Zoobomb casualty
I'm not a fan of the Zoobombers. Not so much that they're risking their own necks -- which is part of the thrill of it for them, I guess -- but because they could hurt somebody else, or have an innocent bystander get involved in their self-destruction. If you want to hurtle downhill on Highway 26 at night on a bicycle, for example, you're nuts, and I feel bad for the driver who hits you when they're later made to feel it was their fault.
The plot thickens a bit this week, however, as one of the Zoobomb crazies has been hospitalized with a very badly broken leg. According to the Zoobombers, the injury occurred Sunday night in a bike pileup caused by a bystander who threw ice in the face of one of the daredevil riders.
Now that's ugly. Zoobomb injuries are risks that the riders know, or should know, are coming. But they should have a right to ride without a malicious physical attack, if that's in fact what happened. The injured Zoobomber complains that you shouldn't throw ice at somebody riding 35 to 40 miles an hours down a neighborhood street on a kid's bike. Of course, you shouldn't be riding at that speed, either -- don't bicyclists have to observe the same speed limits as cars? But in this case, if the riders' side of the story is true, we have an assault, plain and simple.
Sad. Malicious bystanders or not, I'm afraid we'll be attending a Zoobomber funeral one of these days. I'm sure it will be a "kickass, fun" funeral.
UPDATE, 6:41 p.m.: Here's a much more disturbing story in the same vein.
UPDATE, 11:46 p.m.: Here's an interview with the crash victim. He dances around the question of sabotage. He indicates that people threw ice at the Zoobombers at some point, but he does not say it happened this weekend or that it caused this wreck. So far, no other identified rider has publicly made that charge, either. You have to wonder what really happened. I feel much worse for the gal out in Scholls.
| Posted at 1:53 PM | Permalink |
|
Comments (1)
I feel the same way about the Zoobombers as I do about the Critical Mass riders--they act in a reckless manner and encourage motorists to think less of cyclists. Consequently, normal, law-abiding cyclists like myself have to share the road with these motorists, who now believe that all cyclists are idiots who deserve to be messed with.
Posted by: Dave J. at August 22, 2006 02:32 PMDave- In what way is the Critical Mass ride 'reckless'? How reckless can one get riding really slow?
Posted by: TKrueg at August 22, 2006 02:55 PMA bike is simply never as dangerous to anyone as a car or truck or SUV--so why all the fuss about bicyclists? If you truly care about dangerous streets, you would focus attention on the many tons of motorized steel, not a 25 lb. bicycle.
Dave--I'm sure you have stopped at every single stop sign, always signal appropriately, etc? Right.
Why shouldn't bicyclists be aggressive? Drivers give them plenty of reason: check out kgw.com for a story on how a pickup truck threw water at a cyclist and then ran her off the road, severely injuring her.
Posted by: tbetz at August 22, 2006 03:05 PMThis zoobomb injury was due to someone throwing ice at the riders was they went past. It was NOT car related. As a 40 year bike rider I've seen my share of both cyclists and drivers who should get a'chump slap' along the head for their behavior!
dayaram
Posted by: Don at August 22, 2006 03:11 PMI second Don's sentiment. I ride 16 miles to work every other day and see my fair share of reckless and inconsiderate bicyclists. And I'm pretty amazed how many drivers I see who are careful and considerate around lawful bicyclists (at least on my end of town).
And talking about reckless, the yahoo on the Zoobomber blog riding a child's bike with no helmet is just asking for a severe head injury. What a maroon.
Posted by: Chris McMullen at August 22, 2006 04:18 PMWho are the "reckless" drivers?
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/08/22/police.bike.wreck.ap/index.html
http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_082206_news_cyclist_hit_and_run_.25c5289b.html
Posted by: tbetz at August 22, 2006 04:48 PMOf course, a bike rider would be perfectly within his/her/its rights to spit on, throw/squirt water at, or swerve in front of any motorist who is deemed to have violated their "space". Just try a mild stab at your horn when they're riding two or three abreast and you'll see. It happens all the time. The double standard is obvious.
Funny how the story of "someone" throwing ice "at/on" them (this from an anonymous zoobomber who may or may not have even witnessed the event) gets retold by Maus as fact. Who was this "someone"? Wouldn't they have been fairly easy to apprehend by the mob? Apparently not or I'll bet we'd have heard about it. Did the mysterious stranger escape?
