians to wear them.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • colton September 11, 2015 at 3:36 pm

            …and let’s start by delaying all bike infrastructure until the pedestrian infrastructure is complete.

            Is that your excellent logic, that bike helmets are of no value until drivers and pedestrians use them?

            Use a bike helmet or don’t, but don’t try to convince people that they are without value because drivers and pedestrians don’t use them… that’s for the drivers and pedestrians to work out.

            Recommended Thumb up 0

            • are September 11, 2015 at 4:37 pm

              without value is different from mandatory. and to single out cyclists while ignoring head injuries to motorists and pedestrians is to relegate the cyclist to an inferior user class

              Recommended Thumb up 0

              • colton September 11, 2015 at 9:52 pm

                My mistake, I understood pixelgate to believe that because car accidents sometime result in head trauma that I must bully drivers and pedestrians to wear helmets before I can discuss helmet use on bikes.

                I think the two things can have value independent of the other.

                Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Pat Lowell September 11, 2015 at 2:27 pm

      I agree that riders should wear helmets, but I don’t think there’s any way to tell from this photo whether that poor woman was wearing a helmet, or what part of her body that blood came from. I hope she has a quick recovery.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Chris Anderson September 11, 2015 at 3:19 pm

      Drivers give me a little more respect when I don’t wear a helmet. I’m willing to take some risk to give my children in the bike a little extra safety.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • FietsLief September 11, 2015 at 3:48 pm

      Hey, I broke my jaw in two places when I crashed a few years ago. There was a lot of blood.

      I was also wearing a helmet, which wouldn’t have mattered anyway considering I landed chin-first.

      Let’s stop assuming things and victim blaming, ok?

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Paul in the 'Couve September 11, 2015 at 4:39 pm

        Bingo, in 42 years of riding a bike..my broken jaw which required 40+ stitches from a plastic surgeon outside and a similar number inside my mouth from an oral surgeon was my worst injury and there was a lot of blood. I wasn’t even diagnosed with a concussion. I’ve also broken my collar bone, had stitches to my hand once, cracked ribs a couple of times. As an individual I am an Anecdote, but as a lifelong rider, a risk taker, and a bit of a klutz I am my own sample. No head injury in countless MTB crashes and a good sample size of at least 100 crashes on the road including hit by cars 3 times (all ages ago) the only time I’ve hit my head, I hit chin first and only a full face helmet would have helped. The one thing I have never had however, is a high speed collision. I’ve never been hit by a car going more than 10 mph. But readers here know well that surviving a crash with a car going over 30 is almost always fatal, with or without a helmet.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • Paul in the 'Couve September 11, 2015 at 4:41 pm

          By the way.. I do wear a helmet, have since 2 days after I broke my jaw. But in 32 years of wearing a helmet I’ve never cracked one. Maybe it saved me a minor scrape on a couple of occasions.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • gutterbunnybikes September 11, 2015 at 9:39 pm

            Cracks in the plastic are no indication that helmets work. Your skull is much tougher than a millimeter thick coating of plastic. Feel free to check, even the helmet companies will tell you that the condition of the plastic is irrelevant (other than that you need to buy a new one when it does – interesting isn’t it).

            What does matter is the foam. Was the foam compacted (it won’t spring back if it was)? If the foam wasn’t compacted then the helmet was not a factor in your safety. Granted it might have saved you from a scrape, but it didn’t save your life unless the foam was impacted.

            Recommended Thumb up 0

    • invisiblebikes September 11, 2015 at 4:05 pm

      1) Bicycle helmets are not rated for DOT use, there is not a single bicycle helmet that will even come close to passing DOT testing. DOT testing is the only standard of testing approved by DMV for use in operating a vehicle on public roads. I.e a motorcycle

      2) A Bicycle helmet is only test for low speed impacts, they are designed and tested to protect the user from a fall off of a bike at low speed. Not heavy high speed impacts like a motorcycle helmet. Why do you think DH riders use DOT specific helmets?

      yes I wear a helmet when I ride only because the chances of me falling off my bike are much higher than getting in a collision with a car. Your fooling yourself if you think a foam hat will protect your head from a 5000 lbs vehicle moving at over 30 mph. Not to mention helmets only cover the top and back of your head, a face first crash is very likely in most collisions so a helmet wouldn’t do anything for you any way.

      Do your homework, check what your helmet is rated for. CPSC is the bicycle standard DOT is the motorcycle/DMV standard.
      If your bicycle helmet is more than 1 year old and has even been dropped from your bike or from a counter top or even from you just holding it and dropping it less than 2 feet… it will no longer pass a CPSC impact test and is no longer safe for use!
      That’s how fragile and inadequate a bicycle helmet really is!

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Dan September 11, 2015 at 6:58 pm

      Helmets good. Helmet laws bad.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Chris Anderson September 11, 2015 at 8:18 pm

        There’s an argument to be made that helmets for non-sport riding make biking look more dangerous than it is, sending the wrong message and making everyone less safe by giving people a reason to stay in their cars. http://www.bikehelmetblog.com/2015/06/picturing-bicycle-helmets-makes-cycling.html

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • Dan September 11, 2015 at 9:03 pm

          I don’t wear always wear a helmet. Just when I expect to be riding more than 10mph. Feels real good to go without sometimes.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • WylyQuimby September 12, 2015 at 12:27 pm

            I can’t believe this thread has devolved into “I don’t want to wear a helmet.” Nobody believes they will get in an accident until they do. Even apparently innocent falls can cause a lot of damage. If you don’t wear a helmet, you don’t respect yourself, your family, or the people involved in your accident.

            Recommended Thumb up 0

    • gutterbunnybikes September 11, 2015 at 9:03 pm

      Pretty big assumption. I’d assume that with facial injuries a helmet would have been a non factor,

      The report just released by the JAMA (that’s made the news rounds for the last two weeks) states that only 16% of bicycle injuries are head injuries.

