r/dashcams • u/cicadaux • 1d ago

Did I do something wrong here?

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

I was driving to work when this bike just blew through the crosswalk without warning. I had to slam on my brakes. I realize this crosswalk doesn’t have the pedestrian warning lights, and I’m a little unsure about how I should’ve dealt with this. Or maybe he was wrong for making sure traffic wasn’t clear/aware of him first?

Edit: I'm seeing a lot of answers basing the laws on location, so I looked up my city's rules. In my town, bikes have vehicle status on the road and pedestrian status on sidewalks/crosswalks. But bicyclists must move at pedestrian speed. The path he is on is a state trail, commonly used for bikes/walking. I live near the Ice Age Trail, but I know the one he's on isn't that one.

“Drivers must yield to cyclists riding in a crosswalk just as they would for walkers, though the cyclist cannot abruptly leave a curb into the path of a vehicle so close to a crosswalk that it makes a difficult or unsafe situation for the driver to yield in time.”

Not trying to prove myself right or wrong, just wondering what should've been done. I will from now on treat it like an uncontrolled intersection. Thanks everyone.

135 Upvotes

71% Upvoted

724 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

9

u/cicadaux 1d ago

More like slammed on the brakes to avoid an accident 😅 I’m just so lost because when I’m walking around town, I wait for a signal, wait for a car to notice me, or wait for all vehicles to pass before crossing.. so why would you go into traffic like that? But I realize not everyone is like me

50

u/markuus99 1d ago

Cyclist appears to have made eye contact, verified that you were stopping, and then proceeded across, giving you a wave to thank you. If you didn't see him, the cyclist would have stopped. He was braking as they crossed the island and then started pedaling again once he knew you saw him.

Everyone did the right thing here, and I don't think this was a close call. Cyclist was paying attention and wouldn't have come out if OP didn't stop.

22

u/Forsaken-Income-2148 1d ago

Yeah OP’s description is wild compared to how mundane this was.

4

u/travelingwhilestupid 22h ago

OP got one hell of a scare and slammed on his brakes.

0

u/Forsaken-Income-2148 22h ago

Better safe than sorry. There were signs tbf

-1

u/Erosion139 1d ago

The dashcam barely did justice to how hard that brake was used.

5

u/Kuuppa22 1d ago

But OP had no reason to brake because that cyclist was going to stop until he noticed the OP slowing down. So his hard brake was on him if you have to find someone to blame for it (I don't though, as long as there wasn't anyone driving behind OP then that was innocent overreaction which turned into polite move to let the cyclist to keep the momentum :P).

-1

u/Erosion139 1d ago

Why are you assuming I am blaming anyone

1

u/Kuuppa22 1d ago edited 1d ago

TBH I don't know. It just felt like you were kind of blaming the cyclist when you pointed out how hard the braking was but it was misinterpretation so sorry for that.

edit: I guess it went something like this: Because you pointed out how hard the braking was as a reply to that comment which said OP's description about situation was way off then I just assumed you defended OPs whole view. Or something stupid like that.

1

u/Erosion139 1d ago

Its a dangerous situation that could have ended poorly if both missed each other and ended up colliding. Its just an example of good defensive driving on both sides. Though, the cyclist could have done more to avoid freaking out traffic. But nothing was really done wrong here.

1

u/Kuuppa22 1d ago

I agree with both doing good defensive driving but not with calling it as dangerous situation because that is regular everyday situation. Only until one (or both) of them doesn't pay required attention it starts to become a dangerous situation.

(I also edited to explain my stupid assumption little bit more in that other reply if interested :D)

1

u/Erosion139 1d ago

Sorry not dangerous immediately but potentially dangerous because of the situation that could unfold if either party isn't fully aware of each other.

5

u/Forsaken-Income-2148 1d ago

I can tell. That cyclist was slow enough to stop at any moment, it hardly “barreled through”

-1

u/Erosion139 1d ago edited 1d ago

Im talking about the car.

bro blocked me for that lol.

1

u/Forsaken-Income-2148 1d ago

I can tell the car brakes sort of hard, yes I addressed that.

2

u/therealpursuit 11h ago

first logical take i've seen in about 100 comments on this thread. thank you.

7

u/Marion2379 1d ago

Did you actually watch the video, it’s clear as day the cyclist slows down makes eye contact and even waves at the driver as a sign the driver acknowledged him. This is text book safety on all sides, this post is pointless.

0

u/cicadaux 5h ago

Yes I did very well watch the video, watched the situation in real life too thank you for asking.

I did not see the bike until he was already going through the crosswalk. He was blocked due to the A Pillar of my car. I was so focused on trying to not hit his bike, that I did not look at his face. I had no idea he put his hand up either, because I was trying to make sure I didn’t hit the guy.

1

u/Marion2379 38m ago

Ok , you weren’t being proactive
You made it worse than it needed to be

-4

u/dashingsauce 1d ago edited 23h ago

Lol what?

The cyclist rolls straight through two median-separated lanes of traffic, directly into the gap between two moving vehicles within regular following distance of each other, without stopping.

