I've been slowly digitizing my vinyl collection and was just looking at Desolation Boulevard yesterday. So upvote for the memory lane trip.

Your video, Seth Meyers - Weinstein asked Nathan Lane to cut some jokes, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I agree with Mass Bike that the truck driver was responsible. Not sure that he should be criminally charged, that's a really big hammer to use on someone that almost certainly did not intend any harm. But he wasn't even cited, although he left the scene. He called the Boston police many hours later, from New Jersey.

That said, I would advise any cyclists to avoid ever putting themselves in the position that Dr Kurmann found herself in. It is dangerous to ride beside large vehicles with limited visibility, as we see. Also good to note that semi trucks frequently swing left to set up a right turn -- I don't believe she realized the danger she was in until the truck was close to actually passing in front of her.

The symbol in the middle lane is a "sharrow", which really indicates that the middle lane is not a bike lane. The sharrow is supposed to indicate to motorists that bicycles may be expected in the lane, and to remind cyclists that they are allowed to use it. The Boston police report gets this wrong, irresponsibly making the driving public stupider. At the time of the crash the right lane was used as a turn lane, and there was a bus stop just before the crash site, making it likely that cyclists would use the middle lane.

It's fun to say that you never trust anyone, but that can't literally be true. For example, I trust thousands of drivers standing at red lights or stop signs not to charge out and run me over. It would be almost impossible to move in traffic without relying on most drivers to do the right thing most of the time.

Sad video for sure (the music was a bit much though).

Kind of a tough call - I do think the truck driver deserves the majority of the blame and should at the minimum be charged with a hit and run - and probably more - as he did pass the cyclist and clearly did not proceed with any due caution on that turn.

With that said, as an avid cyclist myself, I trust NO ONE while riding. Looking at the video, there seems to be a bike lane symbol in the middle lane, suggesting that cyclists proceeding through the intersection should be using that lane. Now I don't think that is enforced by law, but if that is what the symbol is there for, this would be a perfect illustration as to why. Also, if you look even closer, it appears the truck had his indicator on before she pulled up beside him; i.e. she should have seen his indicator. I hate to put any blame on that poor woman and - I really hate to say this - this video only goes to show that both parties were at fault.

Wouldn't speed bumps cause the same "traffic calming" w/o forcing you into oncoming lane?

Traffic calming. You need to slow (or stop) and prepare to give way to oncoming traffic. It's exactly like a one lane bridge, except without the bridge.

Can anyone explain the purpose of forcing traffic into the opposite lane periodically?

Let's hope that pensioner, Mr Edwards, has a nice new mansion, courtesy of Mr Plumb, and Mr Plumb is now broke, jobless, and homeless. What a total douchbag.
85mph in a 20 mph residential neighborhood one lane road, then fleeing. He should never drive again. 4.6 years is hardly long enough, imo, especially with the first 1.2 spent in prison, so really he's only restricted an extra 3.4 years.

yup, he hit the brakes as soon as he noticed the guy wasn't going to shoulder check... Maybe he could have hit the brakes harder and sooner, but why would you assume the guy wouldn't look? to brake that hard when the other car was still in it's lane would have made no sense and been more dangerous in the conditions.. this guy with the dash cam did nothing wrong.

also in Canada we can have partial fault in accidents too. % of fault allocated and dispersion of insurance follows suit. so on a bicycle, you can be found partially at fault if you got hit, but since there isn't insurance for bicycles, only the driver's insurance would have to dish out.

Some would say it's best to stay in your lane. The ratings will tell.

This logic is just plain wrong... if you have a single lane x yards long (first scenario, merge early), then you told all the cars to spread into 2 lanes that were zippered and READY to merge into one lane...it would STILL BE X YARDS LONG! Traffic is still slow going and still x yards long, but in scenario 2 they all have a car lengths space in them.

The only reason scenario 2 is best is because it STOPS idiots from running down one side until they get to the front of a line that is NOT ZIPPERING. Thus now the first line has to stop before an idiot in the merging lane causes an accident waiting till the last minute.

If you ever think you will be able to maintain speed when merging busy lanes, you are deluding yourself.

You keep saying that the biker 'committed' to making the light.

As I pointed out, I thought pretty clearly, when the light turned yellow, the driver, based on his speed and time of the video, was less than 30m from the intersection when most any stopping distance guide lists minimum stopping distances as greater than 30m. Physics had him committed to the intersection already.

As for proceeding with caution, I don't disagree, but 100% of the time the person crossing lanes going left is responsible for being sure that it is safe to do so. The driver proceeding through straight should do their best as well, but the responsibility is on the person crossing/changing lanes.

The fundamental point is that when the light turns yellow, the yellow car IS blocking his view, but he speeds up anyway, essentially committing to making the intersection.

At 0:02 the light is yellow and his speed is 54km/h. Less than a second later, his speed is over 60km/h. I'd argue that you can actually see a turn signal from the blue car at 0:05, but the video is blurry.

Either way, it's entirely predictable that the oncoming traffic in the middle lane might be turning left, so the sensible course of action is to proceed with caution.

I'm not saying the biker is an asshole. He just made a mistake and I'm glad he's ok. He certainly doesn't deserve to be injured.

I would take that route out every time.

Turning to the right would require not only a larger change in direction from me, but also the risk of hitting oncoming traffic rather than a very slow moving/stationary vehicle or running off onto grass.

As for the over correction, that's someone driving in a very stressful situation and doing their best. Just about every car you can buy in the UK now has stability control that would have prevented that spin, and the amount of training it would take for someone to be able to reliably control a car without that stability control through a stressful and unexpected situation like that would be overly prohibitive.

The larger swerve required to go to the right of the car cutting in across the lane would have made the car a lot more unstable and a lot more likely to turn over.

Bad call to go to the right. She made the right choice, and less dangerous one and everyone walked away.

Silly cars. Those lanes are for ships. Duh.