      There were just over 15,000 bicycle hospitalizations (ages 18+)in 2012/2013 so roughly 2400 head injuries for those two years (ie 1200 a year).

      There is no differentiation of facial (helmet won’t help) and skull injuries in the study. But considering in most situations with a bicycle incident you are more likely to face plant than land on the top or back of your head, it’s pretty safe to assume that the helmet will only be a factor in at best (being pretty generous here) 600 bicycle injury incidents a year.

      Now consider that the most recent and likely effectiveness rate (done by averaging the results of the most reliable studies on helmet effectiveness) put the effectiveness rate of helmets reducing injury by 0-25% (pretty wide margin eh…this figure includes the results of studies that show wearing a helmet increases the likelihood of neck injuries – pick your poison) you are now looking at roughly 150 people a year in which a helmet was a contributing beneficial factor in their incident.

      Mind you also that every single helmet made comes with a disclaimer (if you had read the instructions you wouldn have noticed that) that they are NOT effective or designed to withstand or protect in a collision with an automobile.

      Also note that many charitable helmet give aways require you to sign a waiver against suing the people giving you the helmet.

      No helmet has ever lost a civil case. In every case the fact that it can’t be proven that the helmet was worn correctly at the time of the incident and their disclaimers in the instructions has gotten them off the hook.

      Lets also not overlook all the data coming in from around the world with bike share, Citibike over 40 million miles no fatalities and only a couple of injury incidents – most riders not wearing helmets. The same kind of numbers hold true to the other bike share systems.

      And not one single jurisdiction (world wide) that has mandated helmet use has ever shown a reduction of bicycle injuries, even more specifically head injuries. Despite the fact that ridership numbers decrease significantly when such laws are put into place. Which means that those riders that continue riding after the mandatory helmet law are at greater risk of all injuries including head injuries.

      Helmets are a scam and snake oil. It’s a high profit margin item. Do you really think a little foam with a thin plastic coating with some nylon straps really costs the manufacturer anywhere near the amount you spend on them – the markup is 10’s of dollars to the dollar on them at least.

      Other than sex, nothing sells better than fear.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • 9watts September 11, 2015 at 10:14 pm

        Speaking of markup…
        I was in Universal Cycles the other day to ask about replacement pads for my helmet. They didn’t have them. But I sauntered over to the helmet shelf—actually it was a whole wall—and wouldn’t you know there were helmets for up to $300 (!) among those on offer. Only marginally different in appearance and makeup from mine, which I think cost $30.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • soren September 12, 2015 at 9:16 am

          I only payed ~$90 for my $300 helmets. In terms of comfort, adjustability, and air flow there really is no comparison to a $30 helmet.

          (I almost never wear a helmet for a purely utilitarian bike trip.)

          Recommended Thumb up 0

        • LC September 14, 2015 at 8:55 am

          Best way to get replacement bits for the helmet is to contact the manufacturer directly. If you’ve worn out pads it’s not uncommon to get free replacements.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Clark in Vancouver September 11, 2015 at 9:17 pm

      I disagree. The premise that helmets can protect in cases like this is solely based on a fraudulent study funded by a helmet company. There is no other evidence that they have any benefit.
      What we really need is a way to cycle everywhere we want to go without having to be anywhere near people in cars.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Joe Adamski September 11, 2015 at 10:39 pm

      the helmet topic simply draws your gaze away from the real issue: The (in)ability for motorized vehicles and human power to safely occupy the same space. Some day we will get it figured out, shift the understandings to that next step. In the meantime, don’t get sidetracked with straw man discussions of helmets or lack thereof. That she may or may not have had a helmet on is not the root cause of the collision, or the drivers leaving the scene.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • HJ September 12, 2015 at 3:55 pm

      Victim blaming much?

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Fozman September 14, 2015 at 9:23 am

      The blood trail has nothing to do with a helmet. We bleed out of all our body, not just our heads. She was on the ground a while, and it’s not unfathomable that she or someone else took off her helmet before this pic was snapped. We don’t know, thus no need to get all Mr. Judgy Bear and assume there was no helmet.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Britta September 17, 2015 at 9:38 am

      That Girl is my Daughter and even the police said if she had been wearing a helmet 1- it would not help her facial injuries and 2-would have possibly killed her because of the way the driver hit her..

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • wsbob September 17, 2015 at 10:09 am

        Sorry about your daughter having been injured, and hope she’s recovering fully and doing well, looking forward to riding again!

        I am wondering though, exactly what the police were able to learn about the collision impact that led them to make a remark you said they did, about the the drive having hit her in a way that would have had a bike helmet possibly kill her.

        Why would they say that? Do they believe some part of the motor vehicle impact her head and face in a way that may have snagged a helmet strap had she been wearing a bike helmet? Sometimes the head and facial injuries people riding and involved in collisions with motor vehicles receive, don’t come by way of direct contact with the motor vehicle itself, but by secondary or third impacts with the asphalt, poles, trees, etc.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Rob September 11, 2015 at 1:54 pm

    I want to see more detail regarding these accidents. Like what did she have for safety gear. Bikepprtland.org please be more detailed. Like a map of what may have happened and a list of equipment. These reports should help others avoid accidents not just list off where and when and a bit of what happened.

    I have little sympathy for people when they do not consider the consequences of there actions. Be it a car be it a bike. Wear your helmet wear you seatbelt. No brainers really . Act accordingly or else you will have no brain. Ride safe folks.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor) September 11, 2015 at 2:02 pm

      I’d love to see more detail too Rob. Unfortunately we often don’t get much detail from the police… and to get the detail we’d need to request police reports and do more investigation that we’re able to do for each incident. I will typically post everything I know.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Paul Atkinson September 11, 2015 at 2:51 pm

        Jonathan, are you aware of any pending legislation to stiffen penalties for hit and run? What we have now appears to be too weak to act as a deterrent, so if there’s something out there I’d love to rally some folks behind that.

