Raged motorist strikes two cyclists

On Aug 18, 4:39 pm, "Stevie" wrote:
"Paul Berg" wrote in message

...





~

News report from KGW TV (Portland, Oregon) - August 17, 2007

Portland police arrested a driver Friday afternoon after a bizarre chase
in which two cyclists were hit by a car in Southeast Portland.

It all started around 12:30 PM on 1000 block of Southeast Clinton
Street. Police said 46-year-old John Eschweiler was driving along when
he reported a cyclist kicked his car. Officers said Eschweiler sped up
and hit the cyclist, who rolled onto the hood of the car, smashing the
windshield.

The car continued on about 75 feet, sideswiping a car and hitting a
truck before turning a corner where another cyclist heading towards the
car was then hit, investigators said.

Police arrested Eschweiler and charged him with two counts of attempted
assault.

The cyclists, 25-year-old Ben Ramsdell and 41-year-old Timothy Mastne,
were taken to OHSU. Their injuries were not life-threatening.

Neither cyclist was wearing a helmet.

I seriously doubt that a road cyclist kicked his car. Maybe hit with a
hand. What would be the reason? Let's see the scuff.

Go on! Did Nevaeh really have fun riding the Sybian on the Howard
Stern show and some mother beat her child on the Wal-Mart cameras, or
did you only decry the SPAM?

Google is my friend...

On Aug 18, 5:13 pm, (Paul Berg) wrote:
~

Lesson to Learn:

If you're on a bicycle, don't kick a car driven by a person as equally
crazy as yourself.

Is THAT what it looks like? Haven't been that way in almost a year.

You and your ****ing queer OCD and WebTV anyway! Thanks for the SPAM,
I only had bread.

On Aug 18, 5:40 pm, Klu Klux Klaners for the GOP
wrote:
In article ,
"Mike Kruger" wrote:

Michael Warner wrote:
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 07:00:28 -0700, Paul Berg wrote:

Police arrested Eschweiler and charged him with two counts of
attempted assault.

/Attempted/ assault? Sounds like he succeeded.

Succeeded all too well. Shouldn't "battery" be in there somewhere, too?

More like assault with a deadly weapon at the minimum and attempted
murder and the max. I saw a African American punch a female (all
college aged). I confronted him and told him that was not cool. His
friends came up from behind me and jumped me, besides punching me (just
had a fat lip) they hit me over the head with a beer bottle (didnt even
hurt the next day). I went straight home after ID'ing the perp's, who
the cops told me had been arrested for gang activity. The guy who hit
me over the head with the beer bottle got misdemeanor assault with a
deadly weapon (only did 2 weeks in county, but got a restraining order
and probation for 3 years).

Getting hit over the head with the bottle did less damage then the punch
to the mouth, yet he got "assault with a deadly weapon".

And you were stupid enough to get jumped knowing they were around.

The sympathy bleeds from every one of my pores.

wrote:
In rec.bicycles.misc "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
wrote:
snip

Third, tell your bit about bump and scrape protection to the guy
in
Minnesota or Wisconsin who got his helmeted head run over by a
right-hooking delivery truck, and walked away with cuts and bruises.

This was a _bicycle_ helmet? If so, what brand and model because I
want one of those.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman" wrote in message
news:46c777e3$0$16387

Mandatory helmet laws reduce the number of cyclists on the road, which
increases the danger to the remaining cyclist from motorists, which has
been shown by reputable studies in jurisdictions that have adopted MHLs.

HUH??

Curt

On Aug 18, 7:47 pm, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
wrote:
Lobby Dosser wrote:
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" wrote:

Lobby Dosser wrote:
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" wrote:

In fact, the evidence indicates the opposite may be true, in
that MHLs cause motor vehicle operators to pass closer to bicyclists
Say What?!!
Yes, a study was done where the horizontal clearance provided to both
helmeted and non-helmeted bicyclists was measured.

The motorists were not available for interview, but it can be
speculated that due to helmet propaganda, helmeted bicyclists are seen
as more responsible and less likely to unpredictably weave into
traffic. An alternate hypothesis would be that helmets are seen as
provided bicyclists with some unreasonably high degree of protection,
so the motorist need not exercise the same degree of care while
passing.

You wouldn't happen to have a Cite for this study, would you?

The study was done by Dr. Ian Walker of Bath University and recorded the
clearance provided by 2,500 overtaking motorists in Salisbury and
Bristol. The study found that motorists passed helmet wearing cyclists
an average of 8.5-cm closer than non-helmeted cyclists.
http://www.bath.ac.uk/news/articles/archive/overtaking110906.html

Citation: Walker, I. (2007). Drivers overtaking bicyclists: Objective
data on the effects of riding position, helmet use, vehicle type and
apparent gender. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 39, 417-425.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia

They drive on the wrong side of the road and wonder why bicyclists are
miffed.

On Aug 18, 7:54 pm, "Kris Baker" wrote:
"Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman" wrote in s.com...

Lobby Dosser wrote:

You wouldn't happen to have a Cite for this study, would you?

The study was done by Dr. Ian Walker of Bath University and recorded the
clearance provided by 2,500 overtaking motorists in Salisbury and Bristol.
The study found that motorists passed helmet wearing cyclists an average
of 8.5-cm closer than non-helmeted cyclists.

And to do it accurately, you'd have to run alongside with a tape
measure. I smell Monty Python here.

You bleeding pigs! You stabbed me!

On Aug 18, 7:59 pm, Lobby Dosser
wrote:
"Kris Baker" wrote:

"Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman" wrote in
s.com...
Lobby Dosser wrote:

You wouldn't happen to have a Cite for this study, would you?

The study was done by Dr. Ian Walker of Bath University and recorded
the clearance provided by 2,500 overtaking motorists in Salisbury and
Bristol. The study found that motorists passed helmet wearing
cyclists an average of 8.5-cm closer than non-helmeted cyclists.

And to do it accurately, you'd have to run alongside with a tape
measure. I smell Monty Python here.

He had a laser thingie. But the 8.5cm closer is closer than a normal
distance of 1.3 METERS.

He'd be okay once he closed his fly.

Lobby Dosser wrote:
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" wrote:

Lobby Dosser wrote:
fred wrote:

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
Paul Berg wrote:
...
The cyclists, 25-year-old Ben Ramsdell and 41-year-old Timothy
Mastne, were taken to OHSU. Their injuries were not
life-threatening. Neither cyclist was wearing a helmet.
Why is h*lm*t non-use always reported, when a foam bicycle hat
provides little more than bump and scrape protection?

And, perhaps more to the point, why don't they mention what the
injuries were? If the cyclists suffered head injuries, the helmet
thingy might be relevant. If they suffered broken limbs and no
head injuries, the helmet thingy would be shown to be irrelevant.
By not mentioning the type of injuries, they imply that they were
head injuries and that helmets might have made a difference.


Nope. They're just letting the public know that they are a couple of
morons.

I see that "Lobby Dosser" has uncritically accepted the bicycle
helmet propaganda designed primarily to drive the sales of foam
bicycle hats.


A good friend had his life saved by one of the foam hats. As long as
you pay your own medical care for head injuries, I don't really care
what You do.

Here we go...

Klu Klux Klaners for the GOP wrote:

"KLANERS"??? LOL