If you ask me, it's equally possible that one or more of these "daredevil riders" got called on their dare, hit some loose gravel and lost it. Of course that wouldn't be nearly so dramatic and might not suit the "victim" motif. These cyclists don't care about who gets hurt by their antics until it's one of them.
BTW, Jack, don't drive to the Zoobomber funeral, take Tri-Met... and be sure to wave at Randy Albright as you pass him on the Hawthorne.
I think I'll give it a miss.
Posted by: rickyragg at August 22, 2006 05:10 PMAmen, rickyragg . . .
I thought it was odd that nobody apprehended the ice-lobbing perp in this case when, according to the Zoobombers' self-promotion on Wikipedia Jack linked to, Zoobombers are crime-fighters. Oh, well. Maybe there are a bunch of Gleeks in the Zoobomber Hall of Justice . . .
Posted by: Sheef at August 22, 2006 05:29 PMDid the mysterious stranger escape?
The crash victim urges people not to retaliate. Hard to retaliate if the person got away.
Posted by: Jack Bog at August 22, 2006 06:09 PMNever heard of Zoobombers until now, which is fine with me. In Jersey they would be Road Pizza.
Posted by: Cousin Jim at August 22, 2006 06:36 PMInteresting that the anti-cyclist crowd is the tighty righties. Guess they're basically anti-people.
Posted by: Allan L. at August 22, 2006 06:48 PMIts offensive and a comment on people's character to celebrate the injury of another human being ("road pizza"). Moreover, there is no reason to doubt the zoobomber's story or you can continue to blame the victim--whatever. Some of the comments above are truly disgusting--cheerleading the unprovoked assault on another human being.
Posted by: tbetz at August 22, 2006 08:31 PMJust a coupla comments from a "tightie rightie" who also happens to ride a bike 60 miles a week:
1. Kids on bikes are dangerous to other cyclists;
2. Young women with great gear who hog the bike path are also dangerous to the rest of us;
3. Most drivers are extremely polite and careful;
4. The ones who aren't are the ones who cut the corners into the bike lane and otherwise drive stupidly;
5. As with everyone else on the road, cyclists are at risk due to drunk and aggressive drivers and have a lot less protection than most;
6. Throwing ice or spit or gravel or broken glass or whatever is an act of aggression and completely unrelated to the fact that the victim is on a bicyle.
I could on. But I won't. JUST BE CAREFUL OUT THERE. The roads are for everyone on them (lawfully). Not just me when I'm driving my Outback, but also for me when I'm riding my 2-wheeler.
Posted by: Molly at August 22, 2006 08:40 PMI guess this hit a nerve. What is it with those of you who see a cyclist as a nuisance and a potential target (or at the least, annoying)? What the heck did I ever do to you? I ride the bike path when it's available. I ride the bike lane when it's available. I stop when I'm supposed to. I get out of your way. I ride on Sunday morning when everyone is still asleep. I watch out for you. And most of you are great and take great care to make me aware that you know I'm there and that you won't run over me. Who are the "you" that can't be bothered to see and avoid the two cyclists on the shoulder of the highway during the bright light of day in Washington county. Or the many cyclists whose deaths are reported every month. I can see them when I'm in my car. Why can't you?
Posted by: Molly at August 22, 2006 08:52 PMIn what way is the Critical Mass ride 'reckless'? How reckless can one get riding really slow?
They're wreckless when they sit down in the middle of the street...say, Burnside, to block traffic. Or when they purposely sit on the hood of a car and taunt drivers. I realize its not all of them, but it happens.
A buddy of mine got his car damaged when a bicyclist ran a red light and hit the side of his car. Guess who had to pay for everything, including the bicyclist's injuries? My friend's insurance.
What torks me off is when I about get hit by a jackass riding on the sidewalk. Its usually a messenger going around a red light or something. Happens almost every day to me downtown.
Posted by: Jon at August 23, 2006 07:44 AMIsnt it illegal to ride on the sidewalk in Portland?
The injured Zoobomber complains that you shouldn't throw ice at somebody riding 35 to 40 miles an hours down a neighborhood street on a kid's bike.