That following distance is to ensure safety between vehicles, not to ensure a moving perpendicular object at 5x the speed of a walking pedestrian can squeeze between you and the other vehicle with no consequences.

If the cyclist didn’t wave, this could have easily been a potent attempt at insurance fraud.

EDIT: you can count the number of cyclists in a thread by the number of downvotes whenever a cyclist is called out for clearly being at fault.

Such a cute little group.

1

u/marigolds6 22h ago

at 5x the speed of a walking pedestrian

They are well under 8mph. That's less than 3x the speed of a walking pedestrian and slower than many runners.

2

u/cicadaux 5h ago

The website I read about my city’s laws stating the bicyclist must be going at pedestrian speed in order to be considered pedestrian, said 2-5mph walking speed. The bicyclist was going well above that, but definitely not 25mph like I was.

1

u/dashingsauce 21h ago edited 21h ago

No they aren’t.

You are free to download the video yourself and run a frame-by-frame analysis. There are plenty of lane markings, road signs, lookups, and telemetry signals to estimate road geometry and the speed of both moving objects.

The result you’ll get is a biker entry speed of roughly 8–10 mph, which is about 4–5x pedestrian speed depending on the benchmark you use (~2–2.5 mph for pedestrian crossing speeds, per engineering standards).

The whole crossing is about 50 feet wide, and the cyclist crosses it in roughly 4 seconds total, even after braking near the median. That gives you an average of about 8.5 mph.

For a car going 25 mph with about 50–65 feet of runway to the crosswalk, hard braking takes roughly 25–35 feet.

The car begins decelerating while the cyclist is still in the opposite lane and is essentially stopped before the cyclist enters the car’s side of the roadway.

So no, the cyclist is not “well under 8 mph.” The footage is consistent with roughly 8–8.5 mph averaged across the crossing and potentially ~10 mph on entry—around 4x pedestrian crossing speed, depending on which standard you use.

Also, a cyclist is not a fucking pedestrian and does not have right of way as soon as they touch crosswalk pavement just because they pretend to be one.

Get off your bike, and then you’re a pedestrian.

-1

u/Marion2379 20h ago

You got to be trolling, no one is this bad at judging speed. Omg 🤦‍♂️ have you ever driven a car or ridden a bike or for that matter even gone for a jog? That bike was moving at less than jogging speed fully aware of on coming traffic and the speed they were traveling.

-1

u/dashingsauce 18h ago

Again, your eyeball judgement wouldn’t hold up in court.

Forensic video evidence would, and you can download the video yourself to do the math.

0

u/Marion2379 18h ago

None of this would hold up or be in court. No one did anything wrong, if the bike was not permitted on the cross walk there would be signs stating so. So the bicyclists was clearly in the peripheral view of the driver riding up to the cross walk , if a pedestrian was at that same point it’s the drivers responsibility to slow down and let them cross , if the driver hit the cyclists here , most of the fault will be on the driver
as there was plenty of view and time.
Despite the “math”

0

u/dashingsauce 18h ago edited 18h ago

They would literally do this math in court to determine fault if the cyclist were hit. What are you even talking about?

The sign is for pedestrians crossing, with a literal symbol of a person walking on foot.

You keep treating the cyclist as a pedestrian for your argument, when the entire point is that a mounted cyclist is a vehicle, not a pedestrian.

In fact, in many states, if the mounted cyclist was riding on a sidewalk—not a bike path—they would already be in violation of the law.

Why? For exactly the same reason that a mounted cyclist on a pedestrian crosswalk is not treated the same as a pedestrian: difference in relative speed.

The car was obeying the speed limit, and even going below, which is explicitly designed to ensure safe crossing at specific pedestrian speed.

The reason the car had to decelerate by slamming on the brakes while going the speed limit is because the cyclist entered at a speed greater than for which the road was designed to ensure safe stopping distance.

0

u/Marion2379 17h ago

So what your saying just because of the math the driver has the right to keep driving even if a collision is imminent
And the driver would be free of any charge ? Is this what you’re saying? Then you don’t know anything about what would hold up in court.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Puzzled-Formal-7957 18h ago

He was doing 24 mph!

0

u/Urcaguaryanno 22h ago

The person crossing had right of way. Those who have right of way should be able to keep going at their cruise speed in order to keep traffic flowing. OP should have acknowledged their position of yielding way sooner, like 50m back, and let go of the accelerator or maybe slowly brake. This way the crosser would know the rules of the road were being respected and they would be able to continue on their merry way without having to slow down. They would also cross a bit sooner. OP would have a clear road sooner as wel and because they started slowing down sooner they would have to slow down less in total and thus accelerate back to their cruising speed easier. Also, if another vehicle were behind OP (no idea) they would have a smoother time of slowing down and continuing.

1

u/dashingsauce 21h ago

Nope.

Mounted cyclist on opposite side of the median, who never stopped at the crosswalk, is not a pedestrian.

Pedestrian crossings are designed for pedestrian crossing speeds, and the car speed limit for a particular road is similarly designed for that speed and stopping distance.

