So there is a marked crosswalk on a somewhat busy (but not overly so) street in the residential section on the outskirts of a major city near where I live. It crosses two lanes of traffic, a center turning lane, and a bicycle lane (all located relative to each other as you’d expect). I believe there may be a lamp on a wire above said crosswalk warning drivers of it (others on that street have it), but I’m not sure. There are no other lights or signals, though.
This morning, I needed to cross. I looked to the left; no cars coming. To the right, the nearest car was a bit away. So I crossed. As I got to the center turning lane, the lead car coming from the right got to the crosswalk, so it of course stopped for me. As I walked to the far side of the car, I saw something that the car had blocked from my view: a bicyclist in the bike lane coming right for me.
We saw each other, and he began braking; I got the impression that he hadn’t started to slow down before we saw each other, but can’t be sure. The braking was sudden enough, and the pavement wet enough, that he took a spill. I asked if he was okay, and he said he was as he picked himself up. He did say, though (not in any sort of angry tone, but still said) that I should “watch where I was crossing.”
I didn’t argue, but I was quite annoyed. I did watch where I was crossing; I was in a clearly marked crosswalk. But I know little enough about bike laws that I’m not sure if I was at fault here.
So those who do know: how much was my scolding justified? Was the dude’s spill my fault?
If I read it right it sounds like one of those unfortunate situations where you were both guilty of not being fully aware of what was happening and/or making unwarranted assumptions.
If you didn’t see him until he almost hit you it seems quite possible that he didn’t see you either in which case you can’t expect someone to stop for you if they don’t know you’re there. If he’d been more aware he might have twigged that there was a reason the other car was stopped but he didn’t. On the other hand you need to be aware that just because one vehicle stops for you it doesn’t mean that all vehicles will be aware of and stop for you.
Cyclist gets -1 point for not figuring that the stopped car was stopped for a pedestrian.
You get -2 points for assuming that there was no further traffic. (It’s more points off because that kind of thinking might get you killed some day.)
Yes, that POV occurring to me is why I posted in the first place. I know it’s very possible to be right AND dead. Though in my defense, my use of that particular street, let alone crosswalk, is relatively rare. Plus, stopping walking in front of a car isn’t exactly the most natural reaction.
Still, I’d like to hear as many opinions on this as I can. Keep 'em coming. (Partly so it’s driven into my head what to do next time, partly out of curiosity, and partly because I’d like to get a feel of how guilty I should feel for “making” that guy fall…)
No, a pedestrian in a crosswalk has the right of way. Period. Vehicles may not pass each other within 100 m of a crosswalk here in Toronto (and I believe that’s true throughout Canada).
One is, where did the bicyclist come from? I would think that if he were in the bike lane next to the one the car was in, the car would overtake him, meaning he should have been visible somewhere in front of the car when you first looked. Alternatively, he may have been on a side street (if there was one) and then turned onto the street you crossed, in which case he would have been “off the radar” when you first looked.
The second is, his comment to watch where you were crossing was out of line. Being on a vehicle, he has a responsibility to stop for pedestrians – it’s up to him to watch for you, not vice versa. Sounds to me like he made a mistake but tried to cover it up by making a douchy remark attempting to shift the blame to you.
It sounds like technically the bicyclist was at fault. It also sounds like the crosswalk design may have been lacking, so I assign some blame to your town planners.
Beyond your incident, though, there’s a problem that there really isn’t a consensus on treating bicycles as vehicles, with all the attendant rights and responsibilities thereof. For example, drivers making turns across lanes have, several times, killed bicyclists traveling in designated bike lanes, and not been criminally prosecuted.
An accident is just an unintended result. There’s no doubt that this was absolutely and entirely accidental. Nobody intended the bicyclist to take a dive. That has nothing to do with the matter of whose fault it was. The great majority of accidents are somebody’s (sometimes more than one body’s) fault, and are avoidable.
He only said what he said because he took a spill. I’d probably mutter something if I took a fall onto the wet ground, too. You might have, too. It’s that simple.
If there were two lanes going in that direction, and the car in lane 1 began to slow as he was approaching the crosswalk; and the car in lane 2, slightly behind the car in lane 1 but having an obstructed view of the crosswalk, failed to slow and stop and hit a pedestrian, car in lane 2 would absolutely be in the wrong.
When a car slows down in approaching a crosswalk, traffic in the other lanes going that same direction ought to slow down as well, for the reason that another car is clearly slowing down for a crosswalk. (Even more so if there’s a light and signage indicating that traffic is cautioned about the crosswalk.)
The bicyclist is under the same obligation as the rest of traffic, without a doubt. You were entirely right that the bicycle should have yielded. Perhaps he was just embarrassed that he took a spill and tried to deflect blame to soothe his sore behind.
But as others have said, even though you have the right of way as a pedestrian, can’t hurt to be extra cautious.
A vehicle interfering with a pedestrian in a crosswalk earns themselves a $500 ticket here; I would love to see cyclists get hit with that (since they actually are vehicles, even though they don’t consider themselves that). Your cyclist’s self-righteous attitude was, unfortunately, completely typical of cyclists in my experience.
When I’m a pedestrian (which is quite often - I walk A LOT), I walk past cars that are blocking my view very cautiously. Walking in front of a bus who had stopped for me once, I peeked carefully around him to make sure the rest of the traffic had stopped, and the asshole honked at me. I should have reported his impatient ass.
From the POV of my country’s traffic laws the bicycle guy was wrong.
Standing on a crosswalk means you have an absolute right of way, even appearing like you’re about to step on one means cars need to stop and let you cross.
Failing to stop next to a vehicle stopped at a crossroads means an automatic ticket if a cop sees you doing it; bikes are considered vehicles when ridden and have to obey the same rules as cars.
Another vote for the cyclist being at fault. Around here, pedestrians have the right-of-way in crosswalks, and bicycles have to obey the same rules of the road as any other vehicle on the street (even though most times they don’t). Plus it sounds like the cyclist was riding too fast and not paying attention.
I don’t know what country you’re in, but in California, the markings of a crosswalk are but encouragement for drivers to obey the law. Every intersection–unless otherwise designated or regulated–is a “crosswalk.” If a pedestrian steps off the curb at an intersection, indicating intention to cross, the driver must yield, whether lines are painted on the intersection or not. This, of course, applies to cyclists, too.