I would agree, but you also shouldnt be going 35-40 mph on neighborhood streets. Isnt the speed limit 25 in residential areas?
Posted by: Jon at August 23, 2006 07:55 AMAnd what would happen if they came upon a car, or someone crossing the street? I'd bet the brakes on a 12" kids bike are not going to stop a grown man going 40mph very quickly, if at all.
A bike is simply never as dangerous to anyone as a car or truck or SUV--so why all the fuss about bicyclists? If you truly care about dangerous streets, you would focus attention on the many tons of motorized steel, not a 25 lb. bicycle.
Actually, that would be incorrect. Remember a couple years back when a kid on the sidewalk was killed by a bicyclist near the Rose Quarter?
You have to remember, that 25lb bike also has 150-200 lbs of rider on it.
And Im sure a pedstrian wouldnt fare well if hit by a speeding Zoobomber either.
Posted by: Jon at August 23, 2006 08:05 AMCould someone put up a map link of the route these kids take from top to bottom? I'm just curious.
Looking at the plethora of pictures on various zoobomber sites, I just see a bunch of smiling kids having what looks like an enormous amount of social fun.
What's the big deal? Are the per capita morbidity & mortality rates greater than those for age-mates touring Iraq?
The only cynical thing I can think of is that the local hospitals anon will examine the demographics (are these kids still on their parents' health plan?) and realize "sponsoring" zoobombs (free MAX tickets, more refreshments, street closure permits, publicity, etc.) might detour more $20K - $100K reconstructive casualties into their operating rooms. It's not like there aren't precedents.
Posted by: WoodburnBob at August 23, 2006 08:11 AMElderly drivers bother me but I don't try to run them off the road. People using cell phones, and driving in both lanes bother me but I don't try to run them off the road. However, I ride my bike and a handful of drivers do try to run me off the road. I signal at every turn and stop at every red light.
I am not sure of a way to stop this behavior. Maybe a PR campaign with 2 wheel victims of road rage, maybe notice that actions like this will result in lengthy jail time. I would like to hear ideas. It scares me to a point where I am uncomfortable riding, which doesn't seem fair.
I am convinced that the only reason I have not been hit is because I am 250lbs. I look like a brightly colored overstuffed sausage in my bike clothes, and people pity me. They also probably fear the damage a body like mine would to their car. I have to go now, I am riding my bike to Dairy Queen.
Posted by: TB at August 23, 2006 09:10 AMAs someone who road bikes about 250 miles a week in the metro area, I want to let Portland area drivers in on a few things.
Drivers listen up: DON'T YELL AT CYCLISTS FOR NO REASON! I get really sick and tired of dealing with drive-by idiots who like to yell at me for no reason at all. I'm obeying the traffic laws, so leave me ALONE! Please don't take out your random frustrations with cyclists on me. For example, my friend and I were riding up Logie Trail Road from Hwy. 30 yesterday morning and some jerk decided to yell something at us he was headed down the road. WHY?!?! We were in the opposite lane, and no cars were in sight. We weren't breaking any laws. Due to the adrenaline of climbing up such a serious hill and pent up frustrations from a summer of heavy biking, I let out a very loud F**K YOU down the hillside. I hope he heard me. Now of course I know that was a stupid thing to do, but I am fed up with drivers like this guy.
Please don't honk at me if I'm out in the lane blocking your path. I'm probably out there because there's some debris in the road like glass, nails, condoms, or there's broken pavement. I will promptly move right over as soon as the obstructions to my path are gone. I promise you can recover those precious 20 seconds of your life later in the day.
Are there idiot bikers out there? Absolutely. Are there idiot drivers on our roadways? Of course! Just slow down, follow the laws, and be patient with one another and everything will be okay!
Posted by: Murray at August 23, 2006 11:42 AMWell, the zoobombers are a little reckless for my taste. But a couple of comments on bike speeds:
Assuming the rider was injured coming down Fairview, most cars violate the speed limit as well. That's why PDOT bumped it:
http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?a=ifdaf&c=dfjda
Even after the bumps, it appears 2/3 of drivers are still violating the speed limit. Let's throw ice and water balloons at them too!