        If there’s not, well, then there’s more work to do.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

      • wsbob September 11, 2015 at 5:49 pm

        “…PPB spokesman Pete Simpson said police investigators found a “blue American car” located at N Kerby and Cook Street just a few blocks from the collision. The car was towed and is part of the ongoing investigation. The person driving the car has not been found. He has been described as an elderly male. …” bikeportland

        Wonder what police investigators had in the way of witnesses to the collision, and descriptions of the person driving and their car. Hopefully, the car they’ve found is the one involved in the collision, and they’ll soon find the person that was driving.

        Fortunate that the gal that was injured wasn’t knocked unconscious, though maintaining consciousness after an impact doesn’t necessarily mean the injuries sustained due to the collision are minor.

        The other collision reported by the Oregonian and mentioned in this story, the one that occurred apparently near I-205 off-ramp at SE Holgate, is interesting for a bunch of reasons: despite substantial trauma, the young girl survives the collision. The person driving, does not stick around, but does call in approximately a half hour later, said he blacked out. I wonder how soon he was taken into custody after having called in and asked to meet the police, and what in the way of medical examination he may have been obliged to be subject to as part of the investigation of the collision; whether the police would want something like that to try determine whether he had a legitimate reason for having ‘blacked out’.

        Earlier this week I believe, in a short story also reported by the Oregonian, there was a collision in Newberg involving a person driving and a couple kids on bikes, one of them killed. I was hoping for a more detailed report on that collision, but I don’t know or not if there has been one.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • Opus the Poet September 13, 2015 at 3:08 pm

          The younger of those “kids” was 44, she was killed, her 60 something husband was still alive last I heard. The driver was 72…

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • Chad September 14, 2015 at 11:34 am

            I understand the confusion though. Initial reports gave no details at all about the victims and emphasized that the collision occurred very close to an elementary school.

            Recommended Thumb up 0

      • METROFIETS September 21, 2015 at 2:25 pm

        FYI: There is GoFundMe campaign for Hannah – https://www.gofundme.com/hannahdavison

        Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Kat September 11, 2015 at 2:22 pm

      It doesn’t really matter if you’re wearing a helmet or a giant suit of bubble wrap when you’re hit by a two ton steel object.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Whyat Lee September 11, 2015 at 4:06 pm

        It absolutely does. The fact that you were hit by a car doesn’t mean your head hits the bumper and instantly kills you. Riders are frequently knocked off their bikes and then hit their head on the pavement, where I assure you, a helmet is handy. As someone who has personally hit their head on the pavement at a high rate of speed my road rash started where my helmet ended. You don’t have to wear one, but it’s a bit of a stretch to act like a helmet is worthless in the case of a collision with a car. I will definitely be wearing mine.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • El Biciclero September 11, 2015 at 4:45 pm

          “It absolutely does.”

          This is a false statement and I can prove it, because I have a counterexample (i.e., anecdote). Of the three (minor) crashes I have had in the last three years, one involved a car and none of them involved helmet damage. What you can say is that it sometimes makes a difference. Just like it would sometimes make a difference if pedestrians wore helmets, and it would sometimes make a difference if drivers wore helmets. Heck, it would sometimes make a difference if ice skaters, ladder-climbers and shower-takers wore helmets. Where are the advocates for these other helmet laws?

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • Chad September 14, 2015 at 11:43 am

            And sometimes people die because they are wearing a seat belt. On balance, I would suggest that a helmet will rarely increase the severity of injuries in a crash and will often lessen them.

            My anecdote: While riding with my wife and son a couple of years ago, the stop light ahead turned yellow despite a long line of cars still waiting to proceed (this was in Hillsboro, where almost all stop lights have loops or cameras) I stopped. My wife, following, wasn’t watching the light since it should have stayed green longer, and collided with me at about 5 mph. She was still clipped in, fell over and hit her head on the pavement. Helmet broke in half, but she was fine. In her case, a helmet meant only injured pride rather than an ambulance ride.

            Recommended Thumb up 0

            • El Biciclero September 15, 2015 at 12:17 pm

              The distinction has to be made between encouraging helmet use (I don’t discourage it), and legally mandating it. If we are going to legally mandate it, then shouldn’t this “common sense” protection be mandated for all activities that see a similar rate of head injuries? Or better yet, shouldn’t helmet use by mandated for any activity for which the cause of death in a statistically significant number of unintentional adverse outcomes is head injury?

              I’m not saying helmets are worthless any more than I would say seat-belts or airbags are worthless. Yet one of the major causes of death for car occupants in crashes is still head injuries—wouldn’t a helmet reduce that risk? Isn’t it worth mandating helmet use by car occupants? Same story for pedestrians—where is the outcry for mandatory helmet use by all pedestrians?

              In view of Tom Hardy’s ridiculous and misanthropic glee at imagining helmetless head injury victims put “at the end of the line” for medical treatment, would anyone holding this same view rejoice so if a helmetless pedestrian were put at the end of the line after a helmeted bicyclist if they had both been run over while walking in a crosswalk?

              What seems to make the most logical sense is mandatory helmets for anyone within 25 feet of a moving motor vehicle…

              Recommended Thumb up 0

      • was carless September 12, 2015 at 12:20 am

        I think you’re supposed to cover the car in bubble wrap. In fact, I recall a hood airbag for pedestrians a few years back.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

    • oliver September 11, 2015 at 2:30 pm

      You want to explain to me, in concise terms, how wearing body armor keeps you from being run over by some coward that has so little regard for the safety of fellow road users that he flees the scene of the crime?

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • soren September 11, 2015 at 2:52 pm

      I would like Jonathan to not report on whether a victim of road violence has proper “safety gear” because I consider this to be victim blaming.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • tedder September 11, 2015 at 3:05 pm

      Does showing a “list of equipment” mean it’s her fault if she wasn’t wearing a helmet, knee pads, and/or jousting armor?

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Eric Leifsdad September 11, 2015 at 4:19 pm

        “The cyclist was not wearing an assault rifle.”

        Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Todd Boulanger September 11, 2015 at 3:56 pm

      …and for all the commenters, please try to refrain from the use of the outdated term “accident” vs. the more technically accepted terms: collision, crash, etc.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Captain Karma September 11, 2015 at 1:59 pm

    I prefer to keep my brain intact. As an alternative to helmet laws though, I say lower speed limits by 5 mph and enforce them. Helmets don’t stop broken limbs, liver or kidney damage, etc. Enforce cell phone laws harshly.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Dead Salmon September 12, 2015 at 12:18 am

      Good idea on the intact brain. Difficult to police 1,300,000 cars in the tri-county area with limited police resources. You could monitor cell phone use and send tickets to people who talk while driving over say 5 miles as evidenced by cell-phone-tower records, but you’d be thrown out of office for even suggesting it. You’d have to cut down a forest to print the tickets if you sent paper tickets – might just add the ticket to the phone bill, but talking while driving is legal if you use hands-free so that would not work either…..
      http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/DMV/docs/stats/vehicle/2014_Vehicle_County_Registration.pdf

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Eric Leifsdad September 12, 2015 at 8:02 pm

        You don’t have to stop a million drivers every time they break the law, but you do need to stop some of them for minor infractions sometimes. If nobody ever gets a ticket or even stopped for 5mph over, everybody is going to treat that as the rule.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • Dead Salmon September 12, 2015 at 9:31 pm

          Yes, I consider 5 over to be safe from tickets, at least on open roads. In town where it’s congested I may slow to 5 under to be safe – don’t want to hit a kid, or a cat, or a dog, etc………

          It is mind-boggling how many people are texting at stop lights. I’d say way over 50%.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • Eric Leifsdad September 13, 2015 at 9:15 am

            Many “open roads” have blind corners, hills, and intersections yet drivers continue at a steady speed through all of these hazards (and if you don’t, you’re likely to get rear-ended by the texting driver tailgating you.)

            Recommended Thumb up 0

          • Psyfalcon September 13, 2015 at 11:24 am

            Why should people be banned from texting at stop lights?

            I suppose it is marginally less safe than being 100 alert, if you don’t take a good look before you go, but its not driving. If people could send a message while stopped, would at least some of them not text while in motion?

            As it is, its easier to be caught doing the safer thing, than while in a moving car.

            Recommended Thumb up 0

            • Dead Salmon September 13, 2015 at 11:12 pm

              Why should they not text at lights?

              1) Because when the light changes they are normally still texting, holding up traffic, pissing off the few who ARE paying attention, and causing how many gallons of fuel to be wasted each day? Wonder how many road rage incidents it has caused – I’ll bet a lot. Wonder how many resulted in fatalities?
              2) Because they cannot see emergency vehicles if they are looking at their crotches.
              3) They need to be aware of what is happening around them before they move. Did a cyclist just pull in front of my monster truck? I don’t know I was texting, and the hood is so high I can’t even see a Fiat, much less a Schwinn.

              I’m sure there are other reasons……….

              Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Tom Hardy September 11, 2015 at 2:06 pm

    I am 1000% in favor of helmet laws. I give kudos to the meds that put injured cyclists that do not or were not wearing helmets at the back end of the line in a trauma situation. If a person does not wear a helmet, it only indicates they prefer to be suicidal.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • RH September 11, 2015 at 2:10 pm

      Must be a lot of crazy, suicidal cyclists over in Demark….

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Brent Shultz September 11, 2015 at 2:24 pm

      Oops, I think you meant to post this on OregonLive.com!

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • oliver September 11, 2015 at 2:29 pm

      I put kids who shoot themselves with guns they find to the the back of the line because clearly those parents care so little for their children that they keep unsecured firearms about the house. It’s usually the lesson they need.

      amirite Tom?

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Lester Burnham September 11, 2015 at 2:30 pm

      I liked you in Dark Knight Rises…Mad Max, meh so-so.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Mike Cobb September 11, 2015 at 3:57 pm

      Head injury is much more common in the car driving world. I think cultural conditioning is the only thing preventing you from adding car driving to the mandatorily helmeted activities list. Logic should not hold you back.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Tom Hardy September 11, 2015 at 6:47 pm

        Yes it is fairly common (car head injuries). 1 brother-in-law, mobile but 100% disable since 1973 when he was driving drunk across the Broadway bridge and did not quite make the turn to the Lovejoy ramp. Bashed his head against the corner post (no seat belt). 30 days in trauma. He should have had a helmet. The next time out he might have killed someone else.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • lop September 12, 2015 at 3:57 am

          A seat belt and an airbag sounds like a better fit.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • Opus the Poet September 13, 2015 at 3:15 pm

            lop
            A seat belt and an airbag sounds like a better fit.
            Recommended 0

            Do you know how much weight airbags add to the average motor vehicle? A lot more than your average 3.3 pound motorcycle helmet. And a helmet for car driving doesn’t have to be any heavier than the average .5 pound bicycle helmet.

            Recommended Thumb up 0

            • lop September 14, 2015 at 12:28 pm

              You really think helmets would work better at preventing injuries to motorists than airbags?

              Recommended Thumb up 0

              • Bill Walters September 14, 2015 at 12:58 pm

                Preventing injuries to motorists? Consider which is used in auto racing, where all participants are motorists (no passengers). Hint: It ain’t air bags.

                Meanwhile, it’s well established that air bags sometimes *cause* injuries; for example, http://emj.bmj.com/content/19/6/490.full

                So yeah, maybe there’s a case to be made for news stories about *car crashes* to include whether or not those involved were wearing their helmets. You know, to get some kind of handle on their regard for their own safety.

                Recommended Thumb up 0

              • Dan September 14, 2015 at 2:21 pm

                A 2006 study indicated that 20% of the cases of traumatic brain injury that year were caused by car crashes.

