Thanks.

In just a few short weeks, SustainLane will release its 2008
sustainability rankings for U.S. cities.

And this time around, we want to hear from you! Top entries win cash
prizes of $100.

Help us shine some light into what’s going on in your city.
Send us your perspectives (humorous, tragic, ironic) on living green in your gray city.

The more specific you are, the more your city's flavor will emerge. Geek out or wax poetic. Dig deep for your inner-urbanist.

Visit our submission page for details.

http://www.sustainlane.com/us-city-ranking/green-urban-life-submissions.jsp

If you have questions please contact us through the email on the above page.

The deadline is September 12th, 2008.

Cheers!

Note a couple things that bicycles are considered vehicles under the CVC. Back when I lived in California, and got my driver license, I remember that the CVC indicates that the buffer zone around a cyclist is roughly the size of an auto. A driver is to maneuver around a bicycle as if they were maneuvering around a car.

Also, to someone that up comments mentioned pedestrians, the CVC also gives the right of way to pedestrians, as long as they are in a crosswalk and not crossing against a light. California jaywalking laws are very strict if you cross against a light as a pedestrian, that would be jaywalking. And yes, you will get ticketed if you are seen doing it by a "peace officer" (the CVC way to describe a police person).

the guy gets off scott free or with the very worst, community service. a privileged little asshole ruins lives because he has no patience, fuck him. yeah, sure, we all get pissed on the road, but this kind of behavior is inexcusable. period.

expect more and more of this kind of bullshit. we are under siege.

I am constantly amazed at people who should know better acting as if they own the road exclusively. This man is a doctor and his intentional injuring of these people is shocking.

Most state laws, like NJ's which I am most familiar with, state that a cyclist must stay the the right as much as is PRACTICABLE. Practicable is the key word. This means if a cyclist only feels that it unsafe to ride as far to the right as might be possible he/she is allowed to move to the left. Reasons to move toward the center of the road might include potholes, sand/debris/glass or even the cyclist's speed. It may be possible to ride further to the right but it may still not be practicable.

Also in New Jersey and in many other states, a cyclist can take the lane if the cyclist is moving at the speed limit or the even just the speed of traffic. The speed limit could be 50mph but if traffic is only going 20mph the cyclist may take the lane.

Down hill riding is a prime example where the "as far to the right as is practicable" law can come into play even if the cyclist is not traveling at the speed limit or the speed of traffic. A cyclist might need the full use of the road to safely navigate the road at speed. Since it may be unsafe to move from the center or even left part of the lane it is no longer practicable and hence the cyclist can legally take full control lane of the lane.

This is probably the rule that the cyclist used in this California case. Plus one of the comments from a direct witness on Streetsblog LA said that they were traveling at speeds between 25 and 30 mph as they were heading down hill on Mandeville Canyon Road. Looking at the road on Google Maps you can tell that it is a twisty residential canyon road and I would be very surprised if the speed limit was anything above 35mph. If it was only 30 mph this Doc is totally screwed which I hope he is anyway.

flame away

But to answer your question,with an example. In NY State, it's illegal for a motorist to open a car door into someone else's right of way, including a cyclist. No one would legally accuse the cyclist of running into a car door (except for some thoughtless people in the media who report on such things.).
One of the basic legal concepts of "right of way" is allowing a road user to have their space on the road, and some kind of a buffer space around it to stop or maneuver in time. Just to give another example, someone changing lanes has to yield to someone in that lane. If they move over and collide with that person, it would be legally incorrect to accuse the person already occupying the lane of slamming into the car that was moving over. Another example: motorists & cyclists are supposed to yield to pedestrians, but that doesn't mean that a pedestrian can simply step out into a space that is going to imminently be occupied by another vehicle, in such a way that they can't stop. In other words, the burden of yielding & respecting someone else's right of way belongs to the vehicle or cyclist making the change, not someone continuing what they're already doing. Recommended reading for you: Bicycling and the Law, by Bob Mionske. You should also take a League of American Bicyclists Road I class, which will describe local cycling law, and rights of responsibilities of cyclists, as well as how cyclists fit into traffic.

The trolls can be as tough as they want, I'm sure that at the end of this (if not already) the doctor will regret his actions. A moment of anger and he's brought down a world of hurt on himself. Facing prison, a felony record, fines, civil cases, and who knows what else. At some point he might even regret the fact that he caused serious injury to two people because he had to drive a little slower.

Urbanis: laws requiring single file cycling vary by state and municipality. Some do require single file cycling; others allow riding two abreast, but require going single file to allow overtaking vehicles to pass more safely and easily. NYSVTL &1234 says cyclists can't ride more than 2 abreast, but they must pull single file to allow overtaking vehicles to pass. Now you've seen it!

Assault on Peterson
Assault on Stoehr
Reckless endangerment (?)
Destruction of Peterson's property
Destruction of Stoehr's property (?)
Verbal threats to third biker (?)
Attempt to leave scene (?)
Other traffic-related violations (?)
Car confiscated, weapon and thus evidence
Driver's license revoked (not suspended!)
Medical license revoked
Civil suit from Peterson
Civil suit from Stoehr

Have I missed anything?

This followup story in the LA Times details the injuries. I won't repeat them here. Dr. Thompson identified himself on the scene as a doctor, then refused to offer the two injured men any medical help.

The soon to be former Dr. Thompson has a brilliant future ahead of him delivering pizza. Oh, wait a minute, he won't be able to drive. Maybe a paramedic. Or a job with the AAA. Is their LA office reachable by public transit?

And how do you figure it is acceptable for drivers to "take over the road?" Drivers are not allowed to drive in bike lanes. They must stick to their part of the road. Similarly cyclists are expected to stick to the bike lane unless they are making a left hand turn or unless they are going straight through an intersection and staying in the right impedes cars trying to make a right.

This is from the CA DMV on bike safety and laws:

Always ride on the right side of the road. Stay in single file as far to the right as practical. It's both dangerous and illegal to ride on the left side of a two-way highway.

As far as this case goes, it doesn't matter if the cyclists were riding side by side cars can't cut cyclists off and then slam on the breaks. And I don't see anyone thinking the driver was justified in taking over the road, as you suspect.