Much of the "fast" upper part of fairview is not residential, it's park, with good views of the intersections.
Moderate speeds (say around 35) on Fairview are still probably safer for cyclists than going the speedlimit:
One, braking to maintain 25 MPH can lead to rim overheating leading to tire failure and instant blowouts. Very dangerous. This happened to me once while following a bus down Fairview.
Two, braking to maintain 25 MPH will likely lead to agressive behavior by the 2/3 of auto drivers going above the speed limit who will tailgate and/or dangerously attempt to pass.
Posted by: MWW at August 23, 2006 11:47 AMBraking to maintain speed in a car can lead to fading and eventually non-existent brakes, which ends up being much more dangerous. So can I use that excuse for exceeding the speed limit in my car?
Just a thought...how about everyone obey ALL traffic laws, then theres no reason for anyone but the extreme nutcases (on either side) to bitch.
Posted by: Jon at August 23, 2006 12:40 PMOne, braking to maintain 25 MPH can lead to rim overheating leading to tire failure and instant blowouts. Very dangerous. This happened to me once while following a bus down Fairview.
One, are you asserting that one CAN'T ride down Fairview without speeding? What utter nonsense. You might overheat your rims descending the Alps, but not Fairview. Was the bus you were following (drafting?) exceeding the posted limit? It begs the question: who created the "Very dangerous" situation? If you can't ride legally and safely on Fairview, perhaps you shouldn't be ON Fairview.
Two, braking to maintain 25 MPH will likely lead to agressive behavior by the 2/3 of auto drivers going above the speed limit who will tailgate and/or dangerously attempt to pass.
Two, not if you accomodate other users of the road (as you demand drivers do) and strive for safety by not riding in the middle of the road and allowing for safe passing. Your assumption about 2/3 of auto drivers demonstrates clearly that you just want to do what you want to do and won't be told otherwise - that motorists must defer to your assessments of their rights and responsibilities. That attitude is exactly what generates frustration among motorists; the vast majority of whom (as opposed to cyclists) are not on the road to recreate.
Posted by: rickyragg at August 23, 2006 12:45 PMIt's quite possible to ride down Fairview on a bike at 25 MPH. Just less safe than speeding. And I was following, not drafting the bus. That's why I was riding my brakes - going faster would mean running into the bus.
I make no "assumption" that 2/3's of auto drivers speed down Fairview. Please go to my original link and look at the PDOT data.
I don't understand how riding my bike at the same rate as traffic (the _empirical_ PDOT observed rate of traffic) instead of blindly capping my speed at 25MPH(*), a speed that less than 1/3 of traffic on that road travels, and therefore encouraging drivers to pass me on blind curves, is making anybody any safer.
(*) I'd also like to know how you would suggest a cyclist safely monitor his speed on a curving downhill
As far as riding the middle of the lane, it's 100% legal when riding at the speed of traffic. Learn the law before getting amped about others not following it.
Re: brake fading: Cars can downshift to slow themselves without overheating the brakes. Bikes can't. (Although you can easily smell that many cars recklessly only use their brakes down roads like Fairview and W Burnside)
Posted by: MWW at August 23, 2006 01:05 PMMWW,
amped???
As in the story about the zooboobs, things just get curiouser and curiouser when you try to pin anything down.
Let's see, a few observations:
1) according to you, speeding is safer than not speeding. Does this mean your "exploding tire" argument was hyperbole? When you're doing some "safer speeding", will you be able to stop for pedestrians, children or pets? Remember, your tires may explode!
2) the PDOT data you cite doesn't mention your key assumptions - those about "...braking to maintain 25 MPH will likely lead to agressive behavior by the 2/3 of auto drivers going above the speed limit who will tailgate and/or dangerously attempt to pass." and your new one - "...and therefore encouraging drivers to pass me on blind curves"; in fact the study you cite doesn't even mention bicycles OR the evil intentions of motorists on Fairview.
3) If you don't have a speedometer, then how do you know who's speeding? If you have one and don't use it, that's irresponsible - I check mine all the time when I ride. Perhaps for you it's too much trouble or just doesn't matter.