                Recommended Thumb up 0

              • lop September 14, 2015 at 3:06 pm

                Different environment on a raceway. Don’t have to worry about helmet impaired hearing keeping you from hearing the fire truck that’s running the red light at the intersection you’re about to go through, or of helmet impaired vision keeping you from seeing the guy on a bike riding across the street. You would need a neck brace too, otherwise the helmet would cause more problems than it solves since in a car crash your head is already protected for the most part by wearing a seat belt and being in a vehicle equipped with airbags. Combined airbags+seat belts have been shown to reduce mortality something like 80%. Continued improvements in vehicle crash safety are responsible for much of the decline in traffic deaths the last fifty years. You’ve shown no research to support your assertion that helmets would improve safety for motorists. News reports should mention when someone doesn’t wear a seatbelt, or if it’s determined they weren’t wearing it correctly – a growing issue among fatter americans.

                Recommended Thumb up 0

              • Opus the Poet September 14, 2015 at 2:44 pm

                lop
                You really think helmets would work better at preventing injuries to motorists than airbags?
                Recommended 0

                Not just “yes”, but “HELL YES!” I was involved with NASCAR, SCCA and local (Nashville, TN) oval track racing in my younger days. Good safety harnesses and helmets are worth much more in a wreck than lap belts and airbags, and as I pointed out are lighter and require less structure in the car to implement. In the case of helmets there is no additional structure required, in the case of 5-point harnesses I think I calculated the weight penalty of having something to attach the shoulder harness was about 50 pounds over nothing, 20 pounds over just a lap belt if an existing support was not suitable and additional structure had to be installed.

                Recommended Thumb up 0

    • invisiblebikes September 11, 2015 at 4:27 pm

      I would only support helmet laws if all manufacturers produced helmets that meet or exceed DOT standards… Annnnd if any driver that hits a cyclist is held criminally responsible, jailed and fined based on their income.
      I.e. if a person that makes more than 250,000 a year hits a cyclist they do mandatory jail time (even if its only 3 days) and is fined 1% of their yearly annual income a nice $2500 fine.

      Annnnd all moving violations fines be based on 1% of that persons income!

      I’ll happily vote for helmet laws that include these contingencies.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • B. Carfree September 11, 2015 at 7:14 pm

      I strongly favor mandatory helmet laws… for motorists. Proper motor vehicle helmets would likely save thousands of lives per year. While we’re at it, mandatory five-point attachment harnesses should be required as well.

      For cyclists, not so much.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • was carless September 12, 2015 at 12:23 am

        I heard not getting hit by cars is a great way to prevent getting killed while on a bike!

        Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Pete September 14, 2015 at 2:40 pm

      “If a person does not wear a helmet, it only indicates they prefer to be suicidal.”

      It may also indicate they prefer not to be hit by cars.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Lester Burnham September 11, 2015 at 2:29 pm

    Skidmore needs some major help. This is a pretty heavily used connection between MLK and Interstate. Vehicle speeds are very high. Take out the vehicle parking on both sides and add a buffered bike lane.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • ethan September 11, 2015 at 3:31 pm

      Exactly! I don’t understand why this city prioritizes on street parking so much! Especially for people that are required by law to have off-street parking.

      Perhaps we should park a series of hollow metal boxes on the street indefinitely, creating a protected bike lane but without interfering with the city’s “streets are for parking” motto.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • MaxD September 14, 2015 at 2:56 pm

      100% agree! If parking were removed from Skidmore, bikes could have buffered or protected lanes that SAFELY cross Interstate, Mississippi, Williams, Vancouver, MLK and 7th with an existing traffic control device (signal or 4-way stop sign. This would create SAFE connections between the Concord greenway (and other points in NoPo) and the Going greenway so bikes could SAFELY access commercial stuff on Interstate, Mississippi, Williams, MLK, Alberta and Killingsworth. It is a potentially huge link in cycling infrastructure that could be implemented fairly inexpensively

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • dmc September 11, 2015 at 2:40 pm

    Some of the comments on here feel like they are taking the stance of victim blaming. Did Oregon live link this page? (lol)

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Mark September 11, 2015 at 3:41 pm

    To all of you insisting that cyclist should wear helmets:

    Bicycle helmets are NOT designed to protect against motor vehicle collisions. They are designed to offer some protection against low speed falls from bicycle height. Throw in a couple of tons of steel moving at 30mph or more, and any protection they provide is merely coincidental.

    I am sickened by these reports of hit-and-run collisions; cowardice and disregard for human life. I feel like perpetrators should be run down by their own vehicles and denied medical treatment for several hours. They deserve no better.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • davemess September 11, 2015 at 5:50 pm

      Except often a collision with a car will throw you from your bike and your head will hit the ground. It isn’t just about a direct impact with a car.

      I’m living proof that a helmet can help in a car crash after I smashed my head/face into someone’s windshield. Ended up with a cracked helmet and pretty sever concussion, but I was able to go home that night.

      I’m not pushing for helmet laws, but it’s silly to say that a helmeted rider (in general) won’t have better odds in a car altercation than without.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Tom Hardy September 11, 2015 at 6:53 pm

        I too have made use of destroying my helmet. Over the handle bars at 36 miles an hour with my bottle stuck between the front fork and the tire. Helmet totally destroyed but no head cuts (concussion yes) back of jersey shreaded. right hooked by car that just passed me on a downhill when I was doing the speed limit of 35. Helmet elbow and back shredded but I survived and rode home. The driver did not give me any info because I did not have anything to write with. A Ray Thomas clinic a week later.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

      • rachel b September 11, 2015 at 7:52 pm

        Helmet has protected brain more than once (over the handlebars and onto head), in my case. Thankful for helmet!