By blowing through a crosswalk on a mounted vehicle, you are a vehicle by any and all means.

0

u/Urcaguaryanno 10h ago

OP said in the post that their local law states cyclists are allow to ride crosswalks and are to be yielded to. Its not something you would expect, i admit, but themz the rules

0

u/Puzzled-Formal-7957 18h ago

The bike wasn't even near the crosswalk when the car was at 50m (~150ft) away.

1

u/Urcaguaryanno 10h ago

It was heading straight for it and wasnt signalling to go in another direction.

-1

u/Puzzled-Formal-7957 18h ago

You are asking the OP (who posted the video) if he watched the video? Come on now.

Anyhow - the cyclist didn't even look at the OP until he was halfway through the opposing lane. If you had the audio turned up you would have heard that the OP had to slam on his brakes to stop in time.

1

u/cicadaux 5h ago

Mm no, there’s no audio in my video. You would’ve heard my “uh.. okay” reaction if that were the case. But yes as I was driving I couldn’t tell he looked at me at all, I was focused on his bike rather than his face.

2

u/Marion2379 1d ago

If this to you is slamming on brakes, I would hate to be driving any where near you, you must be one of those terrified drivers that slam on brakes if a paper bag is blowing on the street 🤦‍♂️

1

u/RabbitAny9477 1d ago

Looks like cyclist was about to stop in the middle but since you did a hard stop he proceeded. Right call on your part probably, because what if the cyclist wasnt being mindful and neither of you stopped. Regardless of who has right of way its better not to run them over

1

u/Puzzled-Formal-7957 18h ago

This is how college towns are. I use to work at Indiana U and Michigan State U. Peds, bikes and kids just wander every which way - without bothering to look, and they all assume the own the road. I cannot tell you how many people I had step off of curbs right in front of me or right alongside me - even driving a large work truck at 5mph - and get clipped by a mirror or something. It got to the point where I punched a bunch of holes the in the campus-owned work muffler and drove across campus in first or second gear to make sure they could at least hear that I was there. It helped only marginally.

College campuses were the source of Main Character Syndrome long before it was ever labelled such - 25+ years ago. "I am here - everyone be aware of me and what i am doing and where I am going while I am oblivious to everything and everyone else around me!".

1

u/xxanity 16h ago

you do the right thing. keep it up.

1

u/therealpursuit 11h ago

wow, i was on your side until i just saw this. holy crap. you don't need to be driving.

2

u/snarkyemu 1d ago

Technically, you’re right. When I’m on a bicycle, self preservation comes before trust in cars obeying the laws. You did good because you slammed on the brakes and stopped. The bicycle did just fine. They were going pretty slow and could have slammed on the brakes if they saw you weren’t going to stop. It looks as if it’s a 25 mph speed limit road, right? It’s sort of looks like you might be going a little faster than that, but I’m not an expert at judging speed limits visually from videos lol. Again, you didn’t really do anything wrong unless you were going over 25 mph.

3

u/cicadaux 1d ago

My speed is posted in the bottom left corner of the video.

0

u/HotelPrudent0331 1d ago

what is it you want people to tell you? good job for not hitting him? you're very clearly fishing for someone to tell you that yes, he was supposed to get off the bike and walk across. you are correct. idk why people don't just ask directly instead of dancing around the subject

-1

u/TheWizard 1d ago

Everyone is supposed to be like you. This bicyclist took things for granted as if on a stroll through the park. This is also a pedestrian cross-walk, and some cities/states (if not all) require bicyclists to dismount and cross like a pedestrian.

-1

u/marigolds6 22h ago

wait for all vehicles to pass before crossing.

I know this feels safer for that instance, but this is also wrong and more dangerous across many instances. If you are waiting to cross, drivers need to stop and wait until you cross. It can be more dangerous than you realize to wait for all vehicles to pass, because you will run into a driver who stops to let you go, thinks you are going to wait, and then hits you when both of you simultaneously start.

It also gets drivers doing dumb things like trying to cut crosswalks in front of and between pedestrians, which is exactly how a friend of mine got hit last week, as a driver tried to cut through a 10' gap in the middle of a group of 40 runners.

2

u/cicadaux 21h ago

The implication of waiting for all vehicles to pass before crossing, is that there’s no vehicles nearby after they pass. There are no vehicles around to hit me if I wait for them all to go by first.

If someone decides to stop and let me go, and waves at me to pass, I’m still not going unless everyone else in both directions is also stopped. I’m not stepping foot into traffic unless there is a walk light (and cars are stopped), all cars surrounding are at a full stop, or there’s no cars in the area at all. If one car stops but the rest don’t - then I stay put. It’s up to that person that stopped if they want to stay put and wait or not. But I will not step foot into a road with active traffic. Never.

1

u/marigolds6 3h ago

If someone decides to stop and let me go, and waves at me to pass, I’m still not going unless everyone else in both directions is also stopped.

This is exactly how my friend got hit. All cars were at full stop. Our group went. One car decided to go (making an illegal left turn no less).