4) (my favorite) As far as riding the middle of the lane, it's 100% legal when riding at the speed of traffic. Learn the law before getting amped about others not following it. How about riding 100% legally all the time - not just picking and choosing which laws and which times you'll deign to obey. My comment was that you should "strive for safety" not that you were doing something (God forbid) illegal. Maybe you should read the comment before you get amped about something I didn't write.
Posted by: rickyragg at August 23, 2006 02:01 PMrickyragg,
1) nope, not hyperbole at all. riding your brakes all the way down fairview WILL heat rims literally blistering ly hot, which CAN lead to tire failure, and HAS happened once to me on Fairview.
2) ??? Jack's original post says cyclists shouldn't be going down Fairview at 35-40 MPH. Yet MOST auto traffic does. So should bikes go the speed of traffic or not?
I did make a misstatement: 2/3 of auto drivers will not tailgate or attempt dangerous passes of 25 MPH cyclists. 2/3 of auto drivers DO speed down Fairview, the same behavior that is so reprehensible when commited by a bicyclist. I still maintain that not going the speed of traffic by following the speed limit greatly increases my chances of getting tailgated or unsafely passed, based on my personal observations of descending steep hills in Portland: Staying out of the way of cars ("accomodating" if you will) is the best way to stay safe.
3) I have a speedometer on my bike. I don't read it frequently if at all on steep downhills. It's dangerous. My speedometer, like most, also has a max feature which can be checked at any time so it's not hard to develop an idea of your speed without looking at a gadget.
4) you said cyclists should accomodate autos by "not riding in the middle of the road." Well, in the context of Fairview, it's legal, safer, and accomodative to go the speed of traffic in the middle of the lane. Legal because I'm going the speed of traffic. Safer because I'm more visible to traffic by being in the middle. Accomodative of cars because it lets cars know that it's not safe to pass, and that's why I'm not allowing them by. (Note, similar techniques should and are used by operators of heavy equipment on roadways, yet I don't see 5% of the flack that bikes get) Hugging the side going into a hairpin turn is neither safe nor accomodative.
100% legal is a standard that's not reasonably attainable by cars or bikes. If, as an auto driver, I pass a 50 MPH car in a 55 MPH zone on a two lane road, I do it at 60, not 55, because it's safer. (This also used to be legal under the basic rule). Bikes that speed downhill to stay at the speed of traffic are doing the same thing. Cars and bikes should BOTH operate legally when reasonable and stay safe otherwise.
Posted by: MWW at August 23, 2006 02:33 PMI'd also like to know how you would suggest a cyclist safely monitor his speed on a curving downhill
Not my problem...its the bicyclist's. They decide to ride with auto traffic. If you dont like or cant handle it, then dont ride where there are "curving downhills".
Posted by: Jon at August 23, 2006 03:01 PMAllan L. and tbetz,
My "road pizza" remark was intended as a jab at the lack of courtesy of New Jersey's drivers, several of whom have recently almost run me down during my morning walks (riding a bike would be too dangerous). I am not "anti-people", only anti-idiot, and neither of you know a damned thing about my character.
Posted by: Cousin Jim at August 23, 2006 07:19 PMI am always amazed when I see cyclists riding on a road with no shoulder, or whizzing down the 4 foot strip between two busy lanes of traffic.
They are simply taking their lives and placing them into unknown hands. Many of which are talking on cellphones, lighting a cigarette, putting on makeup, or gawking at the pretty girl/boy across the way. Not to mention all the folks that are high, drunk, elderly, or driving without a license or insurance.
The surgeon who got plowed this weekend is a good example. If your hands are your livelihood, maybe you ought to confine your cycling to bike-only paths, or invest in a high end stationary bike.
Posted by: Mister Tee at August 23, 2006 10:08 PMAs I'm stopped at the intersection of SW Park Place and 20th at 10:45pm Sunday, the Zoobombers start coming - straight through the stop signs. Not one or two, but a bunch of them. They are very hard to see and just flew through the stop sign. I've seen them in previous weeks because I live close-by, but if you didn't know they were coming...
Sooner or later one of them is going to do that and the result is going to be very ugly.
Posted by: Zookeeper at August 27, 2006 11:22 PM[Posted as indicated; restored later.]
Posted by Blog restoration | August 14, 2007 3:38 AM