        Recommended Thumb up 0

    • B. Carfree September 11, 2015 at 7:19 pm

      Decades ago, Robert Heinlein wrote a book titled The Number of the Beast in which the protagonists visited several alternate-dimension worlds. In one, the justice system was exactly as you describe. A motorist who had run over someone was in turn run over by his own car and forced to wait for treatment from the EMTs who were standing by for the exact amount of time his victim had to wait. In some settings, eye for an eye is good policy.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • was carless September 12, 2015 at 12:25 am

        Man, I just tried reading that book a couple of weeks ago, and it was so bad I gave up halfway through it. Worst book I’ve ever read.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Alan 1.0 September 11, 2015 at 3:55 pm

    Here’s hoping both young women heal quickly and completely.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Todd Boulanger September 11, 2015 at 4:02 pm

    And as for guidance on “reporting” per the incident at BP, I would recommend not including unsubstantiated mitigating issues, such as “He claimed to have blacked out during the crash,”etc. (Thanks for including the “he claimed” text but it likely irrelevant as to the actual cause, especially since it is not balanced by comment from the victim / other incident party.)

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Todd Boulanger September 11, 2015 at 4:03 pm

      …or substantiated by witness(es).

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • 9watts September 11, 2015 at 4:48 pm

      “He claimed to have blacked out during the crash”

      Yeah, that’s a real whopper.
      He kept driving, for crying out loud!

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • pixelgate September 11, 2015 at 5:16 pm

        ’twas a lucky blackout!

        Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Dan September 11, 2015 at 9:08 pm

        If he’s prone to blackouts while driving, I assume he plans to stop driving, right?

        Recommended Thumb up 0

    • gutterbunnybikes September 11, 2015 at 9:52 pm

      The O-live article spells it out too. The whole reporting of it on BP is pretty much just a rewrite of the Oregon piece.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Dead Salmon September 11, 2015 at 4:47 pm

    Can’t tell if she was wearing a helmet or not. BUT I’d recommend one as others have in comments above.

    Looks like she was wearing a black top and a black pack. Not the best for visibility. High-viz clothing MAY have prevented this one. Usually if the driver can see the cyclist they will not hit them. High-viz is like a 2×4 across the drivers forehead saying “HEY! WAKE UP! SOMETHING IS IN THE ROAD AHEAD.”

    Let the assignation of my character begin in 3, 2, 1……..

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • 9watts September 11, 2015 at 4:56 pm

      “High-viz is like a 2×4 across the drivers forehead saying “HEY! WAKE UP! SOMETHING IS IN THE ROAD AHEAD.”

      And you know this, how?

      There are studies which come to a rather more nuanced conclusion that have been discussed here at some length.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Dead Salmon September 11, 2015 at 8:42 pm

        Ever heard the phrase “common sense”?

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • 9watts September 11, 2015 at 8:46 pm

          nope.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Dead Salmon September 11, 2015 at 8:52 pm

        9watts says: “And you know this, how?”

        600,000 miles of motor vehicle driving. I know from experience that cyclists with dark clothing can be almost invisible depending on the lighting conditions, the type of sunglasses being worn, shade from buildings/trees, cleanliness of windshield, obstructions to view, etc, etc, etc. In an urban area drivers are very busy trying to read all the signs, figure out where to go, watching for cars, etc, etc – HELP THEM TO SEE YOUR SKINNY LITTLE CYCLIST BU TT.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • 9watts September 11, 2015 at 10:09 pm

          “cyclists with dark clothing can be almost invisible depending on the lighting conditions”

          Sure, I hear you. But what I’m saying is that people in cars frustrated they can’t always see so good don’t necessarily get to decide whose responsibility that is.
          If you drove slower, paid better attention, not just to the possibility of dark clad cyclists but the possibility of encountering boulders or deer or a broken down automobile, you could avoid hitting all these others.

          I won’t disagree that wearing bright clothes solves the problem, so defined. I just don’t agree with the definition, the assigning of responsibility in those ways.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

    • pixelgate September 11, 2015 at 5:17 pm

      You do realize the sun was out when this happened, yes?

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • gutterbunnybikes September 11, 2015 at 9:50 pm

      Because the HI- Viz works so well? Please show me one study that proves it works (hint- don’t bother I have looked extensively and one doesn’t exist).

      It’s been mandatory to wear in construction for years (I’m a tradesman) and I’ve yet to see anything which shows that there is a reduction of injuries from wearing hi-viz in construction. Infact, I’m sure that the rates have been pretty steady, especially in road construction, maintenance, and utility crews – which have the most exposure to automobile traffic (and they still get hit and ran over)

      The hi-viz is construction – which predates it’s use for bicycles has much more to do with insurance liability (like most OSHA rules) than it does actual improvements to the workers safety.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • lyle w. September 12, 2015 at 8:35 am

        It’s anecdotal for me personally, but I know that when I switched to a neon yellow giro helmet, I IMMEDIATELY noticed that people were more aware of me and responding more clearly to where I was. I always am looking for eye contact at intersections, even when I have the clear right-of-way… and I could sense the day I bought it that people were more aware of my presence and looking at me quicker, etc. Doesn’t stop the occasional right-hook or someone who pulls out from a side street without even looking in my direction, but I am absolutely certain it has increased my safety.

        Get a bright yellow helmet and pay attention to people’s responses… you’ll be surprised.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • 9watts September 12, 2015 at 8:39 am

          “Carry a Howitzer and pay attention to people’s responses… you’ll not be surprised.”

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • Bill Walters September 12, 2015 at 9:53 am

            One variety of Howitzer can be a boxy GoPro camera, which can’t be confused with a light, mounted atop your helmet so it’s visible from rear, side and front.

            Recommended Thumb up 0

        • soren September 12, 2015 at 9:24 am

          I have the exact opposite experience. When I’m wearing my fancy 220 gm lime green helment I experience far more close passes than when I ride at night dressed in black with no helmet and no lights. Motorists and cyclists tend to really notice me when I ride in “invisible” ninja mode!

          Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Opus the Poet September 13, 2015 at 3:23 pm

        The only study I could find on HiViz bike wear showed that while drivers did see it they didn’t alter their behavior because of it. The only outfit that changed behavior was wearing a police rain uniform (which happened to be HiViz). Unfortunately wearing a police uniform is not legal in most states unless you are a licensed LEO.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • Dead Salmon September 13, 2015 at 11:19 pm

          I have seen that study also and it is nonsense. Here’s why: The study measured the distance between the car and the bicycle as the car passed. It did NOT measure the number of times the cyclist was HIT. Who gives a shi t what the distance is as long as you don’t get hit. Not getting hit is the goal, not being so many inches from the car as it passes.

          Rarely on this website has there been a story about a cyclist hit while wearing high-viz.

          The study was correct in what it measured, it’s just that what it measured was irrelevant to safety.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Dead Salmon September 11, 2015 at 4:49 pm

    Assassination.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Dan September 11, 2015 at 8:55 pm

      Of your “character”? Quote it please.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Dan September 15, 2015 at 1:54 pm

        Recommended Thumb up 0

  • davemess September 11, 2015 at 5:52 pm

    Not to be nitpicky, but there is no Holgate 205 ramp. It’s the Foster exit (part of which is confusingly Woodstock).

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Captain Karma September 12, 2015 at 2:51 pm

      I was really scratching my head, thinking I’d have to go look….maybe they meant the MUP ramp…? Thanks.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Nick Skaggs September 11, 2015 at 6:06 pm

    Let’s end the victim blaming and focus on the right “H” word.

    Helmet missing? Not a crime.
    Hi-vis missing? Not a crime.
    Hit and run? Crime.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Tom Hardy September 11, 2015 at 6:38 pm

    It is highly unlikely the motorist will be charged with anything unless there was a witness with a camera that could prove a positive ID on the driver. The police are very unlikely be able to identify the driver from the registration in the car or from the license because they won’t take fingerprints from the car until after it is washed by the towing company. If there is no insurance or the owner is not licensed they will not issue a citation. The police will try to cite the cyclist for damaging the car.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Dead Salmon September 11, 2015 at 8:35 pm

      The EPA has been called in on this road incident. They will be fining the cyclist big buck$ for polluting the storm water system with bodily fluids.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Dan September 12, 2015 at 8:28 pm

        I don’t get your sense of humor.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • Dead Salmon September 12, 2015 at 9:35 pm

          You should contact the defense department – they’re always looking for dense stuff for bullets, etc.

          🙂

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • Dan September 13, 2015 at 9:00 am

            Much better. Your first funny joke. 🙂

            Recommended Thumb up 0

  • bjorn September 11, 2015 at 6:53 pm

    I am a little uncomfortable with her photo being published, even if she isn’t easily identifiable in it. If I were on the ground after being hit by a car I wouldn’t appreciate strangers taking my picture and posting it to the internet…

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • rachel b September 11, 2015 at 7:54 pm

      I agree!

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • gutterbunnybikes September 11, 2015 at 9:25 pm

      I would.

      Make me the freaking posterboy for intensifying the investigating and prosecution of hit and run. Anything less that 1st degree assault is ridiculous.

      In the case of the 14 year old girl, it should have been attempted murder. He hit her once, then after waiting ran over her. That second time should be an attempted murder charge.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • rachel b September 12, 2015 at 1:24 am

        Would you mind if you wore a skirt or dress? Not challenging you–genuinely curious.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • gutterbunnybikes September 12, 2015 at 9:14 am

          Art School dropout (I’ve posed for classes and other artists) – started life drawing classes at 13.

          That is one of the things I’ve never understood about American culture, God didn’t make clothes, and that nudity/sex is considered as damaging (or even more so for some) to people’s psyche as violence is in the US. Skin is only skin, and none of it is a sin.

          So no I wouldn’t mind.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • rachel b September 12, 2015 at 6:57 pm

            Glad you’re that way. 🙂 But some folks are less comfy for good reason.

            Recommended Thumb up 0

      • bjorn September 12, 2015 at 10:01 pm

        I don’t have a problem with someone making the choice to have their photo published, but I find rubbernecking distasteful and taking pictures of someone who is severely injured and not in a position to say no and then publishing it widely seems doubly so. This is kind of like a papparazzi picture of someone who isn’t famous. I don’t think it is illegal, and it would probably be difficult to contact the person due to HIPAA rules, but I also don’t think I’d like it if it happened to me.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Captain Karma September 12, 2015 at 2:55 pm

      Seems like it used to be a journalistic principle to not do that, but I guess not anymore?

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • El Biciclero September 16, 2015 at 11:41 am

      The current “younger” generation has a completely different definition of “privacy” than I’m used to. With the advent of reality TV and YouTube, the kids all want to be famous now—and assume everyone else does, too. Who needs “Big Brother”? We have a million annoying little brothers who excel at tattling.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • 9watts September 11, 2015 at 7:04 pm

    I blacked out = contemporary variant on The sun was in my eyes

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • rachel b September 11, 2015 at 8:06 pm

      It really is weird, the hubris that settles over you when you drive a car. Cars today are so lulling–so comfy, like a living room, with cushy seats and video screens and music and very little need for muscle or anything but the lightest touch of a finger to do anything. The modern car interior prompts you to relax way too much for the serious task you’re undertaking. I hate what I become when I drive–just one of the reasons we ditched the car altogether. Driving in Portland as it is now nearly gave me an aneurism and spawned a regular torrent of cursing (from me. maybe at me too).

      I’ve always driven a manual and I really think cars should (as long as they are still human-piloted) be made to be as spiny and uncomfortable as possible; all manual transmissions and no power steering. Hard steel seats! Pointy things that poke into your arms if you don’t sit up straight enough! That’d certainly discourage the profligate use of cars, too.

      My best wishes for swift healing to the injured parties.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Dead Salmon September 11, 2015 at 8:41 pm

        It’s not the cars the cars or the comfy seats that are the problem – it’s the drivers and their failure to realize the seriousness of what they are doing (just as cyclists don’t take helmets/hi-viz clothing/etc seriously). Car drivers are doing way too much texting/talking on the phone. All the computer screens visible to the driver should be removed – they’re dangerous. Except, GPS screen would probably be OK.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • rachel b September 12, 2015 at 12:59 am

          Well, of course it’s the drivers–thought I made that clear! But the drivers are lulled and complacent in part because we now regard cars as rolling living rooms. And nobody’s serious or attentive in their living room. Unless they are playing Jeopardy. 😉

          Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Adron Hall September 15, 2015 at 2:47 pm

      That excuse should equate to instant negligence charge. :-/ “I blacked out…” shouldn’t be operating a vehicle then.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Joe Adamski September 11, 2015 at 10:50 pm

    what will it take to change the mindset of automotive primacy? In my mind, that is the biggest obstacle to safe streets. We can all agree safe streets are a wonderful thing, but hey, I am late for my appointment.. pardon my speed. Ooops. It took me a few years to get there, how do you accelerate the process?

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • 9watts September 11, 2015 at 10:59 pm

      You’re absolutely correct in my view. I wonder sometimes if the demise of cheap fossil fuels will take care of this for us. Maurie Cohen talks about this in an interesting essay a few years ago.
      http://www.citylab.com/tech/2013/03/what-steamship-and-landline-can-tell-us-about-decline-private-car/4930/

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Dead Salmon September 12, 2015 at 12:32 am

        9watts: ” I wonder sometimes if the demise of cheap fossil fuels will take care of this for us.”

        I think it will if something else doesn’t do it first – maybe self-driving cars, maybe economic collapse, who knows….

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • El Biciclero September 16, 2015 at 11:45 am

          Cascadia subduction quake followed or preceded by a Yellowstone Supervolcano eruption…

          Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Dead Salmon September 12, 2015 at 1:46 am

        I read the article on steamships, carriages, and landlines, etc and how those were ubiquitous in society, then went extinct. I’d have to disagree somewhat about those examples – propulsion systems for ships (and carriages) have changed but we still have ships and horseless carriages (cars). Landlines are declining but still over 50 or 60% of American homes have one.
        .
        Fossil-fuel powered cars may go away, but they will be replaced with electric powered cars or something else but they will still be “cars”. By the time most cars are electric I’d think self-driving would be the norm, making streets safer (we hope). Cars give us freedom to easily go places that mass transit cannot so they will be popular as long as we think we can afford them. My guess is economics will determine how many cars are in use – pretty much as it does today. World production goes up every year except in recession years because people LOVE cars:
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automotive_industry

        Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Ted Buehler September 12, 2015 at 12:26 am

    This is my neighborhood.

    I ride this stretch of Skidmore regularly. I usually find it calm and reasonable.

    Best wishes for a full recovery for the woman who was hit.

    Be careful out there, folks.

    Ted Buehler

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Mossby Pomegranate September 12, 2015 at 8:24 am

      I agree with what others have said about removing parking though. And I hate that intersection of Skidmore and Mississippi. Skidmore and Williams are no picnic either with all the construction.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Ted Buehler September 12, 2015 at 12:27 am

    & if you think Portland’s streets should be safe enough that 24 year old women can ride around without worrying about getting killed, make sure your elected officials know your views.

    #VisionZero

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Dead Salmon September 12, 2015 at 12:51 am

      I’m predicting that it will be quite a few years before a cyclist in traffic with motor vehicles should not worry about being hit. In the mean time, I’ll take what action I can to make my chances better; but I understand that I might still get hit. Sad but true.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Kristi Finney Dunn September 12, 2015 at 7:31 am

    My heart is sickened again at the inhumanity of some people. I so hope these two make a full recovery and the drivers have strict punishments. Hit and run is despicable! You can also die of blunt force head trauma and a helmet would have made no difference AT ALL. (But please wear a helmet). RIP Dustin Finney.

    November 5th 9:30-11:30 is the 2nd meeting of the Vision Zero Task Force. The focus will be on goals. Public comment is welcome and appreciated.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Alistair Corkett September 12, 2015 at 1:02 pm

    This is ridiculous. In my experience, nothing will happen to the driver because they hit a cyclist, so they should just be a decent human being and stop.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • lyle w. September 12, 2015 at 3:34 pm

      Hey dude, I was just thinking about you the other day (think i saw your name on one of the strava leaderboards).

      What happened to the guy who hit you?

      Hope you’re doing good.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Pete September 12, 2015 at 8:11 pm

      Unfortunately, you’re right (you’d know!). My neighbor Stan was killed by a girl who drove off the road while texting, and then left the scene. Witnesses followed her to the coffee shop where she was meeting friends and forced her to return, so she called her Dad. They were willing to testify she was weaving and they saw her with phone, but she got leniency because it was her first offence. No civil case because Stan was from Poland and had no family here. Our friends who attended the trials said she didn’t seem remorseful, but instead terribly inconvenienced by it all.

      http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_23270453/woman-set-be-charged-hit-and-run-killing

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Mark September 12, 2015 at 9:05 pm

    As someone who rides a motorcycle as well, we spend lots of money wearing high viz, pads and gear. That all rarely helps when hit by a car. I wear a bike helmet in case I bumo the ground.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Dead Salmon September 12, 2015 at 9:42 pm

      I doubt that high viz is made to help AFTER you get hit by a car. I think motorcycle head lights are on when the engine is running, right? That probably helps visibility quite a bit.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Ex Commuter September 13, 2015 at 11:08 am

    This is one of the reasons i don’t bike commute anymore. I also got tired of people messing with and steeling parts off of my bike. It is really sketchy out there.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Dan September 13, 2015 at 12:12 pm

      Need more bike lockers.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Dead Salmon September 13, 2015 at 11:22 pm

        Need fewer thieves.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • Dan September 14, 2015 at 11:01 am

          Get the police to follow up on stolen bike lights and saddles? Good luck.

          Recommended Thumb up 0